When is the A380-800...

[C]

Has Airbus found the solution to all of the problems the A380-800 has? The electical and wieght problems that have hurt it for the past year?  :-?

Nick

Dunno. But the last I heard the 787 was overweight too. Have they sorted that out yet?

Looking at the 787 section on the Boeing website, in the photo section how many actual photos are there of the 787 structures...

10, 20, 30...



...nope...


...2! The nose cone and the well publicised "Dreamliner" labelled fuselage section.

[Woodlouse2002]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

[Jakemaster]

[quote][quote]Has Airbus found the solution to all of the problems the A380-800 has? The electical and wieght problems that have hurt it for the past year?

[dcunning30]

[quote][quote][quote]Has Airbus found the solution to all of the problems the A380-800 has? The electical and wieght problems that have hurt it for the past year?

[NDSP]

I havent heard of any weight problems in the 787. Its a small aircraft, supposed to replace the 757 and the 767.

I think if it flies the way it marketed to, its a great aircraft. Its an airplane that can be converted to go international or be converted to go city to city (atleast thats what ive heard...).  If it works out I think its a better design than the A380 simply because it has great range and doesnt need a lot of runway, much unlike the A380. I have heard that airports like Heathrow are putting in extra work in expanding their taxiways just for the A380. That seems a little over the top to me. Its just a 747 with another 100 or so seats. Sure, its range is better, but it still might be more gas guzzling than expected because of weight conditions.


The A380 deffinatly does have more room in the Cabin for other things than seats, but we all see how much airlines use the space for other things...

Nick

[Chris_F]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

[C]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends on the paper...

I havent heard of any weight problems in the 787. Its a small aircraft, supposed to replace the 757 and the 767...

...If it works out I think its a better design than the A380 simply because it has great range and doesnt need a lot of runway, much unlike the A380.

Well your first statement says its replacing the 757 and 767, yet in the second statement you compare it directly with the A380, which is replacing nothing, and is competing in the 747 market, of which Boeing have had a monopoly for 37 years.

I have heard that airports like Heathrow are putting in extra work in expanding their taxiways just for the A380. That seems a little over the top to me.  

When you're one of the biggest airports in the world you make your airport fit for any potential airliner, particularly if its an Airbus or Boeing.

[vololiberista]

On the subject of extending rwys to accomodate the A380, one recalls the 60's when the VC10 was designed both for hot high airlfields and short rwys. Along came the 707 and all the airports of the world extended their rwys to allow it to fly.
A fully loaded VC10 is twice as heavy as the 707 and yet requires a take off distance of almost 3000 ft less!!!
The rwy where the VC10's were built was a little over 4000ft!!!!!!!!!!
Vololiberista

[C]

On the subject of extending rwys to accomodate the A380

I don't think anyone is. Same runway needed as a 747, just taxyway widening needed AFAIK.

The rwy where the VC10's were built was a little over 4000ft!!!!!!!!!!

But they were lightly loaded on a one way trip to Wisley!

One thing I didn't know - in extending the runway at Brooklands for the VC-10 it had a slight kink requiring the aircraft to make a very slight left turn soon after beginning it's take off roll!

[Woodlouse2002]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends. Water colours or oil paints?

[C]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends. Water colours or oil paints?

How much does a pixel weigh?

[vololiberista]

On the subject of extending rwys to accomodate the A380

I don't think anyone is. Same runway needed as a 747, just taxyway widening needed AFAIK.

The rwy where the VC10's were built was a little over 4000ft!!!!!!!!!!

But they were lightly loaded on a one way trip to Wisley!

One thing I didn't know - in extending the runway at Brooklands for the VC-10 it had a slight kink requiring the aircraft to make a very slight left turn soon after beginning it's take off roll!

Yes they were lightly loaded running on fumes rather than real fuel for the short journey to Wisley
As regards the kink in the rwy I have seen that on film. A novel idea to extend the take off roll!!
I can tell you that fully loaded on take off at Heathrow they were already above 500ft by the time they passed the control tower!!!

One thing you can all try with a fully loaded VC10 if you have Kai Tak is to line up on Rwy 13 from taxiway alpha, handbrake "on", engines firewalled, let go the brake and rotate before the numbers. How many fully loaded a/c have that kind of performance today? I think it would be tricky in the A380!!!!!!!
Vololiberista

[Woodlouse2002]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends. Water colours or oil paints?

How much does a pixel weigh?

At what resolution?

[Jakemaster]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends. Water colours or oil paints?

Paint is also a hot topic for the 787.  Boeing doesn't want any airlines to paint more than monotone on the engines because multiple layers of different paints would hamper laminar surface flow

[NDSP]

Which means that the 787 is still basically still only an artists impression...


Dreamliner indeed.

How much can an artist's rendering actually weigh?

Depends on the paper...

I havent heard of any weight problems in the 787. Its a small aircraft, supposed to replace the 757 and the 767...

...If it works out I think its a better design than the A380 simply because it has great range and doesnt need a lot of runway, much unlike the A380.

Well your first statement says its replacing the 757 and 767, yet in the second statement you compare it directly with the A380, which is replacing nothing, and is competing in the 747 market, of which Boeing have had a monopoly for 37 years.

[quote]I have heard that airports like Heathrow are putting in extra work in expanding their taxiways just for the A380. That seems a little over the top to me.