Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » A380 - world's largest pasenger aircraft - makes maiden flight (Page 7)

 
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
Author Topic: A380 - world's largest pasenger aircraft - makes maiden flight
Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 07-08-2006 09:30 AM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Not to worry Leo, Northwest has indeed just announced they are retiring their DC-10s:
quote:
Airwise News

June 29, 2006

Northwest Airlines said it will speed the retirement of its remaining 12 DC10-30 aircraft.

The bankrupt US carrier said that during the next seven months it will replace its DC10s with new Airbus A330s and Boeing 747-400s. The carrier said that currently seven routes are served with DC10 aircraft.

Northwest has the oldest fleet of the network carriers with an average age of 17 years, according data from Bear Stearns.

(Reuters)

As for pilot training, Boeing's been doing the commonality thing for a very long time. The 757 and 767 share the same type rating - qualify on one and a pilot qualifies on both. Airbus does the same on its A330 and A340.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 07-08-2006 10:41 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That sounds like a strategy to lock customers in to one supplier or the other. If you're already operating A330s and are looking to expand your fleet, buying 777s is just going to land you with a big bill for pilot training, whereas if you buy A340s your existing crews can operate them (or vice-versa).

quote: Paul Mayer
Not to worry Leo, Northwest has indeed just announced they are retiring their DC-10s
Thanks Paul.

I hope that one or two of those DC10s can be kept flying for museum purposes, but I can't say that I'm sorry to see the back of them for regular passenger flights. This article (found through Google) doesn't mention Amsterdam to Boston, so I guess I'll get a 747 or an A330. As I'm not lucky enough to have an excuse to visit Hawaii before next January (only Anchorage in October, which I guess will involve a connection at Minneapolis), I guess I'm safe!

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 08-30-2006 09:29 PM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Whether you like Airbus or not, today's A380 formation flight over Toulouse was pretty impressive. Here's a pic from French Frogs AirSlides over at www.airliners.net:

 -

I like some of the caption comments for the pic:

"If they were full of pax, there would be more than 3200 people in this picture."

"And now, let's do a loop."

"Caution wake turbulence..." [Big Grin]

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 10-04-2006 03:24 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: L.A. Times

Airbus Hit Hard by A380 Setback
In delaying deliveries an extra year, the jet maker will see profit cut an additional $3.6 billion.
By Peter Pae, Times Staff Writer
October 4, 2006

Airbus' woes worsened Tuesday as the world's largest aircraft maker said deliveries of its flagship A380 super-jumbo jet would be delayed a year longer and airlines began considering the possibility of canceling their orders.

Two of Airbus' biggest customers — Emirates Airlines and International Lease Finance Corp. of Century City — said they were considering all options. That includes terminating orders for the $285-million aircraft, capable of carrying 555 passengers.

"This is a very serious issue for Emirates," said Tim Clark, president of the Dubai-based carrier, which with its $13-billion, 43-plane order is Airbus' largest A380 customer.

The threats came after Airbus informed airlines that the first A380 would not be available until October 2007 — more than 18 months behind its original schedule — because of problems installing electrical wiring.

Some airlines can expect delays of more than two years from the dates they were initially promised, Airbus said.

The latest delay, Airbus' third in a year, is likely to bolster rival Boeing Co.'s plans to build a larger version of its venerable 747 jumbo jet to compete against the A380. Chicago-based Boeing has had difficulty selling its latest 747 variant, the 450-seat 747-800. But the latest Airbus troubles could prompt carriers "sitting on the fence" to make a move, an airline industry executive said.

"Boeing may make inroads with the 747-800," said John L. Plueger, president of International Lease Finance, the world's largest jet-leasing company. "It could spur the launch of the 747-800."

Shares of Boeing rose $1.18, or 2.3%, to $81.78. Airbus' parent, European Aeronautic Defense & Space Co., rose 1% in Paris before the announcement.

Analysts said suppliers of parts for the A380, including about 100 Southern California companies, were unlikely to be affected significantly by the new delay. Other Airbus aircraft such as its single-aisle A320 line are selling well, and in recent years the company has had to ramp up production to meet demand.

Although A380 parts come from thousands of suppliers around the world, Airbus completes most of the assembly in Toulouse, France, and Hamburg, Germany. The latest delay was caused by problems with wiring installation at Hamburg, where much of the fuselage is assembled.

Airbus said the latest postponement would slash about $3.6 billion from its earnings over the next four years, bringing the total cost of the delays to more than $6 billion. As a result, the company, based in Toulouse, does not expect to post a profit until after 2010. Airbus said that to mitigate the loss it planned to cut about 20% to 25% of its managerial and support workforce not related to aircraft production. Airbus employs about 90,000 people.

"It is very disappointing that we find ourselves in this situation, but we need to be realistic with ourselves and our customers," said Christian Streiff, Airbus' president and chief executive. He was appointed to the position three months ago after the company shuffled top executives in the aftermath of a previous production delay.

Despite threats of cancellation, Streiff said no customer had given any indications of canceling orders.

"Everybody is still on board," he said during a conference call with reporters and analysts. Airbus has orders for 159 A380s from 14 airlines and two air cargo companies.

Airbus in June cited the wiring problems for the A380's second delay, which the company at the time said would push back production by about six months. But Streiff said a full analysis had revealed that the problems were much worse than expected.

The installation of wiring, which was expected to take two months for each plane, has grown to nearly six months, mainly because the computer software used to design the wiring system was not compatible with the A380's main design and engineering software, Streiff said. So when the fuselage assembled in Hamburg came to Toulouse to be mated with other parts, the wiring didn't match.

Scott Hamilton, an aviation consultant with Leeham Co. in Issaquah, Wash., doubted that customers would cancel A380 orders, noting that the carriers have a long-term interest in having two strong aircraft makers competing for their business.

Besides, he added, "by the time airlines get through raking Airbus over the coals and getting them to pay the penalties, they'll have the cheapest wide-body airplanes in the world."

They were saying on the radio this morning that the Hamburg-based engineers who designed the electrical systems did so using a totally different and incompatible CAD system to that which was used for the airframe/structural design work in Toulouse. Numerous minor problems were encountered when the time came to put two and two together, with the result that the entire electrical systems are having to be redesigned on a compatible CAD system and the first production line aircraft rewired for testing.

It looks like someone made a fundamental and very expensive mistake early on in the programme...

 |  IP: Logged

Will Kutler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1506
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Registered: Feb 2001


 - posted 10-04-2006 05:46 AM      Profile for Will Kutler   Email Will Kutler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wiring an aircraft like this is no simple task. General standards in aviation is that wiring is to be routed ABOVE fluid lines, wiring has specific requirements regarding harnessing including bundle wrapping and mounting to fusalage. Wiring must also have play to compensate for expansion and contraction. All leads must be tracable. There are requirements for anti-chaffing grommets as the wiring goes thru the fusel;age structure. The list of requirements is extensive!

Kutler

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 10-04-2006 11:35 AM      Profile for Bill Enos   Email Bill Enos   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Requirements or not, either they can do it or they haven't figured out all the issues. Seems like the prototypes flying are not really airworthy if there are still problems.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 10-04-2006 01:45 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That thought occurred to me, the radio interviewer and the Airbus spokesman on Today this morning. The latter sidestepped the airworthiness issue quite neatly, I thought, by claiming that the problems thrown up by the incompatibility of the two CAD systems were purely to do with the in-flight entertainment systems - which, he pointed out, had been specified very differently by each of their launch customers - and nothing to do with anything related to flight safety.

If the story about two incompatible CAD systems being used in France and Germany is true, though, it all adds up to a first class cock-up.

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 10-05-2006 12:16 PM      Profile for Bill Enos   Email Bill Enos   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sounds like a bull shit story to cover up something. Dosen't seem like they would hold production over an entertainment system issue.

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 10-05-2006 05:38 PM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
In-Flight Entertainment (IFE) systems are nothing to sneeze at these days. The A380 will have an all-digital IFE system capable of routing hundreds of channels of audio and video and broadband to each seat. Nowadays IFE is as important a selling point as payload, range, fuel burn, and projected maintenance costs. The IFE cabling task is indeed quite formidable.

The A380, like all Airbuses from the A320 on, is a fly-by-wire aircraft. Turns out that at the data rates now being used, crosstalk in the flight control channels has become an issue. The solution was to increase the shielding by going to a larger cable gauge. Unfortunately the new cable will not fit through the existing holes in all of the bulkheads, formers, ribs, stringers, and other bits of structure that the cables must pass through. Hence, a fairly major engineering rework will be needed for all those components. Looks like delivery of the A380 will be delayed an additional year because of this.

As you might imagine, Airbus parent EADS is not happy about this. Neither are the airlines that paid top euro/dollar to have one of the first delivery positions. The Airbus business guys certainly have their work cut out for them, as Airbus will pay substantial contract penalties to the customer airlines for missing the promised delivery dates. In the mean time, testing continues with the five aircraft now flying.

Back to throwing bags in my dinky obsolete fly-by-fluid MD-83s. The Mad Dog lives on... [Big Grin]

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 10-05-2006 05:55 PM      Profile for Bill Enos   Email Bill Enos   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It seems to me that crosstalk in flight controls would definitely be an airworthyness consideration. Designers of this dog have apparently never run cable of any kind before.

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002


 - posted 10-05-2006 06:49 PM      Profile for Michael Schaffer   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Schaffer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Maybe you should head over there and show them how it's done, Bill.

quote: Paul Mayer
The A380, like all Airbuses from the A320 on, is a fly-by-wire aircraft. Turns out that at the data rates now being used, crosstalk in the flight control channels has become an issue. The solution was to increase the shielding by going to a larger cable gauge. Unfortunately the new cable will not fit through the existing holes in all of the bulkheads, formers, ribs, stringers, and other bits of structure that the cables must pass through. Hence, a fairly major engineering rework will be needed for all those components. Looks like delivery of the A380 will be delayed an additional year because of this.
What I don't understand here - whether it's "incompatible CAD software" or "unforeseen cable requirements" (in either case, a major massive fuckup, all we really learn from these alleged reasons is that people are panicking and starting to point fingers in all directions) - is, wouldn't an airplane like that be designed with redundant cabling space and paths from the start? Because even if the current design *would* accomodate whatever cabling is needed right now, you never know what comes up in the future.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 10-06-2006 01:43 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not an aeronautical engineer so please forgive me if this sounds stupid, but I'd expect the gauge of cabling needed for a given data rate to decrease over time, as the technology improves, not increase. So unless you want to design in the flexibility to add additional features (of the sort that needs wiring) at a later overhaul of each plane, then building in the capacity for currently unneeded cables would probably involve an increase in production overheads or a decrease in efficiency or capacity that the designers didn't want. The down side is that this leaves no margin for error if you get the sums wrong or you hit an unforeseen problem, one or both of which seems to have happened in this case.

I wonder if using fibre optic for the data cables might have reduced crosstalk? I'm assuming there's a glaringly obvious reason why they didn't...

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 10-06-2006 10:44 AM      Profile for Paul Mayer   Author's Homepage   Email Paul Mayer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Though I'm no AE either, I think you've got it Leo.

As for fly-by-glass, we'll probably start seeing that in the next generation of airliners. Military designs have begun using glass and eventually that technology will filter down to us civilians, just as things like FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) already have.

In another related note, Rolls-Royce announced today that they are suspending work on the Trent 900, the engine that will power the first A380s, for about 12 months. At this point the first A380s will not fly in scheduled service until near the end of 2007. No layoffs are planned at RR, as the Trent 900 is but a small part of their present revenue stream.

[ 04-27-2007, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: Paul Mayer ]

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 10-06-2006 01:58 PM      Profile for Bill Enos   Email Bill Enos   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Michael, in running cable, crosstalk is something that happens often enough that you must expect it, and be prepared to resolve it. You, working in the service side well know that the engineering types seem to believe their designs are perfect from the beginning. In reality, it's the service techs that make most of their designs function in the real world.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 10-06-2006 03:01 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Paul Mayer
In another related note, Rolls-Royce announced today that they are suspending work on the Trent 900, the engine that will power the first A380s, for about 12 months.
Inevitable, I guess. If they ran the production line at full pelt now, then assuming that model of engine can't be fitted to any other plane, they'd simply end up with a whole load of them in mothballs for a year or even longer: thereby incurring the production (and storage) costs now, but only generating revenue later, after inflation has had a year or two to eat away at the profit margin. Presumably just about every other supplier producing custom-designed parts for the A380 is in the same position.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 9 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.