Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Aug 01, 2016 10:36 am

KarelXWB wrote:
If you look closely at the 787 nose it has a dent too.

How dare you ;) It's a dimple and a nice one at it. :lol:

KarelXWB wrote:
would be impossible. The 787/A350 noses are a completely different generation than the A330/777 style noses.


Of course, but every new design beginning at the E-Series (or even Do728) did a better job than Airbus in my opinion.

Btw, could Airbus have bothered any less about the livery of this airplane? Just some stickers is not what I want to see here.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Aug 01, 2016 11:54 am

WIederling wrote:
Cockpit windows on the A350 are proportionally larger than on the 777 ( enhanced by the racoon mask. )
Similar impression imho with the 787.
Onlookers size the plane in relation to its cockpit windows.

I think the relatively large size (and at least on the 787 wider spacing) of the cabin windows compared to what we are used to with older generation aircraft adds to the illusion.

Meanwhile, am I the only one that looks at the raccoon mask and thinks it is a slightly silly attempt to make the cockpit windows look more like the futurist wrap around version from the early renderings than the more standard A380-esque design it ended up with. That said, I'm looking forward to seeing A350s regularly at my home airport, and getting the opportunity to fly on them.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15146
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Aug 01, 2016 3:32 pm

Video of the painting of the A350-1000

https://youtu.be/EV97JZkqd0Q
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Fiend
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 8:53 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Aug 01, 2016 7:01 pm

Stickpusher wrote:
mat66 wrote:
It is no Comet or 787 with their perfect nose, unfortunately. But no 777 either.


Don't forget the lovely Caravelle!


The 787 nose reminds me of the Caravelle...
BAC 1-11, A300, A320, A321, A330, A340, A350, A380, B737, B747, B757, B777, B787, L1011, Fokker 100, ATR 72, MD83
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 7:49 am

Comet and Caravelle share a nose section. Boeing has a thing for grafting on heads too. 767 nose on 777 fuselage.
No idea where they borrowed for the 787 :-)

WP::EN:Caravelle:
The nose area and cockpit layout were both taken directly from the de Havilland Comet jet airliner, while the rest of the plane was locally designed.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 8:58 am

WIederling wrote:
The nose area and cockpit layout were both taken directly from the de Havilland Comet jet airliner, while the rest of the plane was locally designed.


I remember reading about that years ago. At the time it seemed inconceivable (to me) that rivals would share tech that way, and look where we are now!

As someone who took many jumpseat rides at the pointy end of Comets (with Dan-Air back in the day) I was very much into the history of the aircraft. Like the 757, it was gloriously over-powered, and to eke out the range the crews could throttle back the outer two to flight idle with no problems. Fab plane, in its time, although the Caravelle was definitely better-looking.

Sadly I can't say the same about the A350. It's functional, and doubtless the design makes perfect sense, ticks all the boxes, does what it says on the tin, and whatever the next cliché will be about suitability for the job, but aesthetics is a very personal thing. It's a mighty achievement, but I wouldn't want one parked on my driveway. I'll just have to love it for being an aircraft, which is good enough.

Still not sure whether there's another stretch in there though, and I'll be interested to see how it sits when the full weight of the engines is on there. Are there aspects of flight testing the -1000 that simply carry over from the -900, or is it the same regime as for the prototype? If not, what do they test for, the extra length obviously makes some aspects change?
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:24 am

Stickpusher wrote:
WIederling wrote:
The nose area and cockpit layout were both taken directly from the de Havilland Comet jet airliner, while the rest of the plane was locally designed.


Sadly I can't say the same about the A350. It's functional, and doubtless the design makes perfect sense, ticks all the boxes, does what it says on the tin, and whatever the next cliché will be about suitability for the job, but aesthetics is a very personal thing. It's a mighty achievement, but I wouldn't want one parked on my driveway. I'll just have to love it for being an aircraft, which is good enough.


A you say, a very personal thing. For me the A350 is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design. It pleases my eye from every angle.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Tedd
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:22 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 10:43 am

Can you imagine the consternation if the A350 looked anything like a B787?! At the end of the day there`s only
so much you can do with an airliner shape. The A350 may not have the grace of the Boeing, but it`s suitably
different yet still easy on the eye. Most importantly it`s a terrific response to an incredible aircraft, one that I would
imagine Boeing engineers thought would have no pier when they signed it off. Coffee anyone :)
 
User avatar
frigatebird
Posts: 1789
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:02 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 10:46 am

enzo011 wrote:
It is going to be interesting to see the 779 when it rolls out, whether the proportions will look right or it will fall into the A346 looks department. I love the A346, but it is one long aircraft.

The A35K has about the same length as the 77W, with a narrower fuselage. So, the 779 being a bit longer but also wider fuselage should be equal in proportion I expect.
146,318/19/20/21, AB6,332,333,343,345,346,359,388, 722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9, 742,74E,744,752,762,763, 772,77E,773,77W,788 AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E75/90,F50/70
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 10:57 am

mariner wrote:
graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design.


I think maybe "essentialist" might be a better term, which also conveys a sense of "can do" that the A350 certainly exudes. I enjoy that movie of the five test aircraft in formation as much as anyone, and its always fabulous to see something that will spend its life in harness being really flown once in a while (ever seen a dray horse being turned out for a summer in pasture?). So yes, I get the same joyous "vibe" watching the A350 strut its stuff, I'll just be pining a little for a similar film featuring the A330! Or maybe the NEO, in time...

I've always liked this takeoff from XFB.
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 11:06 am

Tedd wrote:
Can you imagine the consternation if the A350 looked anything like a B787?!


Well, accusations of plagiarism, for a start! The fanboy wars would be something to behold. Popcorn sales would spike.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 1:49 pm

Stickpusher wrote:
Tedd wrote:
Can you imagine the consternation if the A350 looked anything like a B787?!


Well, accusations of plagiarism, for a start! The fanboy wars would be something to behold. Popcorn sales would spike.


Hehe. Only the brightest manage to accuse the orignal of copycatism. :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 2:47 pm

WIederling wrote:
Stickpusher wrote:
Tedd wrote:
Can you imagine the consternation if the A350 looked anything like a B787?!


Well, accusations of plagiarism, for a start! The fanboy wars would be something to behold. Popcorn sales would spike.


Hehe. Only the brightest manage to accuse the orignal of copycatism. :-)


Ah, but a true fan wouldn't let facts get in the way ... :)
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 02, 2016 8:05 pm

Stickpusher wrote:
I think maybe "essentialist" might be a better term, which also conveys a sense of "can do" that the A350 certainly exudes. .


I meant "minimalist" in the sense of less is more, the very least necessary to achieve the desired effect. The best of Apple design, for example, or the architecture of Mies van der Rohe, or the music of Philip Glass, all minimalism.

But this isn't a design class and, as we are agreed, it's very subjective, personal, and if "essentialist" works for you - fine. Image

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Aug 03, 2016 1:10 pm

That's how I see minimalism too, it's something I'm a fan of and have bought over the years (Philippe Starck is a personal favourite), and indeed studied at Uni. I can't ever think of aircraft that way because they are full of redundant components by design. They're minimalist from a safety perspective, but not as a design. If they were truly minimalist they'd never be certified - that's how I arrive at a slightly different definition for such objects. They could have far fewer components and still fly, is what I'm getting at.

I'm not trying to persuade you to think in that way, just saying that for me there's a distinction. Philip Glass, Harold Budd et al can afford to strip things right back because thankfully there's no industry regulation for artistic expression! The guidelines of popular opinion don't seem to be working too well either, come to that.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Aug 04, 2016 7:39 am

mariner wrote:
A you say, a very personal thing. For me the A350 is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design. It pleases my eye from every angle.


787 nose ( and the fuselage too ) is stubbier and panders more to cuteness effects ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuteness )
than the leaner A350 nose.
To note: "cuteness" is not a relevant design element in efficient aerodynamics. More of a detractor.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Aug 04, 2016 8:10 am

Stickpusher wrote:
I'm not trying to persuade you to think in that way, just saying that for me there's a distinction.


That's good, because I think we have a different view of the concept of minimalism and you're not winning me over. Image

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Aug 04, 2016 8:24 am

I don't get the 757 worship to be honest. It has a rat or weasel like appearance IMO.
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/-88/CRJ-700/-900
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat Aug 06, 2016 9:56 pm

mariner wrote:
Stickpusher wrote:
I'm not trying to persuade you to think in that way, just saying that for me there's a distinction.


That's good, because I think we have a different view of the concept of minimalism and you're not winning me over. Image


Think in terms of structure, not appearance. It's why things such music and art can afford to be truly minimalist while other things are compromised by the needs placed on them. That's not to suggest that complex objects can't be minimalist in the way they are constructed, but a commercial airliner can't really be stripped to its essentials because the regulatory authorities require redundancy, and passengers want things that are completely unrelated to the flying of the aircraft at all, in other words it's congenitally incapable of being properly minimalist due to the number of different masters it has to serve. A key identifier for minimalism would be purity; an airliner is hybrid of the needs of these "different masters" and, since aircraft are amongst the most complex machines our species makes, it would be far safer to consult the Wiki and mention Philip Glass et al. as proper examples.

I'm a minimalist composer myself and, to make matters worse, I graduated in History and Art History alike in 2014 since I wanted to formalise what I knew from my arts career (which was parallel with a science career, strangely enough). That's not to suggest that we can't have different views on it, certainly art critics made a living from writing about their own personal interpretations of what anything meant. Some critics even went to the extreme of interpreting artworks in ways the author disagreed with - it was that personal. That said, I'm happy with my understanding of the concept; as a student as well as practitioner of the arts I'm also fine with the idea that no two interpretations will ever be the same, even in academia - which is why pressing an idea on someone else never really works even when you can defend your position. There's no scarcity of opinion, which isn't a bad thing.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat Aug 06, 2016 10:23 pm

Stickpusher wrote:
Think in terms of structure, not appearance. It's why things such music and art can afford to be truly minimalist while other things are compromised by the needs placed on them. That's not to suggest that complex objects can't be minimalist in the way they are constructed, but a commercial airliner can't really be stripped to its essentials because the regulatory authorities require redundancy, and passengers want things that are completely unrelated to the flying of the aircraft at all, in other words it's congenitally incapable of being properly minimalist due to the number of different masters it has to serve. A key identifier for minimalism would be purity; an airliner is hybrid of the needs of these "different masters" and, since aircraft are amongst the most complex machines our species makes, it would be far safer to consult the Wiki and mention Philip Glass et al. as proper examples.


I go back to my original statement: "it is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design."

As Jean Cocteau said: "Style is a a way of saying very complicated things very simply" - as Philip Glass proves, with music, time and time again.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
LPSHobby
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sun Aug 07, 2016 12:42 am

will Latam Brasil replace their 77W with these A35K ?
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3427
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:47 am

WIederling wrote:
CALTECH wrote:
Then the A-350 nose looks good from certain angles but looks blunt and a bit steep in profile, but seems not as good looking or streamlined like the 787.


My guess would be that there is more aero and less pandering to beauty perceptions in the A350 design than in the 787.
( this also echoes into the reliabilty and spares situation : you heard early on much more 787 windscreen issues than today about A350 glazing. Limited lifetime of cockpit glazing seems to be a special Boeing issue anyway? )

Surprising that so many find the cheaply glued on 767 "microcephalic" nose/cockpit section on the 777 aesthetically pleasing.
reflects on tastes more linked to "our" than anything else, imho. :-)


That smells of 'our' or more likely, fanboyism. Yeah, Boeing didn't want a aerodynamic nose, wanted a draggy nose but wanted to satisfy beauty perceptions. Oh, and Boeing doesn't make the 787s windshields, PPG Industries does. And if you want to talk windshields, had a A320 diversion because the Capt's #2 windshield cracked after takeoff and spit dangerous shards of glass into the Capt's face and ear. Never saw that before. Must be some kind of Airbus window issue. Kinda like the fanboys who said the A320 wing was perfect and didn't need winglets.

Liked the original A350 nose. 'Seemed' more streamlined..

[img]https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=29332[/img}

The two nose sections of these new plastic jets compared,

Image

Image

Image

The 787-8 looks like a 'fat' aircraft with the wide fuselage and short landing gear. It will be nice to have both of these beautiful aircraft in the fleet.
Last edited by CALTECH on Thu Sep 29, 2016 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You are here.
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 09, 2016 8:48 am

"it is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design."

Look on the bright side, I can agree with the overall sentiment of your post, I could just express it in a more minimalist fashion. Omitting a couple of words!

While we're still off-topic, though, it pays to be careful quoting Cocteau (who I was a fan of as a teen and through my twenties, and still have a half-shelf of books on his work and life). He said a lot merely for effect, and personally I'd pay more attention to contemporaries such as Erik Satie and Piet Mondrian who had far more to say about simplicity - informed in Mondrian's case by Hegelian philosophy. Like his far more influential contemporary, Marcel Duchamp, Cocteau was an outsider struggling for acceptance, especially by wealthy patrons(!), partly because like Duchamp he wasn't a top-tier artist (making the Academie late in life, for film). They both made their impressions by being outrageous, more style than substance. Duchamp's rebellion led to Art being somewhat redefined, Cocteau didn't manage anything equivalent to that, and his major personal accomplishments were usually collaborations. Even then he had a hard time selling himself to people like Serge Diaghilev. He became very aware that appearances were more important than substance (at least to him), and that sense informed almost everything he said, even about the topic of "less is more". If you're going to quote a master of ambiguity like Cocteau, how about "I am the lie that tells the truth" - that appearances are deceptive! :)

Which I guess brings us back to the A350, it looks minimalist (if you must) but that's not what it is. If the design stops at the skin then it's simple enough, but no more than other designs out there, as a whole, though, it's an example of one of the most complex machines humans make. Minimalism isn't in its DNA.

So if we are in fact talking about superficial aesthetics (we must be for the term minimalist even to make sense), what about the A350 looks less complicated than the 788, and the answer surely is "not a whole lot". In fact, to me it seems that the 787 is less fussy, not by much, but apart from engine chevrons, it is more "whole" - of a piece.

When, as a kid, I saw the prototype A300 at Hanover way back in 1974 I couldn't help thinking that such a plain design was probably the future and not especially appealing. Fast-forward to now, and the designs are fundamentally the same, the only recent revolution (appearance-wise) being in aerodynamic treatment of the cockpit area thanks to advances such as computer modelling and fabrication. Flap tracks & fairings, engines, gear etc have not fundamentally evolved in the same way. I'm sure flap tracks could be faired in more subtly and look far more "minimalist" if the trailing edge structures were faired in differently, but I assume there are aerodynamic advantages to keeping them looking like breakwaters, in this case directing airflow directly across the wing rather than allowing lateral flow.

There's a case for calling almost all aircraft shapes "minimalist" if that's the case. I don't think the A350 stands out in that regard. To me, the A350 fuselage is certainly nicer-looking than the 787's - it's something that Airbus seems to get right all the time and Boeing, not so much. The 787 starts well but the rear fuselage just doesn't gel, but in all other respects I actually now prefer the 787 to the A350. The wing is infinitely more graceful than that of the A350 to my eyes, particularly the trailing edge. Does the fact that Airbus deleted a fairing at the base of the tailfin make the design minimalist, or does making the tail look like a second object attached to the first like a snap-together kit actually complicate the design - remove its sense of whole-ness? Even SOCATA's attempt to delete the tail fillet was eventually reversed, and I'll be interested to see whether Airbus relents and adds that back in a few years down the line.

I think Caltech makes a good point that we need to be mindful of partisanship getting in the way of objectivity. There's no taking away from Airbus their vast achievement of making market entry back in an age mired in incumbent aircraft manufacturers, the investment and belief is genuinely staggering and admirable, and the designs eventually got the chance to sell themselves because they're perfectly good designs.

I dislike the 777 for my passenger experiences in the plane (BA), it's noisy and wearying to fly in, I like the A330/340 for noise reeasons and also for the "floaty" nature of its flight that I put down to being the wings and how they deal with turbulence. I also prefer them aesthetically, but that doesn't make the 777 a bad bet, and certainly doesn't justify carping about issues that crop up. These vastly complex machines live a helluva life, and things happen. The last major dropped ball was Boeing's battery issues with the 787 that came up in testing and yet entered service (shades of the DC-10 door issues) because Boeing was on the back foot time-wise and made bad decisions. That doesn't mean I (or anyone) should be carping about it now that it is proving itself in line service. What's past is past - we can only go on flagellating Boeing if they've done nothing about it. Same for Airbus.

Okay, back to lurking, I guess.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:15 am

Stickpusher wrote:
"it is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design."

Look on the bright side, I can agree with the overall sentiment of your post, I could just express it in a more minimalist fashion. Omitting a couple of words!


Maybe you could, but I chose the words I wanted to use, to create my own effect, and I didn't claim to be a minimalist. LOL.

Stickpusher wrote:
While we're still off-topic, though, it pays to be careful quoting Cocteau (who I was a fan of as a teen and through my twenties, and still have a half-shelf of books on his work and life). He said a lot merely for effect....


He's not alone there.

Most artists I know - artists I respect - create things entirely for effect and my own work is intensely subjective, my own view of the world. But I believe we have wandered quite far enough off-topic.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Aircellist
Posts: 1582
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:43 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue Aug 09, 2016 3:58 pm

mariner wrote:
Stickpusher wrote:
"it is a graceful, elegant - even minimalist - design."

Look on the bright side, I can agree with the overall sentiment of your post, I could just express it in a more minimalist fashion. Omitting a couple of words!


Maybe you could, but I chose the words I wanted to use, to create my own effect, and I didn't claim to be a minimalist. LOL.

Stickpusher wrote:
While we're still off-topic, though, it pays to be careful quoting Cocteau (who I was a fan of as a teen and through my twenties, and still have a half-shelf of books on his work and life). He said a lot merely for effect....


He's not alone there.

Most artists I know - artists I respect - create things entirely for effect and my own work is intensely subjective, my own view of the world. But I believe we have wandered quite far enough off-topic.

mariner


Maybe, but it was fun.

If I may add my little grain of salt, I'd say that, compared to airplanes a century ago, yes, today's jetliners are quite minimalists. I guess the next venture in minimalism might be a more generalized use of the flying wings.
"When I find out I was wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?" -attributed to John Maynard Keynes
 
Stickpusher
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Aug 19, 2016 10:50 pm

Sorry to have to return to this but, after a week on an arts tour... (yes, really, in fact I'm still there)

mariner wrote:
and I didn't claim to be a minimalist. LOL.


I did, and I stand by it even though not everything I do is in that vein. It's more than a claim!

mariner wrote:
Stickpusher wrote:
While we're still off-topic, though, it pays to be careful quoting Cocteau (who I was a fan of as a teen and through my twenties, and still have a half-shelf of books on his work and life). He said a lot merely for effect....


He's not alone there.


Sad attempted ad hominem, but still, never a truer word...

mariner wrote:
Most artists I know - artists I respect - create things entirely for effect and my own work is intensely subjective, my own view of the world. But I believe we have wandered quite far enough off-topic.


If, as you suggest, you are au fait with the arts, you'd know that a statement about "economy of expression" (your Cocteau Googling - read something like Steegmuller for real insights into the guy) has very little relationship to minimalism - they are emphatically not the same thing. The fact that you seem to have conflated these two quite different concepts in trying to co-opt an artist to your cause was evidence enough to me that there was no real point in trying to actually make the point, because to understand what I'm trying to tell you, you'd need to grasp the underlying concepts; your attempted conflation of the two tells me unequivocally that you don't. To use an artist I'm very familiar with was also a bit unwise, frankly. Stick to your opinion if you must, though, but perhaps read more into the subject if only to understand what it is that you are presuming to disagree with (a.k.a. the body of art theory).

For a Uni module that would cover the topic, try http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/aa318/index.shtml that can be studied from anywhere in the world. I Profess to know that this module covers the distinction between economy of expression and minimalism, although very briefly. Try it, you might like it.

Oh, and you'd also know that all artists create things for effect, otherwise they'd be accountants or something similarly useful.

You worry about us wandering off topic. This is the sign marked "cliff". Mind how you go, I won't be here to help you.
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:06 pm

(hmmm, page 5 folks, y'all stray much?)

It will be very nice to see that plane with it's large Trent engines and paint job! Excited for the flight test program to begin to see some real world results.
learning never stops.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:42 pm

Stickpusher wrote:
If, as you suggest, you are au fait with the arts, you'd know that a statement about "economy of expression" (your Cocteau Googling - read something like Steegmuller for real insights into the guy) has very little relationship to minimalism - they are emphatically not the same thing.


I don't claim to be "au fait" with the arts because I'm not really sure what that means. I've spent my (very) long life (a) in the company of artists and (b) earning my living in various art forms, mostly visual and literary, but for the record, I have never googled Cocteau. Almost everything I know about Cocteau is knowledge I had decades before Google even existed.

Stickpusher wrote:
You worry about us wandering off topic. This is the sign marked "cliff". Mind how you go, I won't be here to help you.


Again, I'm not sure what that means and I don't remember asking for, nor needing, your help, about anything really. I expect I'll manage fine without you, just as I always have. Image

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:46 am

And now the second A350-1000 emerged from paint.

Image
2nd prototype Airbus A350-1000 F-WLXV by Jujug Spotting, on Flickr
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:49 am

CALTECH wrote:
Yeah, Boeing didn't want a aerodynamic nose, wanted a draggy nose but wanted to satisfy beauty perceptions. Oh, and Boeing doesn't make the 787s windshields, PPG Industries does.


That is the american way: overstate to no end what someone else said and
then go into jeering mode hysterics based on this overstatement.
( if you need it .. carry on. )

finally: PPG obviously makes them to Boeing specs.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11889
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:39 am

KarelXWB wrote:
And now the second A350-1000 emerged from paint.

Image
2nd prototype Airbus A350-1000 F-WLXV by Jujug Spotting, on Flickr


Nicely balanced, when will the first flight of an A350-1000 be?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14000
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:59 am

The Trent XWB-97 arrived at Airbus for flight testing 1 year ago and its

still not hanging under a -1000 with 3x -1000's assembled.

Someone is doing extra hours.

https://youtu.be/2vaDpdLCMxY
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:14 pm

keesje wrote:
still not hanging under a -1000 with 3x -1000's assembled.


That's a wrong assumption, MSN 59 got its engines installed earlier this month.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:37 pm

alyusuph wrote:
BTW. I can see all the elements of Karma in the horizon. With my complete amateur knowledge of aircraft, Why are A350s called XWB if they are "thinner".

It's thinner than the 777 but wider than the originally designed A350.
Airbus originally designed the A350 to be essentially a warmed up A330. Airlines didn't like it and one of the things airlines asked for was a wider fuselage. So rather than retire the A350 model number and call the new re-designed something like the A360, Airbus chose to go with A350XWB.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 5412
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:01 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
That's a wrong assumption, MSN 59 got its engines installed earlier this month.


An A350-1000 with engines?

Would anybody have had the opportunity to take a picture of such a mythical creature?
:)
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14000
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon Sep 26, 2016 2:46 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
keesje wrote:
still not hanging under a -1000 with 3x -1000's assembled.


That's a wrong assumption, MSN 59 got its engines installed earlier this month.


Comforting.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
AsiaTravel
Posts: 328
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:28 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:26 am

And look who is here:

Image
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11889
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:28 am

Nicely balanced airframe with its engine attached. Me like ;-)

Has her first flight been set yet?

( I feel the A350-900 looks to short for one reason, let the A350-1100/2000 come)
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
uta999
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:39 am

Oh, so the A350-1000 does need engines after all.

I thought Airbus were going for the 100% reduction in fuel burn crown.
Your computer just got better
 
Sooner787
Posts: 2720
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:28 pm

I'm a Boeing fanboy but will admit that 35J looks awesome.

Can't wait to see her airborne :)
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2992
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:33 pm

Maybe some other angles will help but it's just too long imo.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:45 pm

alyusuph wrote:
Quoting dc10lover (Reply 4):Wait till they do the rumored A350-1100/A350-8000 or whatever the stretch might be called.

-Dave
OMG. With the same taxiways we know?. Or will they put some sort of an "articulated fuselage or something?" Let me run to patent this idea   


A powerback with that fudelage would be as about an unsafe thing you could do. along with possible injury to the ground crew and terminal damage.
You'vr Obviously never been on an airliner Ramp where there are about 800 different ways to get killed. even doing it Right.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3333
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:47 pm

AsiaTravel wrote:
And look who is here:

Image


Nice looking aircraft.

So the A350-900 is a 777-200 replacement product, is the A350-1000 the 777-300 replacement product?

Again, congrats to Airbus for delivering another aircraft on schedule.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1497
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:24 pm

Beautiful plane. The A359 looks (to my eye) a bit too stubby, and I feel the same way with the B788 vs. the B789. This one is j-u-u-st right, and the -1100 may be a stretch too far. Aesthetically, that is.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24599
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:26 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Maybe some other angles will help but it's just too long imo.


I think it's pretty good looking but I prefer the dimensions of the A359.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:16 pm

So the A346 finally loses its title as "The Flying Phallus" :-P

I think the A359 is among the most beautiful aircraft ever produced... this one's a bit too out of proportion IMO, but I still like it a lot.

Wish we could've seen the A359ULR as a shortened version of this, like it was originally planned to be. THAT would would look amazing! :o
Last edited by LAX772LR on Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1773
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:18 pm

Can't wait to see it taking off!
@DadCelo
 
mcogator
Posts: 554
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:51 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:24 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Maybe some other angles will help but it's just too long imo.

I wish I could personally say, "that's what she said", but I can't.

On the bus, I think it's absolutely beautiful, but I've never seen a commercial jet I didn't like.
“Traveling – it leaves you speechless, then turns you into a storyteller.” – Ibn Battuta
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:36 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
alyusuph wrote:
Quoting dc10lover (Reply 4):Wait till they do the rumored A350-1100/A350-8000 or whatever the stretch might be called.

-Dave
OMG. With the same taxiways we know?. Or will they put some sort of an "articulated fuselage or something?" Let me run to patent this idea   


A powerback with that fudelage would be as about an unsafe thing you could do. along with possible injury to the ground crew and terminal damage.
You'vr Obviously never been on an airliner Ramp where there are about 800 different ways to get killed. even doing it Right.


do you have the same reservations in respect to the 748 ? ( after EIS the longest airliner taking the "throne" from the A340-600 :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:47 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
A powerback with that fudelage would be as about an unsafe thing you could do. along with possible injury to the ground crew and terminal damage.
You'vr Obviously never been on an airliner Ramp where there are about 800 different ways to get killed. even doing it Right.


You've obviously zero sense of humour.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos