Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Initial Climb Angle Of The Airbus A380  
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1174 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 17527 times:

I recently observed two Emirates A380s departing Sydney airport and noticed that the initial climb angle seemed less steep than other aircraft. I then flew on an Emirates A380 out of Auckland and got the distinct sensation of a lower climb angle than when I fly on other aircraft. Is the lower angle a reality? Is it a design feature? If so, what benefit does it provide?

Here are videos of the two Sydney departures that I mentioned:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTAoeh83kuU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHO9F_gZmPw

And here are examples of a 747 and an A330 taking off at the same airport:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24kqlvxzHBA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH8cu-EawjU

[Edited 2009-11-03 05:03:04]

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2453 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 17426 times:

Are you referring to the angle of attack of the aircraft or the rate of climb of the aircraft?


A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 17345 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 1):
Are you referring to the angle of attack of the aircraft or the rate of climb of the aircraft?

I am referring to the angle of attack on departure.


User currently offlineAffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 349 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 17300 times:

I'm not sure if I agree.. I've seen the A380 taking off from DXB now a couple of times and compared to EK 744 cargo I'd say it's pretty much the same. The A380 seem to have a higher initial pitch (AOA) on rotation but once it settles they seem to have pretty much the same as the 744.. The rate of climb on the other hand is way better than the 744, quite similar to the A332 actually..

I know the 744 tends to look like it has a higher AOA because of the hump but from my experience you can't spot the difference, maybe if you had them taking off side by side.

just my 2ç

Cheers



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 17241 times:

One of the reasons the A380 has a smaller noise footprint than the 747 is because it can outclimb the 747. Of course it also has larger, slower turning fans which also contributes to its smaller noise footprint.

User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12027 posts, RR: 47
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It's certainly not a limitation of the plane:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley


 wink 



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 16820 times:



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 5):
It's certainly not a limitation of the plane:

In this video it "appears" to be flying almost vertical. LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuFRM_G50Nc

Where's the jet that's making all the noise?


User currently offlineSimProgrammer From France, joined Aug 2004, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 16475 times:

The A34x is also a slow climber when full, becasue the wing design is optimised for cruise economy. The airshow 380 is an empty plane & very easy to do at low alt.


Drive a bus, an Airbus, easier than a London bus!
User currently offlineAeroflot001 From Argentina, joined Oct 2009, 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 16271 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 6):
In this video it "appears" to be flying almost vertical. LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuFRM...G50Nc

That vid sure shows that the extra power is there when its needed although it may not be fully loaded there.


User currently offline7673mech From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 696 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 16123 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 5):
It's certainly not a limitation of the plane:

That one is empty!  Wink


User currently offlineOgre727 From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 16027 times:

I flew it from SIN to LHR... it struck me as a very slow climber....


Sigh
User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15176 times:

Quoting Ogre727 (Reply 10):
I flew it from SIN to LHR... it struck me as a very slow climber....

I think they often run reduced power take-offs, at least out of Sydney - the near silence suggests that.

But, you definitely know when they use more power - the noise is much louder and very distinctive (Trent 900 anyway - I can pick it immediately from any other plane just by the sound). That's all quite unscientific, but I see 2 or 3 A380's just about every day, so you get to know them well enough.

They can climb quite quickly otherwise.

[Edited 2009-11-03 17:30:26 by cpd]

User currently online9MMPD From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 280 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14018 times:

Both my A380 flights (SIN - LHR - SIN) felt like they had a shallow climb. What also led to this feeling was how quiet the cabin as during departure maybe that has something to do with it?

User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9391 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13773 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 2):
Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 1):
Are you referring to the angle of attack of the aircraft or the rate of climb of the aircraft?

I am referring to the angle of attack on departure.

Not to be nitpicky (  Wink ), but you can't tell the angle of attack of an airplane just from watching it fly by. Angle of attack refers to the angle of the wing relative to the freestream flow.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineSwallow From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 554 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13740 times:

I've read on this board that the 380 can go straight to cruise altitude without having to do a "step climb".

Is this because of its optimized wing?



The grass is greener where you water it
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13536 times:



Quoting Swallow (Reply 15):
I've read on this board that the 380 can go straight to cruise altitude without having to do a "step climb".

Is this because of its optimized wing?

Well, I read that it can climb to FL350 without a step climb but requires a step to get to normal cruise around FL400.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9834 posts, RR: 96
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13333 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Reggaebird (Thread starter):
I then flew on an Emirates A380 out of Auckland and got the distinct sensation of a lower climb angle than when I fly on other aircraft

Whether the angle-of-attack is any different, I don't know, but that HUGE wing generates a phenomenal amount of lift - enough in fact to give a 600 tonne to 625 tonne A380 variant (if there ever is one), decent field and climb performance.
Hence the "cooking" 560 tonners we have today have an abundance of lift, even at MTOW.

So they will have absolutely no problem whatsoever gaining altitude in a VERY timely manner  Smile

Quoting Affirmative (Reply 3):
The rate of climb on the other hand is way better than the 744, quite similar to the A332 actually..

 checkmark 

Rgds


User currently offline413x3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13281 times:

I am sure the slower climb has more to do with fuel savings with such a heavy load on board than any missing power it may or may not have.

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9834 posts, RR: 96
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13235 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting 413x3 (Reply 17):
I am sure the slower climb has more to do with fuel savings with such a heavy load on board than any missing power it may or may not have.

Slower thatn it's capable of? Or slower than other planes?

It isn't

Quoting Affirmative (Reply 3):
The rate of climb on the other hand is way better than the 744, quite similar to the A332 actually..

Funnily enough, when you look at the field performance charts, if I read them right, the only other widebody that matches the A380 for take-off distance capability is the A330 - according to their charts, these planes will take off at MTOW, at 0 ft and ISA +15c in 2 900m (for comparison, the 773ER chart shows 3 100m for the same evolution..)

Rgds


User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3613 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13194 times:



Quoting Swallow (Reply 15):
I've read on this board that the 380 can go straight to cruise altitude without having to do a "step climb".

There is no single cruise altitude that an airliner will always climb to on every flight.

Optimum cruise altitude depends on the weight of the aircraft and atmospheric conditions and changes as the aircraft gets lighter.
What the A380 can probably do better than other very heavy aircrafts is climb to a higher cruise altitude earlier in the cruise, probably maintaining a faster rate of climb throughout.

This is due to its huge wing (designed for a much heavier aircraft still) and power to weight ratio.

A maxed out 744 will typically climb to an initial optimum cruise altitude of 30,000 ft, while an A380 can probably go higher under the same conditions, although I don't know how much higher. It will still do step climbs further on after it loses some weight.

Climbing higher sooner has a few advantages. The longer you stay higher, the less fuel you burn, and by being able to go higher sooner you can avoid having to fight for flight levels and get your optimum FL more easily.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 11582 times:



Quoting SimProgrammer (Reply 7):
The airshow 380 is an empty plane

Having been involved in the hot weather trials (and also taking photos at that same airshow), I can assure you that even at high gross weights the A380 can climb really well...



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineJoakims From Sweden, joined Jan 2002, 55 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 11370 times:



Quoting Swallow (Reply 14):
I've read on this board that the 380 can go straight to cruise altitude without having to do a "step climb".

I remember then my wife and I flew SQ A380 from LHR to SIN. We went up to 35.000 feet directly after takeoff The last climb up to 38.000-39.000 came near Nicobar and Andaman Islands in the Bay of Bengal. I think it was due to the usual turbulence in that area.


Joakims


User currently offlineRcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1292 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10102 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT



Quoting Francoflier (Reply 19):
This is due to its huge wing (designed for a much heavier aircraft still) and power to weight ratio.

I've seen references to the "huge" wing and high power/weight ratio and similar statements several times. Does this mean the wing loading on an A380 is less than typical airliners? I thought that (in basic aeronautical engineering classes I took 20+ years ago) that a lightly loaded wing meant good climb performance, long glide performance, but typically less efficient cruise due to more drag. Or am I remembering wrong (or simplifying too much)? If that is true, then the only reason the A380 would have an unusually light wing load is so that they can build heavier variants. Is that the plan at Airbus? If heavier variants were built - they'd have to be cargo, I have a hard time seeing even larger passenger loads.

It seems quite inefficient to build higher performance into the product than needed, (as an engineer, we try to walk the line), but Airbus is hardly into building inefficient products - and the A380 is reportedly quite efficient - so there must be a reason. The 747 was overbuilt in several regards, but it was the first 'jumbo' (Boeing was somewhat conservative in the design) and built when engineering design/tolerance management was less efficient. I'd expect newer types (regardless of manf) to be closer to optimal.

I guess I'm confused. There must be a reason for oversized wings/power. What is it?



rcair1
User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9391 posts, RR: 27
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 9967 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Rcair1 (Reply 22):
I thought that (in basic aeronautical engineering classes I took 20+ years ago) that a lightly loaded wing meant good climb performance, long glide performance, but typically less efficient cruise due to more drag. Or am I remembering wrong (or simplifying too much)?

A lightly-loaded wing should result in less drag than a heavily-loaded wing, all other things being equal. Your induced drag would be reduced.

In general, climb performance is determined by excess thrust.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineRcair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1292 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 9928 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT



Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 23):
A lightly-loaded wing should result in less drag than a heavily-loaded wing, all other things being equal. Your induced drag would be reduced.

Thanks. I was thinking that the larger wing will cause more parasitic (form) drag - but now that I think about it - what a larger wing will do is cause the induced drag curve to shift down and/or left vs airspeed, and the parasitic curve will move up and/or left - so what changes is the airspeed at which minimum drag is achieved will change, but that does not inherently make the wing/plane less efficient, perhaps a little slower at minimum drag.... I'm sure this is way over simplified.

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 23):
In general, climb performance is determined by excess thrust.

Duh  banghead  I knew that.... Stupid question.



rcair1
25 Astuteman : The A380's wing is designed to entertain MTOW's in the 625t - 630t region, to support both ULR A380-800 variants and stretch versions. As for drag, t
26 Starlionblue : As others have said, no you're not. There is no way to tell the angle of attack, which is the angle between the wing and the airflow, from looking at
27 SB : Generally referred to as pitch. S.
28 Starlionblue : Thanks. The name escaped me.
29 A380900 : Also, the big wing has a strategic component: they wanted to completely corner the VLA market. With the big wing, they're telling Boeing: "There's no
30 Francoflier : Interestingly, that would bring its wing loading figure almost exactly to that of the 747-400. That could also be because the A380 maintains a shallo
31 BlatantEcho : Flew LAX-SYD last week on the A380. We took off and climbed up to 32000, then stepped up to 360 and ended up at 390 a few hours out of SYD. Seemed lik
32 Faro : And it looks it. The wing is huge in proportion to the fuselage, which doesn't help the A380's aesthetics much either, but that's a shortcoming airli
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Initial Climb Angle Of The Airbus A380
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is The Angle Of This Plane @ Takeoff posted Thu Dec 13 2007 17:18:27 by SuseJ772
Size Of The A380 Engines posted Mon Nov 12 2007 13:07:08 by Africawings
0° Angle Of Attack In The Cruise posted Thu Sep 6 2007 19:49:57 by Faro
A Tri Jet The Size Of The A380? posted Sun Aug 26 2007 08:22:29 by NEMA
Noise Levels Of The A380 posted Sat Oct 8 2005 11:53:29 by TheSonntag
What Is This In The Back Of The A380? posted Thu Jun 16 2005 22:40:13 by Alphafloor
Rate Of Climb Versus Angle Of Climb posted Wed Feb 23 2005 16:13:58 by Kiwiineurope
Angle Of Attack In A Steady Climb posted Sun Dec 8 2002 04:57:19 by Zeke
Climb Performance B747-400 Vs. Airbus A380 posted Wed Dec 4 2002 07:54:48 by DBOBA
Climb Of The B777/B744 posted Sun May 5 2002 08:57:47 by Mr.BA
Why The Airbus A380 Has Only Two Thrust Reverser? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 14:26:20 by 747400sp
Airbus Strange Definition Of The 350-800 posted Sat Sep 17 2011 00:25:59 by ferpe
What Is The Angle Of This Plane @ Takeoff posted Thu Dec 13 2007 17:18:27 by SuseJ772
Size Of The A380 Engines posted Mon Nov 12 2007 13:07:08 by Africawings
0° Angle Of Attack In The Cruise posted Thu Sep 6 2007 19:49:57 by Faro
A Tri Jet The Size Of The A380? posted Sun Aug 26 2007 08:22:29 by NEMA
Noise Levels Of The A380 posted Sat Oct 8 2005 11:53:29 by TheSonntag
What Is This In The Back Of The A380? posted Thu Jun 16 2005 22:40:13 by Alphafloor
Rate Of Climb Versus Angle Of Climb posted Wed Feb 23 2005 16:13:58 by Kiwiineurope
Angle Of Attack In A Steady Climb posted Sun Dec 8 2002 04:57:19 by Zeke

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format