Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mduell · 03:18 PM

Anyone know the Qantas flight number for the departure from LAX?

voodoo · Mar 20, 2007, 05:55 PM

The 380 at JFK.

V

Kent · Mar 20, 2007, 10:23 PM

Airbus landed @ O'Hare International Airport today.

rickey939 · Mar 21, 2007, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Kent

Airbus landed @ O'Hare International Airport today.

Yep, it flew right over our building at work...amazing.

mrtew · Mar 21, 2007, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

The 380 at JFK.

V

Cool! More!

Kent · Mar 21, 2007, 07:00 PM

Airliners.net Photos: Airbus Industrie Airbus A380-841
Happy Family

badidea · Mar 22, 2007, 08:25 AM

^ I have been there! It was a great airshow!

Troll · 06:01 PM

Video of the JFK landing.

YouTube - Airbus A380 Landing at JFK on 3/19/07

analogika · Mar 25, 2007, 02:23 PM

Nice vid, but what a ****ing awful website.

msuper69 · Mar 25, 2007, 02:30 PM

Anyone notice that the wingspan is wider than the runway?

analogika · Mar 25, 2007, 02:55 PM

Yes.

That's because it has long wings.

Troll · Mar 25, 2007, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by analogika

Nice vid, but what a ****ing awful website.

Oops, never checked out the website before! Apologies. Replaced the video.

mrtew · Mar 25, 2007, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Troll

Oops, never checked out the website before! Apologies. Replaced the video.

I liked the first site better because it allows you to download the video.

TETENAL · Mar 25, 2007, 08:56 PM

Isn't that the better landing video?

YouTube - Airbus A380 Landing at JFK Airport
YouTube - Airbus A380 landing in JFK airport first time

brokenjago · Mar 26, 2007, 01:06 AM

Yes.

That's because it has long wings.

Troll · Mar 26, 2007, 04:48 AM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Isn't that the better landing video?

YouTube - Airbus A380 Landing at JFK Airport
YouTube - Airbus A380 landing in JFK airport first time

Thanks for the ZDF report. I liked that. The last quote from the video was thought provoking. Perhaps one of the reasons that some Americans are against the A380 is not just the fact that it's competition for Boeing but that for once the Europeans have made something that is indisputably very big (big being the domain of the Americans to date).

driven · Mar 26, 2007, 12:05 PM

Yeah .. we Americans like everything big. The bigger the better. Except women .... they can be small.

Buckaroo · Mar 27, 2007, 09:35 PM

Boeing Gets $800M British Airways Order

voodoo · Mar 27, 2007, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Boeing Gets $800M British Airways Order

British Airways to pay Boeing $800M for 4 big jets; 4 more in the pipeline

This is about four frames of T7s. Who cares? This thread is about the A380, not a handful of establised BA types.. sheesh

PS: thanks for the link.. oh wait you were just trolling? My bad.

V

Buckaroo · Mar 27, 2007, 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

British Airways to pay Boeing $800M for 4 big jets; 4 more in the pipeline

This is about four frames of T7s. Who cares? This thread is about the A380, not a handful of establised BA types.. sheesh

PS: thanks for the link.. oh wait you were just trolling? My bad.

V

Sorry.

Buckaroo · Mar 27, 2007, 10:14 PM

The didn't have an embaressed smilley.

Buckaroo · Apr 7, 2007, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

British Airways to pay Boeing $800M for 4 big jets; 4 more in the pipeline

This is about four frames of T7s. Who cares? This thread is about the A380, not a handful of establised BA types.. sheesh

PS: thanks for the link.. oh wait you were just trolling? My bad.

V

Okay, here are some Airbus links.

http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=2356

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...0-a9d2676bf06c

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinio..._airbus08.html

voodoo · Apr 7, 2007, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Okay, here are some Airbus links.

http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=2356

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...0-a9d2676bf06c

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinio..._airbus08.html

Ah, Fiction, Bashing and Opinion... where is the fourth horseman?

V

UnixMac · May 10, 2007, 06:52 AM

I was on the rooftop of the Orchid partaking of the wonderful views of how 1/2 the world lives and

and from the corner of my eye I caught this... so I grabbed the camera. It was a 38C day with LOTS of humidity and he ate up quite a bit of the 12,000' real estate, but he got up and climbed out nicely..

voodoo · May 10, 2007, 11:01 AM

Nice photos! I'm afraid the 380 isn't stopping by in my neck of the woods any time soon. What airport it this at?

V

voodoo · 01:39 PM

Painting of the first A380 completed!

With its distinctive blue and yellow logo, and the name 'Singapore Airlines' stretched across 33 metres of aircraft fuselage, the world's first commercial A380 aircraft (MSN003) rolled out of the paint hangar in Hamburg, Germany this week. The installation of the aircraft cabin was completed at the A380 final assembly line in Hamburg in March, while testing of the newly installed systems was conducted in early April.

Some 100 painters worked over four shifts polishing the 3,100m2 surface area of the aircraft fuselage by hand, and with extraordinary precision. This painting process took 21 days.

Following this, the aircraft will undergo more system analysis on the ground before its cabin systems are tested in flight this summer.

The subsequent A380s for Singapore Airlines, MSN005, MSN006 and MSN008 are also in Hamburg and are on track according to the production schedule. In fact, MSN008 is even ahead of schedule, having arrived in Hamburg two weeks earlier than planned.

MSN005 is currently undergoing electrical harness installation. This will be followed by systems testing in the summer and cabin furnishing.

Singapore Airlines is on schedule to take delivery of the first ever commercial A380 in October 2007, and will be the First to Fly the superjumbo aircraft.

Singapore Airlines A380

V

UnixMac · May 10, 2007, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by voodoo

Nice photos! I'm afraid the 380 isn't stopping by in my neck of the woods any time soon. What airport it this at?

V

VABB, aka Mumbai, aka "Bombay"..

mrtew · 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

Painting of the first A380 completed!

Singapore Airlines A380

V

What's the password? It demands to know.

voodoo · May 13, 2007, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by mrtew

What's the password? Won't show!

There wasn't one before.. ? Here is another link, but no pictures.

http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre...Singapore.html

V

Kevin · May 17, 2007, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Boeing Gets $800M British Airways Order

glideslope · May 18, 2007, 03:56 PM

Nice to see things are still lively in here. Don't let the "This is a 380 thread yada,yada,yada" stuff get to you. Your a troll no matter what you say, unless your into companies being run by 2 CEO's. Of course the election in France will ensure Airbus is divested from EADS IMO. Long overdue, and refreshing to see that the French electorate knows what the hell is going on.

Sit back and relax. BA's decision to replace the 737 Classics with 320's ( a wise choice) has sealed the wide body deal for Boeing. Just a few more weeks. Paris will have a few surprises.

UnixMac · May 21, 2007, 11:20 PM

Guys this whole Boeing vs Airbus debate is silly.. it's like the Chevy vs Ford.. both are good, both have pluses and minuses.. Truth be told, I prefer McDonnell Douglas. Some DC-10's are still flying with 250,000 airframe hours and 60,000+ cycles which is unheard of from either Boeing or Airbus.. Heck, some of our MD-11's are going on 40,000 hours and they're barely looking used..... they just don't make 'em like DC Jets anymore!

Buckaroo · May 21, 2007, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Guys this whole Boeing vs Airbus debate is silly.. it's like the Chevy vs Ford.. both are good, both have pluses and minuses.. Truth be told, I prefer McDonnell Douglas. Some DC-10's are still flying with 250,000 airframe hours and 60,000+ cycles which is unheard of from either Boeing or Airbus.. Heck, some of our MD-11's are going on 40,000 hours and they're barely looking used..... they just don't make 'em like DC Jets anymore!

I liked the DC-10 also. But I have heard some negative about it.

mduell · May 22, 2007, 04:46 PM

60k cycles is not unheard of at Boeing... look up the high-time 737s and 747s.

badidea · Jun 1, 2007, 09:25 AM

Kevin · Jun 2, 2007, 08:09 PM

That is supposed to be modern looking? :/

mrtew · Jun 3, 2007, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin

That is supposed to be modern looking? :/

Modern, no, but it sure is awesome and beautiful!!! I hope you can someday open your eyes enough to see its beauty! Where can we see more, larger pictures of it??

Kevin · Jun 3, 2007, 08:48 PM

I guess beauty is truly in the eyes .....

The only planes I have seen that Impress me are "models" or "designs" of the future.

Nothing anyone has put out short of the stealth bomber has impressed me.

Buckaroo · Jun 3, 2007, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by mrtew

Modern, no, but it sure is awesome and beautiful!!! I hope you can someday open your eyes enough to see its beauty! Where can we see more, larger pictures of it??

That is not even cute. It sucks. They should have put the crew cabin in the upper deck. It would have looked a lot better.

Troll · Jun 4, 2007, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

That is not even cute. It sucks. They should have put the crew cabin in the upper deck. It would have looked a lot better.

It's a commercial jet liner. It's built to the same design constraints that a bus is built to not those a sports car is built to. Aesthetics is last on the list. The reason the cockpit is there is so that pilots that are used to flying other Airbus aircraft can fly the A380 easily because the cockpit is about the same distance from the runway as in other Airbus aircraft. One of the strengths of the Airbus designs is that it's very easy to upgrade from one type to another.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

I liked the DC-10 also. But I have heard some negative about it.

Nothing like having your doors come off mid-flight to give you a bad rep.

Buckaroo · Jun 4, 2007, 01:02 PM

Now this is a much more beautiful plane.

Buckaroo · Jun 4, 2007, 01:08 PM

My response was in reference to mrtew's comment about beauty. NOT the design for function. You are right, it is better to standardize as much as possible, but I'd rather fly a 747 rather than a A380 any day. Well, that is if I was a pilot.

In reference to the DC10 that landed with the door open. Yeah that would be scary, but if you think about it, other aircraft would end up the the door ripped right off. It is impressive that it landed with the door still attached. Especially a door that big. A coworker told me that he use to work for McDonald Douglas and they built the DC10 to last forever. It was built heavy, but strong. That may be one reason FedEx loves the DC10. It's too bad Boeing shut it down when they bought out MD. I have also heard that the C-17 which is built by the same factory is also built tough.

Originally Posted by Troll

It's a commercial jet liner. It's built to the same design constraints that a bus is built to not those a sports car is built to. Aesthetics is last on the list. The reason the cockpit is there is so that pilots that are used to flying other Airbus aircraft can fly the A380 easily because the cockpit is about the same distance from the runway as in other Airbus aircraft. One of the strengths of the Airbus designs is that it's very easy to upgrade from one type to another.
Nothing like having your doors come off mid-flight to give you a bad rep.

exca1ibur · Jun 4, 2007, 01:30 PM

The big problem with the DC-10 was the hydraulics system. The way they are designed if you loose hydraulic pressure in one area the other 2 systems will probably be affected. That is what cause the big crash when that DC-10 got stuck in a spiral when the hydraulic pressure was lost. The entire plane was locked down.

Buckaroo · Jun 4, 2007, 02:01 PM

I think they fixed that problem right after the crash.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

The big problem with the DC-10 was the hydraulics system. The way they are designed if you loose hydraulic pressure in one area the other 2 systems will probably be affected. That is what cause the big crash when that DC-10 got stuck in a spiral when the hydraulic pressure was lost. The entire plane was locked down.

exca1ibur · Jun 4, 2007, 03:03 PM

They addressed it, sort of, but I don't think they ever moved to independent systems. The problem could still happen, just not as likely. All the modern aircraft now, have 4 systems and they are all independent to address such a problem happening again.

chabig · Jun 4, 2007, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

The big problem with the DC-10 was the hydraulics system. The way they are designed if you loose hydraulic pressure in one area the other 2 systems will probably be affected. That is what cause the big crash when that DC-10 got stuck in a spiral when the hydraulic pressure was lost. The entire plane was locked down.

This post made no sense at all. The hydraulic fluid was "loosed"? The plane was "locked down"? And the plane was not designed so that a problem in one hydraulic system affected the others. The accident you refer to was a freak one.

exca1ibur · Jun 4, 2007, 03:26 PM

The hydraulics were lost on one system and in turn all the hydraulic systems failed. Hence the ENTIRE plane had no hydraulics. The systems are routed together, so it IS possible one goes, its possible for all of them to go.

OreoCookie · Jun 4, 2007, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Now this is a much more beautiful plane.

Nah, just another make-over for an old lady.
The first mock-ups of the 7E7 were much more aesthetically pleasing as well (longer nose, for instance), but they went for a much more ordinary design later on. Less pretty, but more fuel efficient, I guess.

chabig · Jun 4, 2007, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

The hydraulics were lost on one system and in turn all the hydraulic systems failed. Hence the ENTIRE plane had no hydraulics. The systems are routed together, so it IS possible one goes, its possible for all of them to go.

They are not routed together. There is a single spot in the entire airplane where the lines come near each other, and it just so happens that the catastrophic failure of engine 2 took out all three systems--a freak occurrence.

Troll · Jun 4, 2007, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by buckaroo

I think they fixed that problem right after the crash.

The problem I referred to was with the DC-10's door design. The doors were badly designed. Unlike all other aircraft where the doors open outwards, the DC-10's doors opened inwards. In the event of a failure, you therefore got explosive decompression which is what happened to a few of them (like the Turkish Airlines plane) before they discovered the problem and redesigned the doors.

As for preferring to fly a 747 to an A380, I'm not sure why you say that but as a passenger, I'll take a plane designed and built with the latest technology over a plane designed 40 years ago.