[iLikebeer]

I can't find any more recent news on this than from early May. It was originally scheduled for this summer, then pushed back to October. Is that still the target date or are they still trying to get a partial test instead of the full 800+?
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/inte...354366,00.html
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safet...emergency.html

"To complicate matters, the jump into the slides isn't entirely safe: Every second, 1.6 passengers will have to get out of the plane, so whoever hesitates will get pushed. Those in the test who have the luck of sitting in the upper deck of the plane -- where later first and business class passengers will relax -- will need especially good nerves. They get to slide from the height of 8 meters (26 feet). In a real emergency, high-earners flying in the upper seats might take to one of the plane's two staircases in order to make their slide a little shorter. During the test in Hamburg, though, such short-cuts won't be allowed. The escape route to the lower floor will be sealed off, though it will be open on some future tests."

[Troll]

Since there are more exits and the same number of people on each level as in a 747, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to get people out of the A380 faster than a 747. Look at the Toronto crash. I don't think Airbus has anything to prove in terms of good evacuation designs.

[iLikebeer]

That wasn't the point of the thread. But there actually is a reason people might not be able to get out in time. They already did preliminary tests and people on the upper deck hesitated longer when they got to the slide. If you've seen the pictures, you'll see it's about a 45 degree angle down the chute with hundreds of people waiting to come down behind you. We just had one of our final classes in Aviation Legislation and went over Airbus/Boeing/Embraer and this point came up. I know badidea works at Airbus, and I was just wondering what the inside scoop is. If they are so concerned about a test for certification, then maybe they know they need to do some more work to make it safer. The A340 is a badass plane and that crash only adds to its safety record, but that has nothing to do with the A380 and whether or not it can evacuate the number of people planned.

[badidea]

I am sorry but I don't know much about those tests!
The last email I got was quite a few weeks ago and they were still looking for volunteers - especially older people! You get something to eat and some Euros but not enough that I wanted to participate.
The problem seems to be that we first need an airplane, right? MSN0001 is still doing flight tests in Toulouse and has no cabin yet - I don't know the exact date when it will be complete! If I get some information i will post it here.

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

upper deck of the plane -- where later first and business class passengers will relax

That's not really correct! I saw a version that had first and tourist class on the main deck and business and tourist class on the upper deck - it depends on what the customer wants!

[badidea]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

A380 Emergency Evacuation Test. When?

Latest news:

Beginning of 2006 - 853 passengers and crew will try to get out in 90 seconds!

[ReggieX]

Originally Posted by badidea

Latest news:
Beginning of 2006 - 853 passengers and crew will try to get out in 90 seconds!

Is that going to be the STARTING evac. time? Sounds a bit ridiculous to me.

[analogika]

So she's flying in Saturday to get a prototype cabin interior fitted?

Bummer i'll be working.

(I#ll be sure to ride the ferry to Teufelsbrück that weekend, though, to get a look at this bird.)

How long will she be staying?

[Weyland-Yutani]

AFAIK the evac test is scheduled to be performed early 2006 on a Sunday at Hamburg Finkenwerder. Airbus is currently recruiting people from the own organisation and subcontractors.

The aim is to evacuate 853 + crew in only 90 seconds using the evacuation slides.

First you need the A/C, then the cabin and the pax. That is the reason for the delay, since there isn't an A/C with an installed cabin until early 2006. The 7 month delay of the A380 has also delayed the evac tests.

cheers

W-Y

[badidea]

Originally Posted by analogika

How long will she be staying?

She doesn't even land (no time)!
Oh well, I have already been in MSN0002 in TLS 4 weeks ago! HUGE

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

AFAIK the evac test is scheduled to be performed early 2006 on a Sunday at Hamburg Finkenwerder. Airbus is currently recruiting people from the own organisation and subcontractors.

The aim is to evacuate 853 + crew in only 90 seconds using the evacuation slides.

First you need the A/C, then the cabin and the pax. That is the reason for the delay, since there isn't an A/C with an installed cabin until early 2006. The 7 month delay of the A380 has also delayed the evac tests.

cheers

W-Y

Well informed!

[iLikebeer]

Cool. I'm glad they're going with a full pax evac test. Good to see Airbus has enough faith in the evac systems to go through with the whole thing. I would have been a bit skeptical otherwise.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

Cool. I'm glad they're going with a full pax evac test. Good to see Airbus has enough faith in the evac systems to go through with the whole thing. I would have been a bit skeptical otherwise.

I haven't done an Aviation Legislation class, but my understanding is that if they can't get all of the people out in 90 second, they don't get an airworthy certificate and if they don't have an airworthiness certificate, they can't sell it as a commercial plane. It's not just a question of designing the evac system. They have to show that it works empirically.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by Troll

I haven't done an Aviation Legislation class, but my understanding is that if they can't get all of the people out in 90 second, they don't get an airworthy certificate and if they don't have an airworthiness certificate, they can't sell it as a commercial plane. It's not just a question of designing the evac system. They have to show that it works empirically.

it would mean they would have to configure the aircraft for less passengers or redesign the evac systems, either of which could be detrimental to airbus' sales. i'm not going to give my opinions on their market one way or the other, but i do think passing this test is crucial for them to reach a profit on a "niche" aircraft.

i really am curious to see what happens when the people go out the top slides quickly one after another. i hope it works out and is just something built up by the media to go with the whole boeing/airbus competition, but it does look like a pretty freaky drop.

[badidea]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

i really am curious to see what happens when the people go out the top slides quickly one after another. i hope it works out and is just something built up by the media to go with the whole boeing/airbus competition, but it does look like a pretty freaky drop.

Now guess why I didn't apply to participate in this test...

[Troll]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

i really am curious to see what happens when the people go out the top slides quickly one after another. i hope it works out and is just something built up by the media to go with the whole boeing/airbus competition, but it does look like a pretty freaky drop.

Freakier than stayng inside a plane that's just crashed? People were throwing themselves off the WTC. I think they'll take their chances down a plastic slide.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by Troll

Since there are more exits and the same number of people on each level as in a 747, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to get people out of the A380 faster than a 747. Look at the Toronto crash. I don't think Airbus has anything to prove in terms of good evacuation designs.

Sit back and watch. It will be two failed attempts, followed by a reduction in max pax.

p.s. Let's not forget the current recruitment from European Athletic Clubs. Round Trip Paid.

[glideslope]

[QUOTE=Weyland-Yutani]AFAIK the evac test is scheduled to be performed early 2006 on a Sunday at Hamburg Finkenwerder. Airbus is currently recruiting people from the own organisation and subcontractors.


ROFLOL. Sure they are. They only want people that run the 40 in 4.0.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by glideslope

Sit back and watch. It will be two failed attempts, followed by a reduction in max pax.

p.s. Let's not forget the current recruitment from European Athletic Clubs. Round Trip Paid.

quoted for posterity.

See you in early 2006.

[badidea]

Originally Posted by glideslope

ROFLOL. Sure they are. They only want people that run the 40 in 4.0.

Oh yeah?! Then please tell me why we are especially looking for people aged between 50-60... (and everyone who has participated in such a test before is not allowed anymore)!

[analogika]

ah, don't bother with him.

He's just a god-fearing little hick who still thinks that Airbus, which is 40% US subcontractors, is socialism because it ain't American.

[Troll]

Edit: Tasteless joke removed.

I don't care if they reduce the number of passengers allowed in an A380. They can take 300 people out and it's still cheaper to fly than a 747. So whatever Airbus does, we, as passengers, are winning.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by badidea

Oh yeah?! Then please tell me why we are especially looking for people aged between 50-60... (and everyone who has participated in such a test before is not allowed anymore)!

My friend. They are looking for a percentage of individuals in that age range. So, one might come to the conclusion that they are looking for a "specific" number of individuals between 50-60.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by analogika

ah, don't bother with him.

He's just a god-fearing little hick who still thinks that Airbus, which is 40% US subcontractors, is socialism because it ain't American.

Unfortunately this type of post is all too common in here these days. Very sad.

[broxy5]

Now just for kicks, don't tell the folks it's an evacuation test, simulate smoke, then tell them there is $500 for the first 100 people to get out. Then we'll see how many get out in 90 seconds. There'll be some pushing and shoving and much caos for sure.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by Troll

Edit: Tasteless joke removed.

I don't care if they reduce the number of passengers allowed in an A380. They can take 300 people out and it's still cheaper to fly than a 747. So whatever Airbus does, we, as passengers, are winning.

No disrespect intended, but I suggest you dig a little deeper into the 380 program, and the events over the last 6 months. The seat cost contains many variables. Most of which have changed since assembly. The 747 will fly for many more years. The heavy lift capability in the 744F can't be matched by the 380F.

I am actually very found of Airbus and their airframes. I simply disagree with the 380, and it's role in aviation.

[badidea]

Originally Posted by glideslope

My friend. They are looking for a percentage of individuals in that age range. So, one might come to the conclusion that they are looking for a "specific" number of individuals between 50-60.

See, you're not as stupid as your other post made me believe!

[badidea]

Originally Posted by glideslope

Unfortunately this type of post is all too common in here these days. Very sad.

Don't you think you were calling for such a response?!?
You came in this thread just to bitch about your undersized genitalia and now you're saying Analogikas post is sad?!?

[Troll]

Originally Posted by glideslope

No disrespect intended, but I suggest you dig a little deeper into the 380 program, and the events over the last 6 months. The seat cost contains many variables. Most of which have changed since assembly.

I looked into the laxt 6 months of the programme and I don't see anything that suggests it's more expensive per passenger to fly. If you have the information, why not simply post it?

I did the comparisons of the planes. Don't see what you're talking about. The A380 with the same number of passengers in it as a 747 is CHEAPER to fly. Makes sense since most of the technology is 40 years newer and the A380 burns 12% less fuel per seat than the 747. Per seat (typical not max), it's 20% cheaper to fly than a 747.

And the A380 generates HALF the noise of a 747 on take off. It is unbelievably quiet, having seen it fly.

Originally Posted by glideslope

The 747 will fly for many more years. The heavy lift capability in the 744F can't be matched by the 380F.

Figures please. Everything I've seen says the A380 can carry 50% more freight than a 747. Which is why so many A380-800F's have been ordered. Why do you think Fedex bought it if it's take off weight is less than a 747's? And if something has changed as drastically as you're suggesting, wouldn't Fedex be pulling the plug? Operating costs are 20% less than a 747 on a long haul. That's why they bought it. This is exactly what Airbus has done to Boeing in every other market sector. Make planes that are more economical because they leverage technology.

In anticipation of your revelations regarding the changes, here are some real facts and figures comparing the 747 and the A380.

A380 on the left, 747 on the right.

Operating weight empty: 277,000 kg 181,755 kg
Max Take Off Weight: 540,000 kg 362,875 kg

I'll let you do the math on those two for yourself.

Powerplants
No. engines : 4 turbofans 4 turbofans
Max engine thrust: 374 kN (84,000 lb) 276 kN (62,000 lb)

Performance
Cruising speed: 902 km/h 907 km/h
Max speed : 945 km/h 939 km/h
Range: 14,800 km 14,205 km

Capacity
Flightcrew: 2 2
Seating (typical): 555 416
Seating (max): 840 568

The A380-800F has three decks and carries 50% more freight than the 747.

[iLikebeer]

i think he might be talking about the size of cargo that the 737 can haul, as opposed to total weight, because the 380 wins on total weight, but the 747 has a larger main deck.

i'm still surprised that airbus built the 380, when their main success and most of their sales come from the 319/320/321. maybe they saw the threat from embraer in the smaller jet category and wanted to expand, but the future is in fuel economy. that's why the 787 is going to keep boeing in the running if not give them back the lead. that's also why airbus has rushed out the a350? not sure if that's the new one coming out. 737/320 family/embraer will do well on the smaller pax jets, boeing will make a killing with the 787, and the others will stick around.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by glideslope

No disrespect intended

My apologies for my earlier post, then.

I'd misinterpreted your post.

Sorry.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by iLikebeer

i think he might be talking about the size of cargo that the 737 can haul, as opposed to total weight, because the 380 wins on total weight, but the 747 has a larger main deck.

i'm still surprised that airbus built the 380, when their main success and most of their sales come from the 319/320/321. maybe they saw the threat from embraer in the smaller jet category and wanted to expand, but the future is in fuel economy. that's why the 787 is going to keep boeing in the running if not give them back the lead. that's also why airbus has rushed out the a350? not sure if that's the new one coming out. 737/320 family/embraer will do well on the smaller pax jets, boeing will make a killing with the 787, and the others will stick around.

Ah. If that's what he meant, then that's different to heavy lift capacity. Standard pallets and containers are 8ft tall and 8ft wide. Certains parts of the main deck of a 747 can take containers that are 8ft wide and 10ft tall. On the surface that looks like an advantage but:

1) the international standard airfreight container is 8x8 so if you put your goods into a 10x8, you can only ship them in a 747F which can only land at a major airport. You can't then put it into a smalller plane to deliver it elsewhere. An 8x8 container will go into any MD11F, DC-10F, A300F, A310F, 767F etc. and they are much easier to find so the bulk of freight is contained in 8x8 containers.

2) The 10x8 containers can only fit into certain parts of the main deck of a 747F.

3) Volume density is a problem with 10x8's so if you have a few of them on deck, you have to sacrifice cargo elsewhere.

4) In most cases, companies are transporting standard 8x8's. In a 747, they wind up shipping 16 square feet of air for each container (the space between the container and the roof). This is wasted space and costs money.

5) Because the deck of the 747 is so small in size, the 747F is really only useful as a high density carrier (small, heavy boxes). The A380 can be configured for low density, high volume or the reverse which is useful for a lot of the things like computer chips that are being airfreighted today.

Here's an article on this.
http://www.payloadasia.com/Magazine/...505_focus.html

Airbus built the A380 for the same reason they built the other planes. Because they saw a Boeing that was old and outdated and saw an opportunity to release a plane that did what the 747 was designed to do but better than the 747. Remember that Boeing themselves believed in a super jumbo right up until quite recently. They only pulled out of the race when their design was rejected by all of the airliners in favour of Airbuses. The fact that they now say that there isn't a market for it is just saving face.

As for the A350, of course Airbus wants to compete across the range. Now that Boeing has something that on paper is better than their offering in that sector, they are reacting. Boeing gave up when Airbus encroached on their 747's market.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by Troll

I looked into the laxt 6 months of the programme and I don't see anything that suggests it's more expensive per passenger to fly. If you have the information, why not simply post it?

I did the comparisons of the planes. Don't see what you're talking about. The A380 with the same number of passengers in it as a 747 is CHEAPER to fly. Makes sense since most of the technology is 40 years newer and the A380 burns 12% less fuel per seat than the 747. Per seat (typical not max), it's 20% cheaper to fly than a 747.

And the A380 generates HALF the noise of a 747 on take off. It is unbelievably quiet, having seen it fly.
Figures please. Everything I've seen says the A380 can carry 50% more freight than a 747. Which is why so many A380-800F's have been ordered. Why do you think Fedex bought it if it's take off weight is less than a 747's? And if something has changed as drastically as you're suggesting, wouldn't Fedex be pulling the plug? Operating costs are 20% less than a 747 on a long haul. That's why they bought it. This is exactly what Airbus has done to Boeing in every other market sector. Make planes that are more economical because they leverage technology.

In anticipation of your revelations regarding the changes, here are some real facts and figures comparing the 747 and the A380.

A380 on the left, 747 on the right.

Operating weight empty: 277,000 kg 181,755 kg
Max Take Off Weight: 540,000 kg 362,875 kg

I'll let you do the math on those two for yourself.

Powerplants
No. engines : 4 turbofans 4 turbofans
Max engine thrust: 374 kN (84,000 lb) 276 kN (62,000 lb)

Performance
Cruising speed: 902 km/h 907 km/h
Max speed : 945 km/h 939 km/h
Range: 14,800 km 14,205 km

Capacity
Flightcrew: 2 2
Seating (typical): 555 416
Seating (max): 840 568

The A380-800F has three decks and carries 50% more freight than the 747.

My suggestion would be to look at the recent purchase of 10 744F by UPS, and the "specific" way in which the aircraft will "supplement" their 380F purchase (which they have not signed for yet). The 744F has a very desirable role in the market separate from the 380F. This is a trend you will see grow, IMO.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Yeah UPS is interested in buying some 8 B744Fs. UPS already uses the B747 a lot, many of them B741s. The only interesting thing about this acqisition is that this is the first time UPS buys new B747s.

An interesting side effect of this order is that this may hold the B747 line open at Boeing long enough for them to develop and launch the B747ADV. The B747 is set to be closed when the last orders are delivered unless Boeing gives the ADV the green light. The company would close the line permanently if there isn't any production of B744s until the B74A. Likely the B74A will only be made as a freighter.

Today there aren't any new B747 pax carriers being made. The B747 is now a freighter and will be for a long time to come. Its days as a passenger plane are numbered.

The A380 is a fine freighter but is first and foremost a pax plane. It holds more volume than the B744F and when utilizing that volume at MTOW the A380 is far more effective and economical than the B747. Note that the B74AF will be (if it is launched) a minor upgrade of the B744. Essentially a stretch with new engines. It will use the same wing so nothing much interesting about it.

cheers

W-Y

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by glideslope

ROFLOL. Sure they are. They only want people that run the 40 in 4.0.

You wouldn't post on a.net sometimes wouldya?

cheers

W-Y

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

The B747 is now a freighter and will be for a long time to come. Its days as a passenger plane are numbered.

Which, ironically, is what it was designed to be from the start. Boeing converted it to a pax carrier when the market showed no interest in their freighter. That's why the cockpit is in such an awkward place - so it could have a nose door.

As you said, the A380 had a completely different design brief. It was designed first and foremost for passengers.

Glideslope, I think we all recognise that different planes will be used for different things and the 747 will still have a role to play for some companies in future. Precisely for those bulky packages that no other plane can accomodate (except some exotic Russians of course). The fact that UPS has bought some 747Fs doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the A380. Your statements about MTOW having been lowered and the A380 being less economical than planned are without basis. The A380 is on schedule and it's performing as expected. It's over budget; that's about the worst you can say about it. Your comment that UPS hasn't signed for A380s is also wrong, btw.

[glideslope]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

You wouldn't post on a.net sometimes wouldya?

cheers

W-Y

Who me?

[PacHead]

I'm sorry to intrude on this circle jerk of European aviation enthusiasts but the A380 has yet to prove itself in the real world. Controlled tests don't mean crap. Why are you guys making such a big deal out of this plane ? It's only a commercial airliner, and quite an ugly one at that.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by glideslope

Who me?

What are the odds! Nice to see a familiar nickname over here at MacNN! I may disagree with you on some topics, but since you have a Mac (I assume) then I certainly don't disagree with you on everything. That and we're both aviation enthusiasts

See ya on a.net in the future!!

cheers

W-Y

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by PacHead

I'm sorry to intrude on this circle jerk of European aviation enthusiasts but the A380 has yet to prove itself in the real world. Controlled tests don't mean crap. Why are you guys making such a big deal out of this plane ? It's only a commercial airliner, and quite an ugly one at that.

Because we're aviation enthusiasts and love planes of all sorts and sizes of course!! I know even glideslope agrees with me there although he holds little love for the A380 (although I don't want to put words in your mouth glideslope, I think I am safe to say that.. right?)

The A380 is in flight tests and has yet to prove itself in action, yes that is true. It is still a new plane, exciting in its own way and the largest civil airliner in the world. For aviation enthusiasts everywhere, not only in Europe, the A380 is rather interesting at the very least.

Most people who didn't think much of its looks while on the ground grudgingly agreed (and sometimes were pleasantly surprised) at how elegant it was when they saw it fly for the first time. Like most airplanes, it truly shines where it belongs. Flying.

cheers

W-Y