rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:34 pm

I was looking at this a380 drawing posted y AirbusA346 in another thread:
http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx?itemid=9140

It seems that the tail interior of the tail area is ... empty? Could this be wasted space?
rolf
 
777DadandJr
Posts: 1484
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:37 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:49 pm

I don't think it's wasted space. I wouldn't doubt that Airbus has left a space for an auxillary fuel tank. Plus, in the extreme rear of the tail, you have the APU. I'm sure it's not just empty space. I would imagine that the structure in the tail would have to be quite substantial as well.

Russ
My glass is neither 1/2 empty nor 1/2 full, rather, the glass itself is twice as big as it should be.
 
AAgent
Posts: 540
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2001 11:41 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:08 pm

Quoting 777DadandJr (Reply 1):
I wouldn't doubt that Airbus has left a space for an auxillary fuel tank.

Although not impossible, it would be extremely unlikely that Airbus would place an auxillary fuel tank in the tail section as it would severely impact the weight and balance of the aircraft. Simply put, it would make the aircraft tail heavy. Typically, fuel is stored as close to the aircraft's center of gravity as possible.

Best Regards,
AAgent
War Eagle!
 
smokeyrosco
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:21 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:10 pm

Quoting Rolfen (Thread starter):
It seems that the tail interior of the tail area is ... empty? Could this be wasted space?

is there any Aircraft that has a full tail interior?
John Hancock
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:41 pm

There have been constant rumours for more than a year that the A380 looks like being between 4 and 7 tons (or tonnes) over its target weight. This, if that is how things turn out, would affect carrying capacity, or range, or both.

It has also been reported that Airbus are using different engines on the production models, to provide extra thrust. This could again entail extra weight, either that of the engines themselves or the extra fuel they are likely to require.

Both the first two recipient airlines (Singapore and Qantas) have announced reduction of heir planned passenger loads from 505 to 475 or thereabouts. No reasons were given, but I believe that 30 fewer passengers would amount to a weight saving of around 6 tons?

Finally, if you are forced for weight reasons to cut the payload to achieve promised range performance, the obvious place to take the weight off is at the rear of the passenger deck - i.e. the point furthest from the aircraft's Centre of Gravity.

From all that, I for one conclude that the '4-6 tons overweight' problem continues to haunt Airbus' A380 development team.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
smokeyrosco
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:21 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:44 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 4):

that is some pretty wild accusations.
John Hancock
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:52 pm

Not 'accusations', Smokeyrosco, deductions and a conclusion.   I can't help it if Airbus don't pubish any facts to confound the rumours.

Can you think of any other reason why two airlines would cut their intended economy passenger loads? And presumably, therefore, according to that plan, leave useable deckspace empty?

[Edited 2006-02-19 07:06:41]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
smokeyrosco
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:21 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:56 pm

I can't see why any airline would buy an aircraft that does not do what it says on the tin (except maybe Airfrance) SQ cutting it's econo passengers in half because the aircraft cannot do it just dosent' wash with me, if that was the case it would make more sense to cancel the order and suffer the penilties.
John Hancock
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:03 pm

Or negotiate further compensation, on top of that already agreed for the delivery delays? Or a reduction of the (already low) launch prices?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
smokeyrosco
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:21 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:06 pm

maybe at one time this was an option but now with fuel being such a major issue i don't think any compensation can make up for oil being at least $50 a barrel for the life of the aircraft.
John Hancock
 
MarshalN
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:39 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:09 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 6):
Not 'accusations', Smokeyrosco, deductions and a conclusion. I can't help it if Airbus don't pubish any facts to confound the rumours.

Based on..... questionable evidence

NAV20, care to point to a source that isn't just hearsay? Why should Airbus publish any facts or figures to the public? Nobody other than the airlines need to know, and presumably, they're happy enough to keep their orders. The burden of proof, if anything, is on the accuser to show that the aircraft is in fact overweight.

[Edited 2006-02-19 07:11:59]
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:14 pm

Plenty of sources, MarshalN. I'd oblige, but I'm going out to dinner.  Smile Please google 'A380 overweight' and read all about it.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
smokeyrosco
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:21 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:28 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
Plenty of sources, MarshalN. I'd oblige, but I'm going out to dinner. Please google 'A380 overweight' and read all about it.

Aye, and i'm going to bed... nite nite all.
John Hancock
 
Morvious
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:36 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:53 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
Please google 'A380 overweight' and read all about it

yeah thats a good source..  Yeah sure
The only good source is an airliner that is involved with the A380 project (Singapore for example) or Airbus itselves.

When googling, 40 out of 50 hits will direct me to the a.net forums..

To be back on topic, because the question was if the tail section was empty.

It looks like it on this drawing, but I miss for example the APU. So my hard guess is that it will be full with equipment, to safe room for where its needed.
have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:36 pm

Anyhow, back to the topic....

Quoting AAgent (Reply 2):
Simply put, it would make the aircraft tail heavy. Typically, fuel is stored as close to the aircraft's center of gravity as possible.

Fuel is in the HTP of the A380. It is transfered there during climb and is used to give a 3° nose-up for improved cruise.

The other things in the tailcone is (as already said) the APU. Then you have the fuel and APU fuel lines, the hydraulics to the VTP, the HTP 'trimm-spindel' (actuating spiral - can't remember what it is caled in English!) and the mounting points of the HTP and VTP (plus reinforcements)
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9757
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:23 pm

Quoting AAgent (Reply 2):
Although not impossible, it would be extremely unlikely that Airbus would place an auxillary fuel tank in the tail section as it would severely impact the weight and balance of the aircraft. Simply put, it would make the aircraft tail heavy. Typically, fuel is stored as close to the aircraft's center of gravity as possible.

Placing fuel in the tail reduces fuel burn, and increases range. The 330/340/744 pax have fuel tanks in the tail.

The mass in the tail reduces the amount of downforce required to be produced by the horizintal stabilizer, which in turn reduces the amount of lift that needs to be produced.

The 744 pax has 10t of fuel in the tail, 333/343 4.9t, 346 6.5t (approx numbers)

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 4):
Both the first two recipient airlines (Singapore and Qantas) have announced reduction of heir planned passenger loads from 505 to 475 or thereabouts. No reasons were given, but I believe that 30 fewer passengers would amount to a weight saving of around 6 tons?

from http://www.qantasvacations.com/press-airbus-a380.htm dated 18 jan

Quote:
The Chief Executive Officer of Qantas, Mr Geoff Dixon, said Qantas would deploy its first four Airbus A380 aircraft, seating 501 passengers, on services between Australia and the United States of America, including both Melbourne-Los Angeles (12,749 km) and Sydney-Los Angeles (12,052).

The 6 new 744ERs with QF only have 343 pax, I was told for direct MEL-LAX flights with better payload. They generally run 744s configured for pacific or european flights, maybe they plan to do the same with the 380 ?
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:31 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 15):
from http://www.qantasvacations.com/press-airbus-a380.htm dated 18 jan

That was 18th Jan 2005 at the 'Reveal' of the A380.

Quote:
Speaking at the first public viewing of the A380 in Toulouse, France, today, Mr Dixon said Qantas' first 12 A380s would enable the airline to fly at least 17 weekly services between Australia and Los Angeles and 14 weekly services between Australia and London via Bangkok, Hong Kong and Singapore.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9757
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:40 pm

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 16):
That was 18th Jan 2005 at the 'Reveal' of the A380.

Sorry, cannot see where its says 2005 ?
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:43 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 17):
Sorry, cannot see where its says 2005 ?

It says at the "First public viewing of the A380" which was last year!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:20 pm

That story is out-of-date, I'm afraid, Zeke - it's from the 'reveal' in Jan. 2005. This is the more recent picture:-

"Although it can carry as many as 800 people in an all-economy layout, the standard configuration of Version 1 of the A380 (there's to be a bigger, "stretched" version later) is for 550 passengers in the three classes. At first Qantas said it would go with the standard layout, then, earlier this year, announced that it would go with a capacity of 501.

"Now, however, following Singapore Airlines' announcement that its new A380 would have only 480 seats, Qantas has announced that its final definition will also have fewer than 500."


http://www.theage.com.au/news/travel...0-be/2005/11/18/1132016935933.html

Or, if you prefer, this is the Airbus CEO, Gustav Humbert, talking on the same subject in October 2005:-

"Besides, so far our airline customers are planning to install only 440 to 480 seats in their A380s."

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/inte...al/spiegel/0,1518,377753-2,00.html
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9757
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:32 pm

Thanks A319XFW

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 19):
This is the more recent picture:-

Another quote from the same article

Quote:
It had always been expected that Qantas' most lucrative customers at the pointy end would get the lion's share of the lounges and bars that have been a key part of Airbus' spruiking for the new plane. From the little Qantas is now saying - it won't unveil the details for some time because its first A380 doesn't arrive until April 2007 - economy customers will also have "access" to lounge areas.

But the most radical part of Qantas' plan is to introduce more space for each economy seat.



It seems to me the reason is given here, more space given to the customers.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:05 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 20):
It seems to me the reason is given here, more space given to the customers.

Why would they do that, Zeke? Please don't say to offer more legroom than the competition - as far as Melbourne/Sydney to the US West Coast is concerned, Qantas doesn't HAVE any competition worth talking about.

You're quite right about them cutting passenger loads on their Melbourne/LAX 747s. The reason is that it's around 7,000nms., with aggressive headwinds either way at various times of year, and 744s can't safely make the distance with a full load.

The simplest, most likely answer to the question of why Qantas has repeatedly cut their proposed passenger loads is that, on present indications, the A380 won't be able to either.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
SKA380
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:46 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 10:26 pm

NAV20: Care to give a reason how your post has anything to do with the topic ?
 
NumberTwelve
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:57 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 6):
Not 'accusations', Smokeyrosco, deductions and a conclusion. I can't help it if Airbus don't pubish any facts to confound the rumours.

Argh, come on, NAV, you're spreading rumours and others have to confound them? Little silly, or not?
There was a rumour from NAV20 too, that the 380 would never fly - so what about this rumour?
signature censored by admin - so check my profile
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:42 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):

Why would they do that, Zeke? Please don't say to offer more legroom than the competition - as far as Melbourne/Sydney to the US West Coast is concerned, Qantas doesn't HAVE any competition worth talking about.

The answer is, I bet that space isn't going to Economy pax.. or if it is only a little bit. QF will soon have some upper class competition. Air NZ's new product is going to be of appeal to bris and mel pax, and some loyal star flyers to sydney, Plus Air Canada will also soon have a flat bed. QF needs to maintain its premium image in the upper classes... Plus remember this jet is also flying to LHR and for the sake of consistancy, their product to LAX and JFK needs to be the same as LHR. Otherwise you will piss off premium pax. QF have already stated they are introducing a new product when this jet turns up. So let's wait and see.

Nav20, i don't mean to be personal, but many of your posts in the past have been staunchly anti-airbus. Perhaps we could be a little more objective here?


Now back to the topic. As far as I have heard, there is going to be a giant staircase in the tail section. with a spiral-style half way turn. Which makes perfect sense, a staircase has to be somewhere and its going to be a similiar weight to regular flooring (note i said similar- not the same!) and it would make balancing the aircraft much simplier having it there.

[Edited 2006-02-19 15:44:55]
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:58 pm

Also i might add

QF following SQ's reduction would also fit in line with the new "super upper class" products strategy. what routes do SQ fly that the 744, with PW engines...(hence the least weight and range option) struggle on? Answer? none!

So if the A380 only made the 744s range, and it was designed for SIGNIFICANTLY more, well that wouldn't be a problem. Id say this has more to do with competeting to be the 'premiare" first and business class airline. All of the real regular heavy first and business class travellers on these routes usually fly SQ, QF or BA. I'm talking serious repeate business road warrior style travellers.. not wealthy holiday makers. That is the business they're after...each of these pax is worth MILLIONS in lifetime business. Think of the value of somebody who flys first class 15 times a year to LHR and LAX over 20 or 30 years!!!!!
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:52 am

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 14):
the HTP 'trimm-spindel' (actuating spiral - can't remember what it is caled in English!)

The term you're looking for is "jackscrew".

The A380 use of tailcone space outside of the pressure vessel is essentially the same as other transport aircraft. Since this space is unpressurized, it doesn't lend itself to carrying payload and the h. tail makes a better fuel tank if you want to carry fuel aft.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
elvis777
Posts: 346
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:23 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:26 am

Hi Lufthansa,

the answer is:.. no one knows! Your explanation may be plausible but so is Nav's., ...

Anyways,

I am surprised that they would put a fuel tank in there. It seems to me that any fuel tank with any decent capacity would certainly create instability problems due to the CG.. but ok. perhaps its doable. Anyways, even if there was'nt a fuel tank in there and it was only ever used for the APU and its supporting equipment, this does not mean it is wasted space. Not every nook and cranny must be employed by the designers. You know what would be interesting, if some one looked up the structural loading capacity of this section! Maybe it can carry 500 (1000,3000??) gallons of jet fuel, maybe it can't. Or maybe, if it has to be used for something, it will be used as an electronics closet?

Peace

Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:33 am

Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 27):
Or maybe, if it has to be used for something, it will be used as an electronics closet?

With the exception of engine controls, electronics are usually kept within the pressure vessel for environmental, and to a lesser extent, accessibility reasons.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:34 am

personally, while I agree with Nav20 on this, I'm not going to speculate as we dont have "concrete informaton" and we know that the next 14-18 months will give us most of the information we'll need to see if this plane will be a boon or a bust for Airbus...

we've waited this long, another 14-18 shouldn't be too much of a big deal....
"Up the Irons!"
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 2:58 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 26):
The A380 use of tailcone space outside of the pressure vessel is essentially the same as other transport aircraft.

But I guess since the aircraft is bigger, then the empty space is also proportionally bigger. I didnt know that this part is unpressurized.

Sorry, I guess the equipment is not clear on that drawing. Like A319XFW said, all the mechanisms to control rudder and elavators and structural reinforcements probably take up a lot of space.
rolf
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:17 am

Quoting NumberTwelve (Reply 23):
Argh, come on, NAV, you're spreading rumours and others have to confound them? Little silly, or not?
There was a rumour from NAV20 too, that the 380 would never fly - so what about this rumour?



Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 24):
Nav20, i don't mean to be personal, but many of your posts in the past have been staunchly anti-airbus. Perhaps we could be a little more objective here?

C'mon guys. Nav20 has links to back up his stories. QF and SQ didn't reduce pax numbers just for the heck of it and at the same time, they're not gonna come out and say 'Oooh, by the way, the whalejet is waaay short on it's weight promises so we have to reduce pax count..bummer'.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 26):
The term you're looking for is "jackscrew".

That's the one! Thanks! I'm forgetting my English after being in Germany for a bit Big grin
 
elvis777
Posts: 346
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 9:23 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:18 am

Hi OldAeroGuy,

Thanks, I was just guessing. Speaking out of my ear is a better way of describing it!

Peace

Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:27 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 31):

C'mon guys. Nav20 has links to back up his stories. QF and SQ didn't reduce pax numbers just for the heck of it and at the same time, they're not gonna come out and say 'Oooh, by the way, the whalejet is waaay short on it's weight promises so we have to reduce pax count..bummer'.

That is true, but by that same standard we also have reports of EK planning to run an all-economy outfit increasing it!!!!! So go figure. Also remember that in this part of the world, consumers here, unlike in america, won't put up with being shoved in any shitty old sardine can. Not when they've got those kind of flight times and paying such high prices. Remember if the A380 makes its target of 15-20% less CASM, that gives them a lot of space to play with before they get to the point where CASM=that of the 744. Now they can make money at the 744s level... so they could win marketshare buy pushing things further the other way and offering a much better product for the same price.

I can't help but think this is somebody praying for this jet to fail.
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:25 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
Plenty of sources, MarshalN. I'd oblige, but I'm going out to dinner. Please google 'A380 overweight' and read all about it.

Back to your old self?

The 380 is reported to be less than 1% over target weight (compare to the 787 that is 1,5% over target weight) and the 380 is also reported to be preforming better in real life flying than expected. There has been a whole discussion going here on that subject. SQ did choose their seat numbers before these numbers were given to them. So as to your speculations concerning the reasons for SQ's choosing I can only say that they apear as taken out of the clear blue sky.

Abba
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:31 am

Quoting Abba (Reply 35):
The 380 is reported to be less than 1% over target weight (compare to the 787 that is 1,5% over target weight)

you certainly aren't comparing an over-sized watermelon to a small plum are you?
"Up the Irons!"
 
dl757md
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 9:32 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:56 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 26):
The A380 use of tail-cone space outside of the pressure vessel is essentially the same as other transport aircraft. Since this space is unpressurized, it doesn't lend itself to carrying payload and the h. tail makes a better fuel tank if you want to carry fuel aft.

Only 26 replies to get to get a knowledgeable answer. Gotta love A.net. Thanks OldAeroGuy for finally posting the right answer. I was beginning to think as I read through this thread that no one was going to get it right after 2 days and 36 replies. I guess with the rumors of the A380's weight problems, most people here are more interested in speculation about that than factually answering the original posters question.

One other thing. Much of the space in the tail or empennage is required for the movement of the horizontal tail center section as it is trimmed up and down. That still leaves a bunch of space left over especially in an aircraft the size of the A380. Since it's unpressurized (and it's not economically feasible to pressurize it) utilizing it for pax space or amenity areas is out of the question. It's also not prudent to move equipment out of the pressurized area as the environmental demands of the unpressurized area would wipe out existing equipment and equipment designed for that environment would be heavier and far more expensive.

DL757Md
757 Most beautiful airliner in the sky!
 
dw747400
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:08 am

Quoting Abba (Reply 35):
The 380 is reported to be less than 1% over target weight (compare to the 787 that is 1,5% over target weight)

Two points. First, the 787 and A380 are in very different stages of development. I'd venture to guess that when the whalejet was where the 787 is now, it was in a similiar or worse predicament (I'm not saying anything in particular about the A380, many designs experience the same problems during design)

Second, you seem to inicate 1% is insignificant. This couldn't be further from the truth, especially when talking about an aircraft the size of the A380. That is rougly 6,100 pounds, about the same as a fully equiped Citation I.

This doesn't mean the A380 is a failure or even in trouble. But its not a trivial matter.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
MarshalN
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:39 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:41 am

Just for the sake of checking, I decided to google as NAV20 suggested just to see what shows up

Lo and behold... this is the first article that pops up

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/182471_airbusproblem17.html

Notice this is from 2004! The rest of the top 10 hits from google (aside from an a.net post) are all dated 2004/2005, most of which are a year or older.

NAV20, looks like your "plenty of sources" are fairly outdated themselves.
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:05 pm

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 36):
you certainly aren't comparing an over-sized watermelon to a small plum are you?

No - I am putting things into perspective.

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 38):
Two points. First, the 787 and A380 are in very different stages of development. I'd venture to guess that when the whalejet was where the 787 is now, it was in a similiar or worse predicament (I'm not saying anything in particular about the A380, many designs experience the same problems during design)

No I do not think so. The 1.5% over target weight seems - from what Gilette says - to be what they accepted after their final "loose weight" campain before design freeze. But I grant you to be much more cleaver than Gillette. No doubt about that at all.

Abba
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:43 pm

Hi, MarshalN! I agree that the links you found have been around for a while - so it surprises me that you'd apparently never seen them before, and had to ask me for 'sources'.  Smile

My position is that I cannot for one moment accept that the airlines are providing all those 'wide open spaces', giving economy passengers extra legroom, and now possibly leaving useable space un-allocated to any purpose, just out of the goodness of their hearts! There has to be a more practical reason.

Secondly, as DW777400 points out, ANY extra weight presents problems - whether it's three tons, four tons, or six tons. In that context, it's worth remembering that no A380 has been fully fitted out yet, and testing is not complete, so Airbus and the airlines are still working on estmates at the moment, not 'hard figures'.

Thirdly, Qantas' longhaul operations (especially services to the US West Coast) ideally require an 8,000nm. range with a full passenger load. Their main reason for ordering the A380 was presumably that, unlike the 744, it promised just that. In round figures, the A380 is 30% heavier than the 748 and will require 30% more fuel. Most of us feel that the 748 will carry about 415 passengers in 'normal' 3-class configuration - applying a factor of 30% means that, to be competitive, the A380 would need to be able to carry 540 (which is about what was promised at the outset).

If, as seems likely on the latest figures, the maximum 8,000nm. passenger load turns out to be only 480 (just 15% more than a 748) you wouldn't expect Qantas, or any other airline, to be pleased - now would you?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:33 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
Most of us feel that the 748 will carry about 415 passengers in 'normal' 3-class configuration

I could have sworn it was 400.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
TaromA380
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:26 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
In round figures, the A380 is 30% heavier than the 748 and will require 30% more fuel.

Finally, only 30% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
If, as seems likely on the latest figures, the maximum 8,000nm. passenger load turns out to be only 480 (just 15% more than a 748) you wouldn't expect Qantas, or any other airline, to be pleased - now would you?

You could have a briliant career as Qantas spokesman.

Cheers.  Smile
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:40 pm

The following is an assumptive conclusion based on viewing dozens of "exploded views" of airliners: The tail end of every/any airliner is not considered for removable space, the cabin pressure bulkhead ends there.

If I'm wrong, please inform me.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9757
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:51 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
Why would they do that, Zeke? Please don't say to offer more legroom than the competition - as far as Melbourne/Sydney to the US West Coast is concerned, Qantas doesn't HAVE any competition worth talking about.

Air NZ is now offering an economy class with a seat pitch of 39’’ over that route.

How long before QF will compete with SQ, EK, EY, VS across the pacific ?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 21):
You're quite right about them cutting passenger loads on their Melbourne/LAX 747s. The reason is that it's around 7,000nms., with aggressive headwinds either way at various times of year, and 744s can't safely make the distance with a full load.



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 41):
Thirdly, Qantas' longhaul operations (especially services to the US West Coast) ideally require an 8,000nm. range with a full passenger load. Their main reason for ordering the A380 was presumably that, unlike the 744, it promised just that. In round figures, the A380 is 30% heavier than the 748 and will require 30% more fuel. Most of us feel that the 748 will carry about 415 passengers in 'normal' 3-class configuration - applying a factor of 30% means that, to be competitive, the A380 would need to be able to carry 540 (which is about what was promised at the outset).

Should I read that as

a) if its a 747 its a 7000 nm trip
b) if its a 380 its a 8000 nm trip

QF with the 744ER which has a Boeing quoted 3 typical class config of 416 installed 343. One would then expect a 748 with a Boeing quoted 3 typical class config of 450 to have 370 ish offering a similar standard of comfort.

370 ish to 470 ish is 100 ish.

QF in the articles quoted above cleary have indicated that they will be offering a greater level of comfort.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
jush
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:10 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:57 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 4):



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 4):
that is some pretty wild accusations.

No that is some proper bullshit!

Regds
jush
There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:19 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 4):
It has also been reported that Airbus are using different engines on the production models, to provide extra thrust. This could again entail extra weight, either that of the engines themselves or the extra fuel they are likely to require.

From what Ive read on here and in other places, the engines were uprated versions of the same engines on the test aircraft, that simply produced more thrust. They werent heavier or thirstier, just better tuned and overall a better version of the same engine. This also alievated some of the weight issues.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:12 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 45):
Should I read that as

a) if its a 747 its a 7000 nm trip
b) if its a 380 its a 8000 nm trip

No, Zeke. Forgive me, but you seem to be clutching at straws a bit. You're a professional pilot, you know better than me that the rule is fuel for the trip plus fuel to an alternate plus reserve. The 744ER can't deliver that from Tulla to LAX with a full load; you can rely on Boeing to make sure that the 748 can.

The question is, will the A380 be able to do the same? All the available evidence (and I admit that that is scanty, because Airbus are being very reticent) suggests that it won't. If you have other evidence bearing on that issue, please post it.

Jush, I don't know who you're quoting, but you're not quoting me. You may have noticed that I don't abuse people merely because their opinions differ from mine.

RichardPrice, please note that I said 'could', not 'would'.  Smile

[Edited 2006-02-20 15:21:50]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: A380 Tail Section: Empty?

Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:41 pm

Well, if you guys wanted to ride in there it'd be cold and drafty, also aft of the pressure bulkhead.

In the MD11 there was a fair amount of stuff going on back in there. There was a ladder that one would climb up that got you in front of the horizontal stabilizer and above that there was an area called the Bridal Suite-a fairly good sized bay with two fuel lines and a dome light. There were a few card games up there on the night shift out on the flight line when things were slow or so I'm told.

There was also another access point that would take you up into the hydraulics bay, and a third hatch that led into the very aft tail compartment which was empty.

As a point of information, trimming for aft CG as a fuel economy gambit with a tank in the rear sounds like a good idea, and I guess the only reason that Airbus hasn't done this is because they have already figured out a way to trim for aft CG that doesn't involve moving fuel back and forth from the wing center box to an aft trim tank. Maybe if they need it in the future it will become an option.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn