Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Bjorn’s Corner: New engine development. Part 4. Propulsive efficiency April 19, 2024
- Boeing unlikely to meet FAA’s 90-day deadline for new safety program April 18, 2024
- Focus on quality not slowing innovation, says GKN April 18, 2024
- Boeing defends 787, 777 against whistleblower charges April 17, 2024
- Dissecting Boeing CEO’s statement next new airplane will cost $50bn April 15, 2024
A380 has “Lite” versions, too
The announcement by Airbus that it will offer Lite versions of the A330 and A350 families caused a much larger stir than we would have thought.
As we previously noted, Boeing will offer a Lite version of the 777-8, and this news was greeted with a yawn.
Airbus offers the A380 in Lite versions. So we still are perplexed about all the questions raised by some, and the high-profile media attention, the A330/350 announcement garnered.
.
The media attention about those “regional” airplanes is a bit ridiculous. Not only the A380 but also the A330 is already available in many different MTOW versions. The A350 won’t be any different.
For the A380 and A330, go to this page, download the PDF files and look for the MTOW models:
http://www.airbus.com/support/maintenance-engineering/technical-data/aircraft-characteristics/
So, just what would be the appeal of a 525 pax, 490 tonne, 5600 nm, 4 engine A-380? It is still heavier than the B-747-400D was.
109 more pax (than 744) and QC1 noise levels.
If you would get out all the the bars etc. and fill up an A380 ANA 747-400D style, you are quickly passing the flight safety maximum of 840 seats.. The Japanese put in close to 600 in a 747D and the A380 is 35-40% larger..
Regarding LHR noise restrictions, a RR guy told me Trent 900 sfc was sacrificed to meet those.
Here’s a link to a lengthy but fascinatng video taken inside the cockpit and through the windshield while an A380 lands at SFO for the first time.
http://www.wimp.com/approachlanding/
Fascinating indeed!
Thanks for your kind response, Norman. I hope the video may be instructive, maybe even useful to Boeing engineers, particularly the automation, cockpit displays, and pilot interactions. Here’s a sort of apology that includes some later thoughts not included in my original posting because now I suspect that interesting video was maybe a promotion. to rub salt in a wound. But if so, it could eventually be regretted by Airbus for disclosing info possibly useful to competitors of Airbus.
As a refresher, initially I posted: “Below is a link to a fascinating video about the double-decker, Airbus A380, partly recorded inside the cockpit, also through the windshield, also watching outside as it approaches and lands for the first time at SFO in San Francisco.”
Of course, maybe Airbus assembled this complex video recording to make a promotional statement, ostensibly comparing how safely the huge A380 can land at SFO compared to the Boeing 787 that crashed on the same runway recently. But it is informative about the cockpit automation and controls nonetheless.
http://www.wimp.com/approach
“Of course, maybe Airbus assembled this complex video recording to make a promotional statement, ostensibly comparing how safely the huge A380 can land at SFO compared to the Boeing 787 [IT WAS A 777] that crashed on the same runway recently.”
That is one of the most insulting comments posted here in a long time.
777’s have been in service since 1995 without any fatal accidents until this one. There has been only one other accident on approach: the BEJ-LHR BA flight with frozen fuel lines. There probably have been millions of safe landings on that SFO runway, going back many years. Although we are a long time away from determining “the probable cause”, every indication to date is that the type of airplane was not a factor.
It was a clear sunny day, calm winds, and four pilots in the flight deck. And yet a hand-flown airplane on a visual approach in ideal weather hit the ground 1000 ft short of a well-known displaced threshold.
It can be an A380, a 777, or a Cessna 172. The pilot-in-command always has ultimate responsibility for the safe operation of the airplane. That will never change.
Yes, I too viewed this on youtube a week or so ago. It’s a composite as some things don’t match, like the tower controllers aren’t the same as on LH454’s first landing at SFO (like there was no interaction with a woman in the tower) and there’s some missing interaction with them (like taxiway vacate directive).
But then, the crew displayed discipline expected in a LH cockpit with the chief LH pilot in command.
The hoopla shows that people don’t realize how airliners nowadays are developed around a number of design points. If I remember correctly, the 7E7 started as a 6500NM airplane with an 8000NM+ capability.
Moreover, recertified MTOWs have been around for at least 30 years. YAWN.
“The volatile topic of government subsidies, necessary in the beginning and conceptually little different than the early days of US defense and commercial aviation, evolved into “reimbursable launch aid” that is unnecessary for a company like Airbus and which remains a target of international controversy when politics arise.”
Reimbursable launch aid for Airbus today is like living with your parents when you are past thirty. Or forty in the case of Airbus. It’s time for Airbus to be on its own.
I am sorry that the name Eurocopter will be dropped in favour of Airbus Helicopter. But we no longer call the Chinook the Boeing Vertol CH-47. The prestigious name Vertol was dropped a long time ago. Like Aérospatiale replaced Sud-Aviation and Eurocopter replaced both Aérospatiale and Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm. We eventually get used to it. Bombardier dropped prestigious names like Shorts, de Havilland and Canadair. But they kept the Learjet name!
The company will now be structured more like Boeing. That means no more independent CEOs at Airbus, Eurocopter and Astrium. Maybe that is why former Eurocopter chief Lutz Bertling left for Bombardier.
This post was intended for the previous thread, where the quote comes from.
I agree with toyuths’ sentiment, quite an unnecessary comment. I, for one, would be quite happy if all such comments were banned.
Not to mention the fact that this video was already available before the 777 incident at SFO and hence, could not be for the purpose you are alluding to.
I guess just a LH pilot doing clips, approved by his employer without any Airbus influence.
Btw not the softest landing I ever saw.
I noticed that landing as well. I suppose one can’t get them all 100% perfect.
If you can walk away, it was a good landing
If you can re-use the airplane, it was a great landing
That’s just an extract of this: http://pilotseye.tv/route/a380-san-francisco-the-final-flights-of-jr-juergen-raps/
I can’t open that youtube link right now, but if it’s the same LH landing at SFO clip I’ve watched, then it’s been on youtube for at least 2months now. So except Airbus had a time machine and saw the future, there’s no way that’s a response to show Boeing how it’s done. Besides while both sides have their squabbles, they tend to stay away from scoring petty points on crashes or serious incidents.
A crash of 787 to SFO?
The engineers of Boeing should take their inspiration from the Airbus’s cockpit philosophy
[Edited as violation of Reader Comment rules.]
Never the A380 was transported as far as the 777 and never will.
For your lesson, the 777 is well the plane the more safe and reliable never stolen. As for the 787 it is never crashed!