jakee 1,611 #26 October 29, 2006 Quote We are talking about a airliner, not a fighter. The pilots will never overstress it just for practice. If they need to go beyond the design structural limits to try to get out of a dive, for instance, then I say they should be allowed to try. But there was that Boeing that crashed last year (2years ago?) because the pilot put in such bootfuls of rudder that the tail ripped off. Envelope protection for that aircraft would have been good, right?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #27 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuote We are talking about a airliner, not a fighter. The pilots will never overstress it just for practice. If they need to go beyond the design structural limits to try to get out of a dive, for instance, then I say they should be allowed to try. But there was that Boeing that crashed last year (2years ago?) because the pilot put in such bootfuls of rudder that the tail ripped off. Envelope protection for that aircraft would have been good, right? I think you're wrong. The plane that got a ripped off vertical stabilizer was, in fact, an Airbus A300 (AA) I'm not aware of an incident involving a Boeing with a ripped off tail. Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #28 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuote We are talking about a airliner, not a fighter. The pilots will never overstress it just for practice. If they need to go beyond the design structural limits to try to get out of a dive, for instance, then I say they should be allowed to try. But there was that Boeing that crashed last year (2years ago?) because the pilot put in such bootfuls of rudder that the tail ripped off. Envelope protection for that aircraft would have been good, right? Let's not forget the Airbus crash at that airshow years ago, because the pilot couldn't override the airplane, which thought it was landing....as it trailed off into the trees...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #29 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuote We are talking about a airliner, not a fighter. The pilots will never overstress it just for practice. If they need to go beyond the design structural limits to try to get out of a dive, for instance, then I say they should be allowed to try. But there was that Boeing that crashed last year (2years ago?) because the pilot put in such bootfuls of rudder that the tail ripped off. Envelope protection for that aircraft would have been good, right? Of course that would have been good for that scenario. I can't remember if it was just an engine out that led to the pilot using so much rudder. Anyway, the engineers had incorrectly calculated that the stress would not be too great, so the flight control program would have allowed the rudder to be applied just as it was. If the engineers had realized that the structure was insufficient, then it would not have failed, and envelope protection would not matter. Remember that envelope protection is also to prevent departures from controlled flight (including stalls), not just structural failure, and that is where Airbus has failed to correctly figure how to prevent them. There was a case of a 727 a long time ago that was able to survive a dive because the pilots were able to overstress the plane. The pilots were using an unauthorized technique of applying a small amount of slats to increase lift, allowing cruising at higher altitudes. In order to extend the slats, they had to pull a circuit breaker, disabling the system that prevents slats at high speeds. The slats are not to be used at such speeds for good reason, because the loads can cause some of them to retract, causing the plane to roll out of control. The pilots spent most of their altitude pulling back on the column, and extended the gear to add drag. They landed OK, with the wings permanently bent. The pilots were suspected of cycling the circuit breakers for the data recorders to delete info that would have shown their unauthorized flight procedure.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #30 October 29, 2006 QuoteThe plane that got a ripped off vertical stabilizer was, in fact, an Airbus A300 (AA) I'm not aware of an incident involving a Boeing with a ripped off tail. Quite right. The A300 is not fly by wire. Anyway, if you incorrectly figure the load limits, then envelope protection won't help. Similarly, Boeing for quite some time was convinced that the Ryan Air 767 could not have crashed because of the thrust reverser deploying. Why did they apply so much rudder?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #31 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteWell, if Emirates cancels its order, and Virgin does too, then Airbus should be able to fill Qantas' order fairly easily...if late. I'd be extremely surprised if Emirates cancel their order. They need the planes. They've ordered 45 of them. What they're doing right now, is stepping on Airbus's toes, so they can get a better package deal, to compensate for the delay. Pure business negociations IMHO. Yves Business is business for sure. But Airbus is up against a proven, and available platform. If Emirates wanted to, they could direct their order for Boeing 747 series with 500 seats each, at probably a lower operating cost than they'd ever see with the A380, and see their first deliveries within a couple years.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #32 October 29, 2006 Of course, Airbus and Boeing have different design philosophies. You can take a different path, and still arrive at the same place, at the same time. The laws of physics are not different for Boeing and for Airbus. They're the same. The key to survival, in this business, is to be able to build and sell aircrafts that can be money makers for the airlines who purchase thoses planes. A & B need to improve wing designs, they need to push engine manufacturers to design more efficient engines. They need to make their airplanes lighter, AND, more reliable. Since 9/11, many things have changed. Airlines are having tough times, with most, barely staying afloat. The FBW software on Airbuses, can be updated at will. I think the aircrafts of the future, will be FBW aircrafts. Many pilots prefer the joystick, to the control column, BUT many pilots still prefer the control column. I think it's a matter of personal preference for the pilots. Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #33 October 29, 2006 QuoteThe FBW software on Airbuses, can be updated at will. I think the aircrafts of the future, will be FBW aircrafts. The 777 and 787 are fly by wire with software that can be updated. I can't remember if the new generation 737 is.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #34 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteWell, if Emirates cancels its order, and Virgin does too, then Airbus should be able to fill Qantas' order fairly easily...if late. I'd be extremely surprised if Emirates cancel their order. They need the planes. They've ordered 45 of them. What they're doing right now, is stepping on Airbus's toes, so they can get a better package deal, to compensate for the delay. Pure business negociations IMHO. Yves Business is business for sure. But Airbus is up against a proven, and available platform. If Emirates wanted to, they could direct their order for Boeing 747 series with 500 seats each, at probably a lower operating cost than they'd ever see with the A380, and see their first deliveries within a couple years. The A380 has a much better wing design than the B747. You should keep in mind that the A388, is, actually, the smallest of the 3 planned A380 versions. In the case of the A380, Airbus has an advantage IMHO. Boeing will not be able to stretch the 747 ad infinitum, without having to design a new wing. Of course, the 748 is on the drawing board, but since the 747 wing is already stretched to the max, I just can't see how the 748 will be able to compete with the A380. The 747 has been designed 40 years ago! IFE is today's absolute requirement in a modern airliner. People want internet access, everywhere they go. They want to listen to their favorite radio station... everywhere they go. And, as you know, IFE needs wires. It needs HUGE bundles of wires. People want luxury, and luxury needs wires. Back in the sixties, when the 747 was designed, the internet was just a dream. Most people had black and white TV sets at home. That was just about it. IFE for a february 9th 1969 B747, was inexistant. So, how do you retrofit modern IFE, to a plane that was not designed for IFE? Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #35 October 29, 2006 You might as well ask how any existing plane that doesn't already have in flight entertainment can be retrofitted.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #36 October 29, 2006 QuoteYou might as well ask how any existing plane that doesn't already have in flight entertainment can be retrofitted. They can! A new wing=a new certification process. $$$$$$$ Yves. Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #37 October 29, 2006 QuoteThe A380 has a much better wing design than the B747. You should keep in mind that the A388, is, actually, the smallest of the 3 planned A380 versions. In the case of the A380, Airbus has an advantage IMHO. Boeing will not be able to stretch the 747 ad infinitum, without having to design a new wing. Of course, the 748 is on the drawing board, but since the 747 wing is already stretched to the max, I just can't see how the 748 will be able to compete with the A380. The 747 has been designed 40 years ago! IFE is today's absolute requirement in a modern airliner. People want internet access, everywhere they go. They want to listen to their favorite radio station... everywhere they go. And, as you know, IFE needs wires. It needs HUGE bundles of wires. People want luxury, and luxury needs wires. Back in the sixties, when the 747 was designed, the internet was just a dream. Most people had black and white TV sets at home. That was just about it. IFE for a february 9th 1969 B747, was inexistant. So, how do you retrofit modern IFE, to a plane that was not designed for IFE? Yves. I'm not an aerospace engineer, so I don't have all the answers. I do know that in lieu of wires, fiber-optics could be used instead, higher capacity, much lower weight, less material, less space. Keeping the design of the 747 around isn't that big of a deal, look at other applications still in use to this day: B-52, 737, DC-10/MD-11, plus a host of Airbus airframes that have seen a lot of use too.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #38 October 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteThe A380 has a much better wing design than the B747. You should keep in mind that the A388, is, actually, the smallest of the 3 planned A380 versions. In the case of the A380, Airbus has an advantage IMHO. Boeing will not be able to stretch the 747 ad infinitum, without having to design a new wing. Of course, the 748 is on the drawing board, but since the 747 wing is already stretched to the max, I just can't see how the 748 will be able to compete with the A380. The 747 has been designed 40 years ago! IFE is today's absolute requirement in a modern airliner. People want internet access, everywhere they go. They want to listen to their favorite radio station... everywhere they go. And, as you know, IFE needs wires. It needs HUGE bundles of wires. People want luxury, and luxury needs wires. Back in the sixties, when the 747 was designed, the internet was just a dream. Most people had black and white TV sets at home. That was just about it. IFE for a february 9th 1969 B747, was inexistant. So, how do you retrofit modern IFE, to a plane that was not designed for IFE? Yves. I'm not an aerospace engineer, so I don't have all the answers. I do know that in lieu of wires, fiber-optics could be used instead, higher capacity, much lower weight, less material, less space. Keeping the design of the 747 around isn't that big of a deal, look at other applications still in use to this day: B-52, 737, DC-10/MD-11, plus a host of Airbus airframes that have seen a lot of use too. Fiberoptics transports DATA, not energy. Fiberoptics transports light. The big LCD screen you have on each of your airline seats (Up to 863, in the case of the A388), still need copper or aluminum wires to provide the necessary power to the LCD for it to operate. With so many things to provide power to, can you imagine the size of the wire bundles??? Fiber optic cables are used for sensor data acquisition/communication, and saves a LOT of weight in an airplane. Still, power is needed at both ends of a fiber optic cable, because optical signals, must me converted to electrical signals. Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #39 October 29, 2006 QuoteFiberoptics transports DATA, not energy. Fiberoptics transports light. The big LCD screen you have on each of your airline seats (Up to 863, in the case of the A388), still need copper or aluminum wires to provide the necessary power to the LCD for it to operate. With so many things to provide power to, can you imagine the size of the wire bundles??? Fiber optic cables are used for sensor data acquisition/communication, and saves a LOT of weight in an airplane. Still, power is needed at both ends of a fiber optic cable, because optical signals, must me converted to electrical signals. Yves. Yes, but light is a form of energy. At somepoint, they'll invent something that allows the harnessing of that light energy, as well as data. As micro electronics are bred to consume less and less energy, it's not such a pie-in-the-sky idea.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #40 October 29, 2006 Isn't it Jetblue or some others that have put screens into every seat on their old airplanes? It must not be too hard.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #41 October 29, 2006 QuoteIsn't it Jetblue or some others that have put screens into every seat on their old airplanes? It must not be too hard. Yes you can retrofit IFE, to just about any airplane. This is no big deal. It can be done. BUT, the fact is that IFE retrofitting, adds a lot of weight to an airplane, and this added weight decreases both the payload capacity, and range of the aircraft. The heavier the aircraft is=less money made, for an airline. Simple economics. Copper wiring has better conductivity than aluminum wiring, but aluminum is lighter than copper. There are solutions to this dilemma. http://www.shibata.co.jp/etxt/3_f_f2.htm The problem with aluminum wiring, is the amount of flex, aluminum wiring can take. You just can't bend aluminum many times... It breaks. So the long term integrity of aluminum wiring is still a mistery.. The wire bundles must be wrapped very tight, so the wires do not vibrate. Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #42 October 30, 2006 I'm pretty sure that aluminum wiring is not used in airplanes. What is done to reduce the weight of wiring in planes is to use small diameter conductors, and very thin insulation often made of teflon or the more controversial Kapton for large power cables that has failed and caused fires. Yes, IFE adds weight. It adds weight whether it is done during assy in the factory or later during a retrofit.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ypelchat 0 #43 October 30, 2006 QuoteI'm pretty sure that aluminum wiring is not used in airplanes. What is done to reduce the weight of wiring in planes is to use small diameter conductors, and very thin insulation often made of teflon or the more controversial Kapton for large power cables that has failed and caused fires. Yes, IFE adds weight. It adds weight whether it is done during assy in the factory or later during a retrofit. For your information, aluminum wiring is being used on the A380. When an airplane is designed, from the ground up, to incorporate IFE systems, then it's easier. Kapton wiring insulation is a possibility (but i guess you remember Swissair 111, that crashed on 9-2-1998, in Nova-Scotia, where Kapton/Tefzel insulated wiring was listed as a factor for the crash) Kapton wiring is still being used by aircraft manufacturers. http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/756098-y1wVq6/webviewable/756098.pdf http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/aviation/wire_types.htm Yves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #44 October 30, 2006 > but light is a form of energy. At somepoint, they'll invent something >that allows the harnessing of that light energy, as well as data. Light-as-energy isn't going to be viable in the near future. With current technology, it takes more pounds of plastic (or glass) to send the same amount of energy as copper electrical wiring. OTOH, it may work as light-to-light transmission; fiber optics may work to distribute light for LCD backlights and/or reading lights (which require small amounts of light, currently coming from relatively heavy fixtures.) We haven't even scratched the surface of weight reduction in wiring in aircraft. I can think of several technologies that could significantly reduce weight in modern aircraft. One of the potential benefits of higher fuel prices is that these technologies will begin to become more cost-effective. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #45 October 31, 2006 More bad news for Airbus. Emirates has cancelled 10 A340 orders and 10 more options, will go with the 777 instead: http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=83730718-2a41-4cf8-920d-b72efd42d659& Will Go With Boeing Instead In a sign of growing discontent with European planemaker Airbus, on Monday Emirates cancelled its order for 10 long-range A340-600 airliners. The Dubai-based carrier also axed its options for 10 more of the planes. "Emirates confirms it will not be taking delivery of its order and option for 20 Airbus A340-600 aircraft," an Emirates representative said. The announcement isn't entirely unexpected, as in March Emirates threatened to defer the A340-600 orders to hold out for a so-called 'Enhanced' version of the four-engine A340. What's different now, however, is Emirates is no longer talking about filling the void with Airbus planes -- and the A340 isn't the only Airbus plane Emirates has expressed doubts over. As Aero-News reported, Emirates -- the largest customer for the problematic A380 superjumbo, with 45 orders for the plane -- has threatened to cancel some of its orders for the mammoth jetliner, as well. With that in mind, it's entirely possible the move to cancel its A340-600 orders is a shot across the bow, to give the carrier's A380 threat added teeth. Along with the announcement of the A340 cancellation, on Monday Emirates also formally announced its plans to send a technical team to Airbus' headquarters in Toulouse, France, to assess the accuracy of promised delivery dates for the A380 superjumbo. But Airbus appeared unperturbed by that development. It is "something agreed to at the time of Christian Streiff," the former Airbus CEO, said Airbus spokesman Justin Dubon to the Associated Press. "He promised customers that they would be kept up to date" and "briefed on the progress of the A380." In yet another possible signal to Airbus, however, Emirates Executive Vice Chairman Maurice Flanagan says the airline plans to go with Boeing 777s instead of the A340s. The airline is also openly courting Boeing to develop a more, well, "A380-like" version of the upcoming 747-8 Intercontinental.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #46 November 7, 2006 More bad news for Airbus http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm That website also has an article about an increase in planned 787 production, likely including a 2nd production line (they always plan on room for it in the factory, next to the first line). FedEx Delivers First A380 Cancellation To Airbus Switches To Boeing 777 Freighters Well, we knew it was coming... but it's from a somewhat unexpected source. On Tuesday, international parcel carrier FedEx announced it is cancelling its orders for 10 freighter variants of the oft-delayed Airbus A380. That's the first cancellation after Airbus announced in September deliveries of the mammoth airliner would be delayed an additional 11 months. FedEx also announced it has ordered 15 Boeing 777-200 Freighters, with options for 15 more, to replace the A380-800Fs. "Global demand for air cargo and express services continues to grow rapidly and FedEx has made significant investments in our network to meet customers’ needs and fulfill our business objectives. Therefore, it was necessary and prudent for us to acquire the Boeing 777 Freighter," said Frederick W. Smith, chairman, president and chief executive officer, FedEx Corp. "The availability and delivery timing of this aircraft, coupled with its attractive payload range and economics, make this choice the best decision for FedEx, its customers, shareowners and employees." As Aero-News reported, FedEx ordered 10 A380Fs, with options for 10 more, at the 2002 Farnborough Air Show. Airbus spokesperson Barbara Kracht said the company regrets FedEx's decision, "but we understand their need to urgently address their capacity growth." FedEx Express continues to be Airbus' largest widebody airplane customer, and will add additional new and used Airbus widebody aircraft to its fleet in coming years. Six new A300-600 aircraft are scheduled to join the FedEx fleet in 2007. The cancellation of FedEx's orders puts the entire A380 Freighter program in a questionable position -- as there remains only two other customers for the cargo-hauling variant of the superjumbo. FedEx competitor United Parcel Service (UPS) has 10 aircraft on order, while International Finance and Leasing Corp (ILFC) has orders for five of the cargo planes on the books. UPS is rumored to also be considering abandoning the A380F program; if that happens, it's likely the entire A380F program would collapse. While that would undoubtably be a significant blow to an already troubled program, it would also allow Airbus to deliver passenger-carrying A380s to expectant airline customers that much sooner -- as those planes would fill delivery slots originally slated for A380Fs. Boeing 777 The Boeing 777 Freighter is the world’s largest twin-engine cargo aircraft, with a range of more than 6,100 nautical miles and a revenue payload capacity of 171,000 pounds. This represents a 2,200 nautical mile increase in range and an additional 8,500 pounds of revenue payload over the MD-11F, which is FedEx’s primary long-haul aircraft. These advantages will result in more non-stop, point-to-point transoceanic routes with shorter flight times, enabling improved service offerings to FedEx customers. FedEx Express is expected to take delivery of four of the 777 aircraft in calendar year 2009, eight in 2010 and the remaining three in 2011. "The Boeing 777F will allow FedEx Express to fly directly between major markets and hubs in Asia, Europe and the U.S. with more freight and in less time than it takes today, improving fuel efficiency and lowering total operating costs," said David J. Bronczek, president and chief executive officer, FedEx Express. The first Boeing 777-200 Freighter is slated to for delivery to Air France Cargo (above) in 2008.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #47 November 19, 2006 Saw this on Yahoo, the "round the world" testing of the A380. So far so good, though FedEx has canceled their order, and note how they'll go the Canada but not the US...you think that's on purpose? http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061118/bs_afp/franceaerospaceairlinea380companyairbusasia_061118085328So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #48 February 20, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070219/ts_afp/francegermanyaerospacecompanyairbus_070219084625 Now, Airbus is closing three plants (one in France, two in Germany), and cutting 10,000-12,000 jobs. Who knows how this will affect their work on the A380.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #49 February 20, 2007 Cat Butt?Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #50 February 20, 2007 Quotehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070219/ts_afp/francegermanyaerospacecompanyairbus_070219084625 Now, Airbus is closing three plants (one in France, two in Germany), and cutting 10,000-12,000 jobs. Who knows how this will affect their work on the A380. It is fortunate for Boeing that Airbus is so hindered by the competing countries involved.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
