Airbus 380 certified

[kallend 2,182]

www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=66138063-b735-4659-a2ab-f0013c613a34

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[AggieDave 6]

I'll blame John Kerry for this when it crashes with 800 passengers on board and everyone dies because someone had a gun and accidently shot the pilot's computer. The pilots couldn't remember how to actually fly without a computer, so it spiralled into a gay only abortion clinic where they were hiding aborted fetuses from an alien race.

(Well, there has to be some reason why this should be in SC, so there you go).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

I'll blame John Kerry for this when it crashes with 800 passengers on board and everyone dies because someone had a gun and accidently shot the pilot's computer. The pilots couldn't remember how to actually fly without a computer, so it spiralled into a gay only abortion clinic where they were hiding aborted fetuses from an alien race.

(Well, there has to be some reason why this should be in SC, so there you go).

Well, it's not about boobies, group hugs or killing kittens, so it doesn't belong in Bonfire.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Well, it's not about boobies, group hugs or killing kittens, so it doesn't belong in Bonfire.

It *could* have been about an 800-way speed star attempt at rantoul by going out the specially installed air stairs in the back and gone in General. Or how if a Vigil gets within 100yrds of the new plane it automatically freaks and fires. Or how you can't travel with the new Vector magnetic riser covers or it'll freak out the fly by wire. Both of those could have gone in G&R.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Well, it's not about boobies, group hugs or killing kittens, so it doesn't belong in Bonfire.

It *could* have been about an 800-way speed star attempt at rantoul by going out the specially installed air stairs in the back and gone in General. Or how if a Vigil gets within 100yrds of the new plane it automatically freaks and fires. Or how you can't travel with the new Vector magnetic riser covers or it'll freak out the fly by wire. Both of those could have gone in G&R.

Your previous post in this thread seems to indicate this belongs in incidents.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Rookie120 0]

It's certified AW now they have to get the customer wiring bugs worked out. I could not imagine the shit pile of wiring they have to sort through. Boeing is enjoying the bugs thats AB keeps getting hung up on. I look forward to seeing the A380 when it finally gets to the US.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[mikkey 0]

We will be some of the first to see the bird down under as Singapore Airlines and Qantas will be some of teh first to get it and it will fly between Europe and Australia. Looking forward to try it, the big question is how they handle check in boarding with the increased numbers.....

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[Erroll 80]

Quote

We will be some of the first to see the bird down under as Singapore Airlines and Qantas will be some of teh first to get it and it will fly between Europe and Australia. Looking forward to try it, the big question is how they handle check in boarding with the increased numbers.....

Didn't it go on to Oz on its test flight after leaving us.
It sure was an awesome sight to see that plane on finals into Johannesburg International.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

the big question is how they handle check in boarding with the increased numbers.....

I have no idea how you handle 500+ people at one gate. Makes me happy I work in MX and not customer service.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[vpozzoli 0]

Quote

Quote

the big question is how they handle check in boarding with the increased numbers.....

I have no idea how you handle 500+ people at one gate. Makes me happy I work in MX and not customer service.

It's simple, you just use more than one gate
Then the problem becomes how do you handle all the passengers that show up at the wrong gate for their assigned seat number
Cheers,

Vale

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

http://www.aero-news.net/...59-a2ab-f0013c613a34

Certified for what?
Where's it going to land?

Airbus designs are big on computers doing the work, to the extent that they actually try to cut the pilot out of the loop. Their whole design philosophy is flawed, IMO. I personally will be very reluctant to get on one.

We are all engines of karma

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I'll blame John Kerry for this when it crashes with 800 passengers on board and everyone dies because someone had a gun and accidently shot the pilot's computer. The pilots couldn't remember how to actually fly without a computer, so it spiralled into a gay only abortion clinic where they were hiding aborted fetuses from an alien race.

(Well, there has to be some reason why this should be in SC, so there you go).

It could be worse it could hit another full A380.

[Stumpy 284]

Quote

Airbus designs are big on computers doing the work, .

This is a question not an argument, (i have no experience in this!) but doesn't thia apply to most modern aircraft designs? (over a certain size/ price of course - i don't mean the latest model cessna 182 equivalents)

I was of the understanding that the latest generation fighter planes are so inherently unstable that they fall out of the sky without the computers for example, and that most modern airliners would be pretty much unflyable without them.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

http://www.aero-news.net/...59-a2ab-f0013c613a34

Certified for what?
Where's it going to land?

Airbus designs are big on computers doing the work, to the extent that they actually try to cut the pilot out of the loop. Their whole design philosophy is flawed, IMO. I personally will be very reluctant to get on one.

I saw the airshow footage of that Airbus landing in the forrest. While the pilot was a fool to be doing MCA demos with a full plane he swore that he throttled up to signal to the computer that he was executing a go-around and the aircraft insisted on completing the landing.

Here's the video, just click accept to see it:

http://www.airdisaster.com/download/af320.shtml

[StreetScooby 5]

My future brother in law is an airline pilot. He prefers Boeing planes because they at least attempt to keep the pilot in the loop in their designs. Airbus is the exact opposite.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I saw the airshow footage of that Airbus landing in the forrest. While the pilot was a fool to be doing MCA demos with a full plane he swore that he throttled up to signal to the computer that he was executing a go-around and the aircraft insisted on completing the landing.

Did the pilot live?

We are all engines of karma

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

My future brother in law is an airline pilot. He prefers Boeing planes because they at least attempt to keep the pilot in the loop in their designs. Airbus is the exact opposite

A friend of mine flies for an airline as well, he agrees. I had always thought he was just bitching because he missed flying OV-10s, but he finally set me straight while drinking some of his homebrew.

Well, he's just counting his days till retirement and if they offer him a package, he's walking with a smile. He's tired of the BS with the airlines anyways. As he said "I don't want to strike, I just want to fly, get my paycheck and work on my Cessna 310..."

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quite the cockpit too, take a look:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0958994/M/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0957790/M/

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

I saw the airshow footage of that Airbus landing in the forrest. While the pilot was a fool to be doing MCA demos with a full plane he swore that he throttled up to signal to the computer that he was executing a go-around and the aircraft insisted on completing the landing.

Did the pilot live?

Yes but AFAIK he's paraplegic. There were 130+ on that aircraft, 3 died AFAIK, they'd all been allowed on at the airshow and the pilot was demonstrating how slow the Airbus could fly with the fly-by-wire design, but he claims that when he executed the procedure to go around (from memory it was supposed to be a simple throttle up) the computer held him in his landing configuration and the outcome is on the video. The official inquiry discredited him, but there was a lot at stake. I think he's an idiot for doing it in the first place but I don't believe for a second that he commanded his aircraft into the trees like that, but hey, you can probably be sure they fixed that bug.

[Scoop 0]

I find the plastic looking electonic gadgetry disturbing. Its enough tio make me never want to fly again. I now appreciate the fact they lock the cockpit doors nowadays.

Just out curiosity (and to demonstrate my total lack of knowledge of commercial aircraft) if they had some sort of total power failure mid flight could the aircraft even be flown?

[dorbie 0]

There are other things to worry about:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/systemsafety/newsletters/tp3658/PDF/2_2004.pdf

I love the part that says they changed the wiring diagram one serial number to another.

[ExAFO 0]

Quote

www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=66138063-b735-4659-a2ab-f0013c613a34

I'd hate to be the poor bastard that has to empty the toilet system on such a mammoth aircraft. What a King-Size Honey Wagon..

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I'd hate to be the poor bastard that has to empty the toilet system on such a mammoth aircraft. What a King-Size Honey Wagon..

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 3,132]

>if they had some sort of total power failure mid flight could the
>aircraft even be flown?

Yes. (That is an issue with any aircraft with hydraulic controls, not just fly-by-wire aircraft.) On the A380, during a complete power failure (i.e. engines AND APU's) a five-foot-diameter RAT (ram air turbine) extends. The wind spins the turbine, and the turbine powers a generator and a hydraulic pump, allowing minimal control. For shorter term power interruptions, the system has large capacitors to "ride through" transient problems like lightning strikes or power switchovers.

[billvon 3,132]

>but doesn't thia apply to most modern aircraft designs?

Depends. Very old aircraft (707's) still have direct mechanical linkages to the surfaces; the yokes are cabled to the elevators (for example.) During a complete power failure, both pilots should be able to provide some control even without any emergency power. More modern aircraft have hydraulic systems instead of direct linkages; saves weight and space.

Most aircraft nowadays have control augmentation systems but do not get directly involved with flight control. Take a 747. When the pilot banks right at high speeds, the outboard ailerons are NOT used (i.e. the system disconnects them to not overstress the wing) and the down-side spoilers are deployed a bit to reduce adverse yaw. But by and large when he turns the yoke the ailerons go up on one side, down on the other, like any other plane from a cessna to an F-14.

Boeing's newer planes (777 for example) replace the direct hydraulic linkages with electronic linkages. Boeing takes the approach that the system should work like its old systems i.e. when you turn the wheel right, ailerons on one side go down, and ailerons on the other side go up. When you kick the rudder the rudder moves in the direction you kick it.

Airbus takes the approach that the computer should do more "work" to help out the pilot. For example, when you push a rudder pedal on a regular aircraft, you get a combined turn and slip. On an A380, you just get a slip; the computer figures you don't want to turn and uses the ailerons to counter the turn. Many pilots don't like this because it feels like someone is 'second guessing' them. Legend has it that the most often-overheard phrase during pilot training on newer Airbuses is "what's it doing now?"

>the latest generation fighter planes are so inherently unstable
>that they fall out of the sky without the computers for example . ..

Depends on the aircraft. Some are so unstable that they will disintegrate without a computer to constantly correct inputs to maintain stability; some would merely be hard to fly by hand.

Side note - many aircraft (including the 777 I believe) support emergency manual reversion. If every hydraulic system on the aircraft fails, you can still move the control surfaces with the trim tabs. (The name "reversion" comes about since you have to move the trim tab down to get the surface to move up.) There's been some work in using systems like this combined with differential thrust to make even a badly damaged aircraft controllable.