Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New A380 Weight Variants  
User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 9663 times:

FG indicates 3 new weight variants. One at 575t is I think the version to EIS with BA. The lowest at 490t is for low noise.

But there is also an intriguing 573t version:

"the documentation also shows a 573t variant, WV007, with respective landing and zero-fuel weights of 395t and 373t."

This is obviously for a sprcific niche - can anyone help explain it?

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ewest-a380-weight-variants-379235/

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 9678 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As I expected, WV006 is the 573t MTOW variant announced in 2010 and being introduced with British Airways.

WV007 looks to be for high-density regional missions as it has the lowest MTOW (492t) and ties for the highest MZFW (395t).

The 575t WV008 equals the RTO test with 16 main braking units, so to go any higher they will need to add the final four, which would then support TOWs of upwards of 625t.


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12523 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 9677 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 575t WV008 equals the RTO test with 16 main braking units, so to go any higher they will need to add the final four, which would then support TOWs of upwards of 625t.

I wonder is this is directed towards EK's need for an acft that can do DXB-LAX n/s with minimal capacity constraints.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 9677 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
I wonder is this is directed towards EK's need for an acft that can do DXB-LAX n/s with minimal capacity constraints.

The 4t boost in TOW for WV006 was worth 190km of range, so this 2t boost would be worth an additional 80km, kicking maximum range to 15,440km on an MTOW-limited mission.

DXB-LAX is 13,420km direct Great Circle, but there would be winds aloft, routings, ambients at DXB and such. Still, it certainly can't hurt.  

I also think WV007 might be appealing to EK for their future "Model One" regional (11-Hour Endurance) two-class configuration.


User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9679 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
WV007 looks to be for high-density regional missions as it has the lowest MTOW (492t) and ties for the highest MZFW (395t).

Will Airbus have an Extended Service Goal program for the A380? I believe the current LOV for the airframe is 19,000 cycles, which is not going to work well for an A380 in a high cycle operation.


User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2195 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9678 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 575t WV008 equals the RTO test with 16 main braking units, so to go any higher they will need to add the final four, which would then support TOWs of upwards of 625t.

I wonder is this is directed towards EK's need for an acft that can do DXB-LAX n/s with minimal capacity constraints.

EK has also said they want to fly the A380 to IAH as well. Could these lower weight variants mean more service by more airlines to more airports? E.G. EK and QR flying to IAH, EK flying to LAX and SFO, QR to ORD, etc...



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9677 times:

Quoting CM (Reply 4):
Will Airbus have an Extended Service Goal program for the A380? I believe the current LOV for the airframe is 19,000 cycles, which is not going to work well for an A380 in a high cycle operation.

Hey CM,

What is the difference now between the A380 and 748 in terms of cycles and hour limits?

thanks,



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8931 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 6):
What is the difference now between the A380 and 748 in terms of cycles and hour limits?

I don't believe Boeing has pulished an LOV for the 747-8 yet. For the 747-400 they are:

Flight Cycles - 35,000
Flight Hours - 165,000

For the the 747-400D, the cycles limit was bumped up to 40,000

I believe the LOV Airbus has publised for the A380 are:

Flight Cyces - 19,000
Flight Hours - 140,000

I'm looking back to find the source where I first found these numbers. It is also worth noting Airbus has at times gone back and later certified extended service goals for their aircraft, having recently just done this for the A320.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9159 posts, RR: 76
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8794 times:

Quoting CM (Reply 7):
It is also worth noting Airbus has at times gone back and later certified extended service goals for their aircraft, having recently just done this for the A320.

and A300, A310, A330, A340 ............



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineqantas744er From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8545 times:

Quoting CM (Reply 7):
I don't believe Boeing has pulished an LOV for the 747-8 yet. For the 747-400 they are:

Flight Cycles - 35,000
Flight Hours - 165,000

For the the 747-400D, the cycles limit was bumped up to 40,000

I believe the LOV Airbus has publised for the A380 are:

Flight Cyces - 19,000
Flight Hours - 140,000

I'm looking back to find the source where I first found these numbers. It is also worth noting Airbus has at times gone back and later certified extended service goals for their aircraft, having recently just done this for the A320.

They just did,

LOV for -8i/F is:

Flight Cycles - 35,000
Flight Hours - 165,000

So the same as -400/M/F

BTW, the -400D kept the 35,000 Flight Cycles, so no change to 40k.



Straight from boeing: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2012_q4/2/

[Edited 2012-11-20 17:48:40]


Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1581 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7643 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The 575t WV008 equals the RTO test with 16 main braking units, so to go any higher they will need to add the final four, which would then support TOWs of upwards of 625t.

They have progressively introduced new more efficient brakes and breaking materials, why cant they certify new MTOW by computer simulations?



BV
User currently offlineKC135Hydraulics From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

Messier-Bugati brakes on those A380s, by chance? I know they make good brakes! I overhaul C-17 and KC-135 brakes back home and they're both made by Messier-Bugati. A typical C-17 brake can stay on an aircraft for up to 5 years before its worn beyond limits. Granted, a C-17 isn't flying as many hours per day, but it experiences a significant amount of high energy stops due to assault landings and other assorted practice landings.

Sorry if I went off topic here, I'm just a big fan of French-made aircraft brakes. Their design is outstanding and repair/overhaul on them is very easy.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7425 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 10):
They have progressively introduced new more efficient brakes and breaking materials, why cant they certify new MTOW by computer simulations?

That might very well be the case, since they didn't perform the RTO at the A380-800F's MTOW of 590t even though they did do a 596.5t take off and a 590t landing. Last I heard, with 20 main braking units the limit was 625t.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9159 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7302 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 10):

They have progressively introduced new more efficient brakes and breaking materials, why cant they certify new MTOW by computer simulations?

The certification tests in 2007 were performed at 577 t, the brakes were only absorbing 89 MJ (bit under 75% of their design as they were designed for 120 MJ). Airbus increased the envelope last year beyond 577 t with RTOW tests up to 600 t.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7271 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 8):
and A300, A310, A330, A340 ............

Thanks Zeke. I was aware of the A300/310, but not the A330/340. Do you know why Airbus takes this approach? At least in the case of the A320, the ESG program was a major undertaking, including puting the fatigue articles back into test. Still underway in persuit of ESG2, as far as I know.

Quoting qantas744er (Reply 9):
They just did,

LOV for -8i/F is:

Flight Cycles - 35,000
Flight Hours - 165,000

Thanks for that. I guess no surprises there.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9159 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7157 times:

Quoting CM (Reply 14):
Thanks Zeke. I was aware of the A300/310, but not the A330/340. Do you know why Airbus takes this approach? At least in the case of the A320, the ESG program was a major undertaking, including puting the fatigue articles back into test. Still underway in persuit of ESG2, as far as I know.

The design load spectrum almost always has been far greater than what the airframe sees in service. They use a combination of the ground fatigue testing and in flight service flight spectrum to extend the life. Additionally the average flight time per cycle often is higher than what was designed. Airbus only had the A300/A310 freighter conversions, that had been their priority for life extension, next came the A320 as they were looking at the P2F conversion for them. The A330/A340 was the lowest priority as it did not have a P2F program until relatively recently.

The first A330/A340 extension happened not long back, it was all part of them getting the heavy maintenance period extended to the same interval as the 787, it eroded one of Boeings marketing advantages. I think it only resulted in a modest increase in cycles to around 10,000 cycles, still a reasonable amount for a long haul aircraft (the 777F correct me if I am wrong was designed for 11000 cycles).

As far as I know Airbus exceeded their 2.5 times design goal on the A380 last year in the fatigue rig, they will continue to test the aircraft to well beyond what it is certified for, and use this data to extend the life of the airframe. Likewise I would expect the 787-8I to have a life beyond what Boeing designed it for, an average 4:42 per cycle is well below what any passenger operator would expect to do with such an airframe, on the freighter this could be a little more representative.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13271 posts, RR: 100
Reply 16, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7098 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

While the WV008 was expected, the other two are a little of a surprise. Is there a European airport with significant noise penalties? For DXB-Europe is quite possible at that MTOW. How would it benefit an airline in terms of allowed operations at which airports? (Note: LHR does have noise limits... So there would be one I'd assume it would be useful.)

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
As I expected, WV006

What are the correct numbers, per the link:

WV008 high MTOW
WV007 high MZFW
WV006 low MTOW for noise.

I just would like to know what is what.  
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
WV007 looks to be for high-density regional missions as it has the lowest MTOW (492t) and ties for the highest MZFW (395t).

Isn't that WV006? Either way, I think with 97t of fuel with the highest MZFW, it should be able to make it to Europe from the mid-east, so its a little more than regional. Note: I'm tired, so I'm guessing range profiles in my head instead of properly looking at a chart.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
I also think WV007 might be appealing to EK for their future "Model One" regional (11-Hour Endurance) two-class configuration.

Agreed. Or even as their 11 hour 3-class.

How I see it

WV008 (high MTOW) for 3-class (or 4-class) ULH
WV007 (high MZFW) for 2-class long haul. I agree with the 11 hour. For how could one use the weight with crew rests?
WV006 high MZFW with low MTOW should be a great weight hauler as far as Europe to the mid-east

I see WV006 being EK specific. (They order enough for that privilege.) WV008 will be popular (BA, EK, and I expect future QF, SQ, KE, and others). WV007 is an interest outlier... I wonder who else ordered that variant (other than EK).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineqantas744er From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6574 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
The first A330/A340 extension happened not long back, it was all part of them getting the heavy maintenance period extended to the same interval as the 787, it eroded one of Boeings marketing advantages. I think it only resulted in a modest increase in cycles to around 10,000 cycles, still a reasonable amount for a long haul aircraft (the 777F correct me if I am wrong was designed for 11000 cycles).


These are the new anticipated LOV values (pending FAA approval):

777F

Flight Cycles: 37,500
Flight Hours: 160,000

The 777 -200/ER/LR and -300/ER:

Flight Cycles: 60,000
Flight Hours: 160,000

787

Flight Cycles: 66,000
Flight Hours: 200,000

The following LOV's and Service Bulletin schedules will only become effective on Jan. 14, 2016. So plenty of time for Boeing to adjust the LOV values.

[Edited 2012-11-20 23:02:16]


Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9159 posts, RR: 76
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6392 times:

Quoting qantas744er (Reply 17):

So what are the current ones ? i.e. the ones that are approved.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineqantas744er From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6212 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 18):
So what are the current ones ? i.e. the ones that are approved.

Currently:

777 -200/ER/LR -300/ER

Flight Cycles: 40,000
Flight Hours: 160,000

777F

Flight Cycles: 11,000 (As you correctly stated before Zeke)
Flight Hours: 160,000

As mentioned, the new B777, B787, and A380 LOV's will be determined by latest Jan. 14, 2016.

[Edited 2012-11-20 23:51:26]


Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3716 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):
What are the correct numbers, per the link:

The article has incorrect Weight Variants. My WV's are from the A380 ACAP (November 2012).


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13271 posts, RR: 100
Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2764 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 20):
The article has incorrect Weight Variants. My WV's are from the A380 ACAP (November 2012).

Thank you.

Quoting qantas744er (Reply 17):
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 16):

Nitpick, that was Zeke.

Quoting qantas744er (Reply 17):
These are the new anticipated LOV values (pending FAA approval):

777F

Flight Cycles: 37,500
Flight Hours: 160,000

The 777 -200/ER/LR and -300/ER:

Flight Cycles: 60,000
Flight Hours: 160,000

787

Flight Cycles: 66,000
Flight Hours: 200,000

Since this is an A380 thread, what are the A380 values (current or anticipated LOV)

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2702 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Since this is an A380 thread, what are the A380 values (current or anticipated LOV)

Current LOVs for the A380 are:

Flight Cyces - 19,000
Flight Hours - 140,000


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
EK: Any New A380 Routes/frequencies Announced? posted Sun Sep 30 2012 05:53:43 by mozart
New A380 Break Eeven Numbers? posted Mon May 7 2012 10:29:03 by bigbird
Emirates New A380 Routes posted Mon Jan 18 2010 20:19:53 by YYZALA
New A380 Order During Dubai Air Show? posted Mon Nov 2 2009 01:12:13 by N14AZ
Next New A380 Customer? posted Mon Apr 27 2009 09:55:50 by CHRISBA777ER
New A380 Operator... posted Mon Jan 19 2009 06:30:25 by Diesel1
Next New A380 Order? posted Mon Sep 29 2008 01:57:22 by Ctang
New A380 Delays posted Tue Sep 16 2008 10:15:50 by 1803sun
AF Releases New A380 Delivery Schedule posted Fri Jul 11 2008 01:26:58 by N14AZ
Airbus Confirms New A380 Delays posted Tue May 13 2008 00:56:51 by Aviationbuff