new Airbus superduper jumbo jet unsafe?

[AoWolf]

Not sure that the Concorde is a great example with respect to fear, uncertainty and doubt. You'll recall that the Concorde had a fatal design flaw that resulted in the death of dozens of passengers when a landing gear mishap destroyed the aircraft.

Well that crash was do it hitting a pice of tire on the plane before them and pilot error IIRC.

 

[Counterfit]

Well that crash was do it hitting a pice of tire on the plane before them and pilot error IIRC.

Still better than its Russian competitor. It's not a good sign when the first prototype crashes at an air show...

 

[RGunner]

Pilot error???

Well that crash was do it hitting a pice of tire on the plane before them and pilot error IIRC.

The last Concorde flight / catastrophe was due to a "Continental Airlines" strip of metal which had fallen off a previous takeoff. That strip of metal hit an unprotected fuel tank on the wing at take off, erupting into a ball of flames. HOW is this pilot error???

 

[AoWolf]

The last Concorde flight / catastrophe was due to a "Continental Airlines" strip of metal which had fallen off a previous takeoff. That strip of metal hit an unprotected fuel tank on the wing at take off, erupting into a ball of flames. HOW is this pilot error???

I thought it had something to do with him getting it into a stall after it got hit. I stand corrected.

 

[HydroMan]

The last Concorde flight / catastrophe was due to a "Continental Airlines" strip of metal which had fallen off a previous takeoff. That strip of metal hit an unprotected fuel tank on the wing at take off, erupting into a ball of flames. HOW is this pilot error???

Correct and Concorde had only one fatal crash and with all the furore that followed passengers refused to fly which killed it off, as for the A380 (there is no A830 aircraft it's a phone) I think it's just the competition bleating because they don't have the funds or foresight to realise that an aircraft of this size is needed, I worked for Bae (De Havilland's) and they were working on Guppy aircraft for passenger use in the mid 80's but could not afford to develop this on their own which was sold onto Airbus, think about it one A380 = at least two 787's.

 

[aquajet]

I thought it had something to do with him getting it into a stall after it got hit. I stand corrected.

You're probably thinking of the TU-144, the Russian counterpart to the Concorde. It crashed at the Paris airshow in 1973. The pilot was performing a dangerous low-speed, low-altitude maneuver, lit the burners and did a steep climbout, which put the aircraft on a collision course with a Mirage. The pilot pushed forward on the yoke too quickly to avoid the Mirage, stalled the aircraft (there's also theories that the disrupted airflow under the wing caused compressor stall in the engines as well), put the aircraft into a steep dive to regain speed and re-lite the engines, and while trying to recover overstressed the airframe and snapped the wings off.

 

[aquajet]

The last Concorde flight / catastrophe was due to a "Continental Airlines" strip of metal which had fallen off a previous takeoff. That strip of metal hit an unprotected fuel tank on the wing at take off, erupting into a ball of flames. HOW is this pilot error???

To be more specific, that strip of metal actually caused a tire to burst, and it was a piece of the disintegrated tire that ruptured the fuel tank.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Correct and Concorde had only one fatal crash and with all the furore that followed passengers refused to fly which killed it off, as for the A380 (there is no A830 aircraft it's a phone) I think it's just the competition bleating because they don't have the funds or foresight to realise that an aircraft of this size is needed, I worked for Bae (De Havilland's) and they were working on Guppy aircraft for passenger use in the mid 80's but could not afford to develop this on their own which was sold onto Airbus, think about it one A380 = at least two 787's.

So the competition found a way to convince this guy to ruin his life and the life of his wife and kids all for some sort of smoke screen maneuver? I don't buy it. Especially sense engineers from other companies interviewed for the article basically said they don't know enough to form and opinion on whether or not the guy is right or wrong.


Lethal

 

[garybUK]

The EU has some of the strictest safety standards in the world. I just see this as sour grapes to be honest. Boeing went off crying to the US government because Airbus has a bigger market share and a better plane and was being funded by the EU. Boo! Hoo!

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Wasn't there a more recent crash involving an Airbus airliner due to the cabin loosing pressure?

 

[kiwi-in-uk]

Wasn't there a more recent crash involving an Airbus airliner due to the cabin loosing pressure?

Are you thinking of the Helios Airways flight from Cyprus to Athens? That was a 737.
I had a quick look in the airdisaster.com accident database here but couldn't find any Airbus cabin pressure incidents (but then I might have overlooked one - it was a fairly quick scan).

Edit: I did find one - an American Airlines A300 Nov 2000 in Miami.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Are you thinking of the Helios Airways flight from Cyprus to Athens? That was a 737.
I had a quick look in the airdisaster.com accident database here but couldn't find any Airbus cabin pressure incidents (but then I might have overlooked one - it was a fairly quick scan).

Thanks that was the flight I was thinking of.

Did not mean any ill towards Airbus, just thought it was a A319/320 involved. To be honest Boeing, Airbus, and any other aircraft manufacturer is at risk, since it is probable that they share certain suppliers. Though the Helios crash was a 737-300 series, and I am not sure if they used computerized pressure controls.

 

[whooleytoo]

Correct and Concorde had only one fatal crash and with all the furore that followed passengers refused to fly which killed it off

Small wonder all aircraft manufacturers are using numeric, similar names. If the Concorde crashes, everyone will remember. But people are less likely to remember if an A330 or A340 (or Boeing 757, 767, etc.) crashes.

 

[kiwi-in-uk]

Yeah.

I know nothing about aircraft, but I worry when I hear about lack of redundancy. I don't travel often - half a dozen times a year - around 120,000 miles - but precisely on the routes that the A380 is designed for.

 

[FireArse]

Not sure that the Concorde is a great example with respect to fear, uncertainty and doubt. You'll recall that the Concorde had a fatal design flaw that resulted in the death of dozens of passengers when a landing gear mishap destroyed the aircraft.

Sorry for not being in the loop for a while....

Documentaries show how the American population were fooled about the noise levels of such a supersonic craft - bad publicity surrounded the jet in the States, needing some sort of Court Action to enable it to land at the few Airports she actually did. In fact the noise levels at the peak (takeoff) were measured to be less than the normal jets of the 1970's.

I hadn't actually meant to bring up the crash - I meant the FUD surrounding the jet before she was put into service - much like this article is doing before the A380 will be put into service some time in the future.

I agree in that after the crash and 9/11, customers for the supersonic jet declined in numbers - but people in the know talk about the jet still financially being able to stay well out of the red. People talk about economics, this bird made a profit.

As will the A380. Will the US airports adopt it? I think they should. Will they? Only time will tell.

FireArse

 

[mpw]

...Documentaries show how the American population were fooled about the noise levels of such a supersonic craft - bad publicity surrounded the jet in the States, needing some sort of Court Action to enable it to land at the few Airports she actually did. In fact the noise levels at the peak (takeoff) were measured to be less than the normal jets of the 1970's....

We regularly got the sonic boom of Concorde out of Paris, which was kinda cool, and I once saw Concorde coming into land in London post crash a couple of weeks before her final sortie. Wow it was loud on approach!

 

[garybUK]

We regularly got the sonic boom of Concorde out of Paris, which was kinda cool, and I once saw Concorde coming into land in London post crash a couple of weeks before her final sortie. Wow it was loud on approach!

I used to work in Staines and had a good view of the Heathrow runways from the higher floors, we always heard Concorde taking off.... very nice it was too .... shame. The only time we have technologically taken a step back.

 

[electronboy]

Just wait till one of these augers into the ground with 800 people on board. That will be terrible. It will eventually happen, equipment or pilot failure is a matter of time.

 

[electronboy]

Small wonder all aircraft manufacturers are using numeric, similar names. If the Concorde crashes, everyone will remember. But people are less likely to remember if an A330 or A340 (or Boeing 757, 767, etc.) crashes.

Everyone will remember when the first A380 crashes regardless of what name or number they give it because of the significant loss of life. (800 passengers will be supported on certain configurations.)

It will be undoubtably BIG news when it happens and will be covered around the world when it happens. The first A380 crash will probably be >>almost<< as significant as the loss of the Titanic--IMHO.

 

[AoWolf]

Everyone will remember when the first A380 crashes regardless of what name or number they give it because of the significant loss of life. (800 passengers will be supported on certain configurations.)

It will be undoubtably BIG news when it happens and will be covered around the world when it happens. The first A380 crash will probably be >>almost<< as significant as the loss of the Titanic--IMHO.

Yeah 800 people is a huge amount. The bigger you make an airplane the more parts. The more parts the greater the chance that something would go wrong.

 

[whooleytoo]

Everyone will remember when the first A380 crashes regardless of what name or number they give it because of the significant loss of life. (800 passengers will be supported on certain configurations.)

It will be undoubtably BIG news when it happens and will be covered around the world when it happens. The first A380 crash will probably be >>almost<< as significant as the loss of the Titanic--IMHO.

That's probably true. The A380 has already attracted much attention, and more will come when it enters service. No moniker on Earth could hide a plane that big, and if/when it has an accident, that may well be enough to put it out of service.

 

[LethalWolfe]

The EU has some of the strictest safety standards in the world. I just see this as sour grapes to be honest. Boeing went off crying to the US government because Airbus has a bigger market share and a better plane and was being funded by the EU. Boo! Hoo!

Sour grapes? It's a whistle-blowing Airbus employee. How is that sour grapes from Boeing? Even engineers from other manufacturers haven't chimed in 'cause they said they didn't have enough info to agree or disagree w/the accusations.

How about this quote from the article:

The European Aviation Safety Agency, which is handling the A380's flight worthiness certification, has reviewed Mangan's allegations. "We have done the research and acted accordingly," spokesman Daniel Holtgen said. "We can't comment on it because it is a matter for Airbus."

So, Airbus gets looked into by the EASA, but nothing gets released to the public unless Airbus releases it. Yeah, that's not messed up.


Lethal

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Documentaries show how the American population were fooled about the noise levels of such a supersonic craft - bad publicity surrounded the jet in the States, needing some sort of Court Action to enable it to land at the few Airports she actually did. In fact the noise levels at the peak (takeoff) were measured to be less than the normal jets of the 1970's.

Having lived near Dulles Airport for (till recently) 13+ years, I can say that the Concorde was not a quiet aircraft on takeoff. IIRC, the Boeing SST was to quieter.

Though to be fair the issue concerning SST's was more to the sonic boom and the environmental impact of those booms. Hence no regularly scheduled supersonic flights of the Concorde were done over "mainland" of the US.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Sour grapes? It's a whistle-blowing Airbus employee. How is that sour grapes from Boeing? Even engineers from other manufacturers haven't chimed in 'cause they said they didn't have enough info to agree or disagree w/the accusations.

How about this quote from the article:

So, Airbus gets looked into by the EASA, but nothing gets released to the public unless Airbus releases it. Yeah, that's not messed up.


Lethal

Right you are.

Things got in cycles. Boeing was king for a long while. Now Airbus is.

It did concern me when Airbus introduced the first fly-by-wire airliner. Now Boeing is doing the same. It still concerns me, but so far we have been lucky. I wonder how United 232 (the Sioux City DC-10 crash) would have faired with fly-by-wire technology.

To be honest I have only been on the A319/320 series from Airbus. Nice flights, but I hate the cabin on them. Give me a 737 or DC-9/B717 or B757 over the lack of headroom space on the A319/320 series (love my window seat).

 

[petej]

A friend of mine has recently survived a rapid cabin pressure loss in a 737. This was caused by the windscreen blowing out. The pilots handled the incident exceptionally well, dropping the plane like a stone down to warmer, breathable air and then landing without incident. These things happen in real life. They just don't ususally get reported anywhere. Slightly alarming for those on board though. It hasn't stopped me flying regularly.

Concorde - what a plane/bird. Small, noisy and graceful.
A380 - Amazing engineering, doesn't look like it should be able to fly. Not so sure about putting so many people in such a confined space. Loading and unloading passengers will be a nightmare.