The big stumbling block is forthcoming
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/ ... air02.html
A380 Evacuation tests
Moderator: Latest news team
Guess this piece in a "Seattle" newspaper is giving local readers exactly what they like !.
Bits 44, like you I have a strong opinion, but there is a pattern showing here, Boeing/Good and Airbus/Bad !!!!!.
Can we please stop this dude !, and post these things in the latest news section where it belongs.
Btw, even Boeing had plans to make a double decker 747 a long time ago. But I guess than it wouldn't be a problem !.
Bits 44, like you I have a strong opinion, but there is a pattern showing here, Boeing/Good and Airbus/Bad !!!!!.
Can we please stop this dude !, and post these things in the latest news section where it belongs.
Btw, even Boeing had plans to make a double decker 747 a long time ago. But I guess than it wouldn't be a problem !.
The big stumbling block is forthcoming
*Zucht*Agree!Bits 44, like you I have a strong opinion, but there is a pattern showing here, Boeing/Good and Airbus/Bad !!!!!.
On topic :
I don't think it would be problem for the evacuation... however, in "Piloot & Vliegtuig" there was a crash report about a 747 in CDG, the nose gear collapsed on the runway, and due of that, the emergency exits in the back couldn't be used. isn't this also a problem for the A380?
Tot hier en verder
From a laymans perspective, it is hard to believe that Airbus (or Boeing) for that matter would invest tons of money to build a product that would fail during any phase of certification (evacuation inclusive). I think that all these things were taken into account during the design of the aircraft.
Lets give Airbus a fair chance of proving that the magnificent product that they have is indeed safe to operate in all possible simulated conditions.
A & B both build good and safe planes and these get even better everyday as technology advances.
Has anyone ever imagined that if this evacuation were the subject of a court trial, a mistrial would be the most likely outcome because of all the negative publicity that may influence those who are responsible to ensure that justice is carried out?
Personally, I look forward to the A380 passing the evacuation test and giving those in aviation (airlines and passengers alike) something to be proud of. Afterall, the success of the A380 (and any other future products of B, Embrarer and everyone else) will be the success of mankind ingenuity and technology, irrespective of who has built it. We should all be proud of how far we all have come since the Wright flyer.
That said, I think the article is partisan and anyone who holds aviation at heart should treat it with the contempt it deserves as it has been prematurely released. Let's all wait for the D-Day then we can come up with our opinions etc. after knowing the outcome of the evacuation test!
Cheers,
Walter.
Lets give Airbus a fair chance of proving that the magnificent product that they have is indeed safe to operate in all possible simulated conditions.
A & B both build good and safe planes and these get even better everyday as technology advances.
Has anyone ever imagined that if this evacuation were the subject of a court trial, a mistrial would be the most likely outcome because of all the negative publicity that may influence those who are responsible to ensure that justice is carried out?
Personally, I look forward to the A380 passing the evacuation test and giving those in aviation (airlines and passengers alike) something to be proud of. Afterall, the success of the A380 (and any other future products of B, Embrarer and everyone else) will be the success of mankind ingenuity and technology, irrespective of who has built it. We should all be proud of how far we all have come since the Wright flyer.
That said, I think the article is partisan and anyone who holds aviation at heart should treat it with the contempt it deserves as it has been prematurely released. Let's all wait for the D-Day then we can come up with our opinions etc. after knowing the outcome of the evacuation test!
Cheers,
Walter.
Please be aware these are not my opinions, they are not Boeing's opinions, or for that matter they are not anyones opinions.
This is a fact, Airbus along with Boeing, or any other Aircraft manufacturer must pass this test, the thing that makes it newsworthy is that no Aircraft has ever had to pass this test with a double decker layout.
The safety of every crew member, every passenger, and every ground safety worker depends on this test being passed, if everyone would stop being so defensive over Airbus and read the article maybe you would understand what its saying.
This is a fact, Airbus along with Boeing, or any other Aircraft manufacturer must pass this test, the thing that makes it newsworthy is that no Aircraft has ever had to pass this test with a double decker layout.
The safety of every crew member, every passenger, and every ground safety worker depends on this test being passed, if everyone would stop being so defensive over Airbus and read the article maybe you would understand what its saying.
It is appreciated that all aircraft must pass these and other stringent tests prior to entry into service for the safety of all who may be involved either directly and/or indirectly with the ops of the aircraft.bits44 wrote:Please be aware these are not my opinions, they are not Boeing's opinions, or for that matter they are not anyones opinions.
This is a fact, Airbus along with Boeing, or any other Aircraft manufacturer must pass this test, the thing that makes it newsworthy is that no Aircraft has ever had to pass this test with a double decker layout.
The safety of every crew member, every passenger, and every ground safety worker depends on this test being passed, if everyone would stop being so defensive over Airbus and read the article maybe you would understand what its saying.
However, my humble opinion was that the article represents a partisan view (whether it is B's, A's, the Author's, the Paper's et al notwithstanding) and it was not in defence of or an attack on A, B or any other entity!
And yes the article was very well understood but apparently it was the content of my post wasn't.
Cheers,
Walter
Bits44,
We know that every plane has to pass this test, and we all know that it'll be the first full double deck plane which will be confronted to such a test. But this being said I also find the article quite subjective and not objective on that subject.
I don't want to go off topic, but I've noticed that since I'm back online there has been an increase in A vs B wars over here on Luchtzak. To be honest I'm really disappointed with those topics and opinions. As 5Y-KQV said, it's the success of mankind and we will all benefit from it. Let's all be proud of Airbus and Boeing and the other manufacturers as well. They all build great planes and enable us to have a great hobby. So why should we ruin that with stupid A vs B wars.
Now I really hope that this A vs B trend will quickly stop here on Luchtzak, because it is bringing down the quality level of the site.
brgds
Chris
We know that every plane has to pass this test, and we all know that it'll be the first full double deck plane which will be confronted to such a test. But this being said I also find the article quite subjective and not objective on that subject.
I couldn't have said all this with better words.A & B both build good and safe planes and these get even better everyday as technology advances. ....... Afterall, the success of the A380 (and any other future products of B, Embrarer and everyone else) will be the success of mankind ingenuity and technology, irrespective of who has built it. We should all be proud of how far we all have come since the Wright flyer.
I don't want to go off topic, but I've noticed that since I'm back online there has been an increase in A vs B wars over here on Luchtzak. To be honest I'm really disappointed with those topics and opinions. As 5Y-KQV said, it's the success of mankind and we will all benefit from it. Let's all be proud of Airbus and Boeing and the other manufacturers as well. They all build great planes and enable us to have a great hobby. So why should we ruin that with stupid A vs B wars.
Now I really hope that this A vs B trend will quickly stop here on Luchtzak, because it is bringing down the quality level of the site.
brgds
Chris
I fail to see how anyone could interperet the article in the Seattle paper as anything but objective, nowhere in the article does it favor one brand of aircraft over another, just because this paper is based in Seattle does not make them pro Boeing, in fact the opposite is usually the case, what readers of this post fail to realize is that this article will probably be repeated in various forms in all aviation related publications around the world.
The writer wrote this article to report a first in Aviation history, an event that will guide the designers of all Aircraft in the future, how anyone can think that this article is in any way biased is beyond me, this is a simple report of a newsworthy event, it would be reported the same way if it was Boeing, or Bombardier, or any other manufacturer.
This is a forum about aviation, sometimes its about Airbus, sometimes its about Boeing, or Embraer, or Bombardier, but in the the end its about Aviation, so lets read the articles with an open mind, and not be so judgmental.
The writer wrote this article to report a first in Aviation history, an event that will guide the designers of all Aircraft in the future, how anyone can think that this article is in any way biased is beyond me, this is a simple report of a newsworthy event, it would be reported the same way if it was Boeing, or Bombardier, or any other manufacturer.
This is a forum about aviation, sometimes its about Airbus, sometimes its about Boeing, or Embraer, or Bombardier, but in the the end its about Aviation, so lets read the articles with an open mind, and not be so judgmental.
Amen!!!! We all have to accept the fact that the A380 will have to undergo some obstacles in order to pass certain regulations. Hell, it's a revolutionary plane, and it doesn't get there overnight!!!!! I'd rather they work out the bugs now than wait for it to be full with 555 passengers and panick!!!
"What's this button do?? I don't know, push it and find out................."
I'm sure that airbus will succeed in the test. They designed the plane with that in mind. This is one of the importent milestones they will have to pass. Once they pass this one they still have a long way to go, but as they spended so much money on this project, I'm sure they didn't allow any mistake in their calculations and considerations. So I'm thinking they will pass the test without any problem.
Is there a possibilty to apply for the test, maybe all luchtzak members could participate!!! It would be fun for all of us to participate! They don't even have to pay me for this! I would volonteer for it and I'm sure that all of you would also volonteer if it was possible! We would be the first ones on the A380!!
Is there a possibilty to apply for the test, maybe all luchtzak members could participate!!! It would be fun for all of us to participate! They don't even have to pay me for this! I would volonteer for it and I'm sure that all of you would also volonteer if it was possible! We would be the first ones on the A380!!
-
HorsePower
- Posts: 1589
- Joined: 12 Jan 2005, 00:00
- Location: France
-
SicilianFalcon
- Posts: 390
- Joined: 11 Oct 2004, 00:00
crazy stuff. What about those 747 Ana packs on domestic routes? If we will compare.
380 Evacuation
From a practical point of view, Airbus obviously want to pass this test with the greatest number of pax and get this requirement behind them.
However, even if it fails with 850 pax it is inconcievable they will fail with 555, so the program will go on, and they will have time to sort out how to get 850 pax off the craft, at a later date.
Emirates and probably others will desire a high density layout in future, but initially they are going for quite a low density seating arrangement, as are QF (505). I think this is to get the craft functioning properly in their operation before pushing the limits, not a desire to give pax a better environment.
Regarding the accusation that Bits 44 is pro Boeing, provided what he posts is objective I don't see a problem with him posting mostly pro Boeing articles and comments and I would be very surprised if every member did not have a leaning to one product or the other for whatever reasons.
I agree though that we must be very careful not to get into the Airliners.net type AvB war.
One of the great things about this Board is that one can have a sensible conversation.
Ruscoe
However, even if it fails with 850 pax it is inconcievable they will fail with 555, so the program will go on, and they will have time to sort out how to get 850 pax off the craft, at a later date.
Emirates and probably others will desire a high density layout in future, but initially they are going for quite a low density seating arrangement, as are QF (505). I think this is to get the craft functioning properly in their operation before pushing the limits, not a desire to give pax a better environment.
Regarding the accusation that Bits 44 is pro Boeing, provided what he posts is objective I don't see a problem with him posting mostly pro Boeing articles and comments and I would be very surprised if every member did not have a leaning to one product or the other for whatever reasons.
I agree though that we must be very careful not to get into the Airliners.net type AvB war.
One of the great things about this Board is that one can have a sensible conversation.
Ruscoe
An aircraft-certification is based on the total amount of passengers that can be evacuated in 90 seconds with only half of the floor-level exits available.
Normally long-haul aircraft have double-slides at every exits just like in this image: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/daniel.safety.c ... 40_600.jpg
It all depends on the type of aircraft and on the type of slides you have but on all the aircrafts currently flying an evacuation-test has been performed. I have heard a few stories of flight attendants from defunct Sabena that got a small job: flight to Toulouse and be a passenger on a A340-600 to test the aircraft certification.
As you can see on this image the A340-600 has 8 floor-level exits and 2 overwing exits (cockpit-windows not included) http://www.airliners.net/open.file/770496/L/ In a normal 3-class layout 380 passengers can be transported thus in case of evacuation 380 passengers need to get out via minimum 4 floor-level exits in 90 seconds. Take it for granted that this has been tested!
An Airbus A380 has 16 floor-level exits (double A340-600) so I am positive as well that the A380 will pass that test!
Normally long-haul aircraft have double-slides at every exits just like in this image: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/daniel.safety.c ... 40_600.jpg
It all depends on the type of aircraft and on the type of slides you have but on all the aircrafts currently flying an evacuation-test has been performed. I have heard a few stories of flight attendants from defunct Sabena that got a small job: flight to Toulouse and be a passenger on a A340-600 to test the aircraft certification.
As you can see on this image the A340-600 has 8 floor-level exits and 2 overwing exits (cockpit-windows not included) http://www.airliners.net/open.file/770496/L/ In a normal 3-class layout 380 passengers can be transported thus in case of evacuation 380 passengers need to get out via minimum 4 floor-level exits in 90 seconds. Take it for granted that this has been tested!
An Airbus A380 has 16 floor-level exits (double A340-600) so I am positive as well that the A380 will pass that test!
One does not need to nose out longtime to realise some people would like to change the rules during the game? Something that was done in Concordes time...luchtzak wrote:An Airbus A380 has 16 floor-level exits (double A340-600) so I am positive as well that the A380 will pass that test!
btw:
The Bush administration will propose elimination of operating subsidies for passenger railroad Amtrak. Congress agreed last year with a Congress increased subsidy of USD$1.2 billion.
No, the USA does not subsidise transport..... Bush does not want to pay for running the trains, but for maintenance of the tracks, see the subtle difference.
-
bigjulie
JetB wrote:Btw, even Boeing had plans to make a double decker 747 a long time ago.
Yes indeed, Boeing did have plans to make the 747 a double decker to start with, but they shelved those plans & went with the single deck, forward bulge concept. They have never looked back, one of the people who said no to the double deck concept, because of concerns about a mass evacuation, was Joe Suter, the head of the 747 engineering team; he must have known something 'cause Boeing came out with a winning design; if it wasn't for Boeing taking that very big gamble, it would have been years, maybe, before there was cheap public air transport for the masses, up till then flying was a very expensive pastime for pax, the only people who could afford it were members of thre so called "jet-set". So many thanks to Boeing for making flying cheap!
Last edited by bigjulie on 06 Feb 2005, 01:02, edited 1 time in total.