Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Posted (7 years 12 months 20 hours ago) and read 14229 times:
Not bad, quite impressive!!
Interesting to note about CX possibly going with the 747ADV to replace the A340-600's
"A380 fuel burn better than expected
Wednesday May 25, 2005
A380, which completed its ninth test flight over the weekend, has exceeded its fuel burn goals, Airbus sources told ATWOnline. While coy on confirming the results, a spokesperson told this website that the aircraft is having a near-perfect flight test program. During the flights, some of which have lasted 8 hr., the A380 has been flown to an altitude of 43,000 ft. and at speeds up to Mach 0.89. Airbus plans to unveil the second A380 sporting a Singapore Airlines livery "shortly." Despite the positive A380 news, Cathay Pacific is still leaning toward the 747ADV and 777-300ER for its fleet growth/replacement order, which is expected in July, sources at the airline said. The fleet replacement plans currently call for its three A340-600s, leased from ILFC, to be replaced by 747ADVs.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 1, posted (7 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 14075 times:
Coy? By how much has it exceeded and up to M0.89, was that Vmax?
Quoting Jacobin777 (Thread starter): Cathay Pacific is still leaning toward the 747ADV and 777-300ER for its fleet growth/replacement order,
Wasn't Cathay Pacific always leaning towards Boeing before?
Quoting Jacobin777 (Thread starter): While coy on confirming the results, a spokesperson told this website that the aircraft is having a near-perfect flight test program
Gotta love the efficiency of people, after all with computers it is "garbage in, garbage out"
I wonder how much of ATW's new reports get hit by members of A.net in comparison with the world?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Glidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 50 Reply 4, posted (7 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 13842 times:
Hi!
I never doubted about if the A380 will meet the promised fuel burn or not. In these days with modern construction aid such as CATIA or other software, it is much less risk to create new designs which would maybe not meet the requirements.
CX is maybe playing a bit with AIRBUS regarding the consideration of the 747ADV
to get a better price for the A380. Who knows?
BCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 18 Reply 6, posted (7 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 13484 times:
Quoting Glidepath73 (Reply 4): CX is maybe playing a bit with AIRBUS regarding the consideration of the 747ADV
to get a better price for the A380.
Of course they are. It is called negotiation. If Airbus believes CX is going to Boeing, you can bet your hide that there will be some concessions on price.
I think Airbus should call their bluff.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 13218 times:
This is a very positive development for the A380. Fuel efficiency has become a much more important issue as crude oil hovers around $50/barrel and with talk of $70/barrel in the future.
BoogyJay From France, joined May 2005, 489 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 13154 times:
Yes it's maybe to counter Boeing and to dissuade Boeing to building the 747Adv. It might be true, but Airbus announces that just when Boeing is on its last step of giving the GO AHEAD for the 747Adv.
Anyway, even if I think they have calculated all the parameters, I will believe the fuel burns of the airlines flying it. It's even not fitted with seats, galleys, bars... And a lot of surprises can arise from the interior.
But I hope the A380 will be a huge commercial and technical success.
NumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 10 Reply 11, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 13130 times:
Quoting BoogyJay (Reply 11): ... , but Airbus announces that just when Boeing is on its last step of giving the GO AHEAD for the 747Adv.
Boeing on it's last step for the 747Adv? Since when does Boeing plan the 747 Adv, since when is it the last step? Boeing always talking about the 747Adv - since ages, and nothing happens. So shall A wait as they waited for B's ok to the co-operation of the Super Jumbo?
9V-SPF From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1375 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 13087 times:
Quoting NumberTwelve (Reply 12): Since when does Boeing plan the 747 Adv, since when is it the last step?
It is not a secret anymore that Boeing is seriously working on the 747Adv. There were some interesting threads about this topic recently on this board so you might consider a search in case you´re interested.
The 7e7 was also discussed extensively before it was officialy launched and so was the A380, of course. I see nothing wrong with discussions concerning rumours about anticipated aircraft launches and their possible influence on decisions of the respective competitor.
I meant that Boeing is PROBABLY (sorry I forgot this word) on their last step considering that if they announce the B747Adv, it may well be in Paris mid-June.
So as the deadline of the Paris Air show is coming quickly, and with that the possible 747Adv Go ahead, I think Airbus would like to put the doubt in Boeing's mind for the 747Adv's competitivity compared to the A380.
Knoxibus From France, joined Aug 2007, 199 posts, RR: 21 Reply 14, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 13012 times:
Quoting BoogyJay (Reply 11): I will believe the fuel burns of the airlines flying it. It's even not fitted with seats, galleys, bars... And a lot of surprises can arise from the interior.
In the other hand they have water tanks inside to simulate MTOW, so be it with seats or water, if it's the same weight, there's no differences.
I saw it take-off some days ago at 520t and it went like a rocket!
I'm receiving every day the flight test report (11th flight today), and yes, the above statement is true.
Although it's far from having been tested in all configuration, it does behave better than expected in all aspects.
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 31 Reply 15, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 12991 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 1): By how much has it exceeded and up to M0.89, was that Vmax?
What is Vmax?
Good to read about the flight testing going well... I will be interested to see what happens when they start doing some serious testing with this thing but good for the program thus far!
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 16, posted (7 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 12986 times:
A380 fuel burn better than expected...
OK,
What were they expecting?
How much better is it than they were expecting?
At what cruise weight?
At what cruise speed and altitude?
At what payload?
How much more vague can this release be?
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Glidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 50 Reply 23, posted (7 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 12272 times:
Knoxibus,
your right with the watertanks and stuff like it. BoggyJay, remember, even the firstflight had a TOW of 421 tons. At future flights, they will do lots of testing with M(aximum)TOW.
(Hard landings, RTO, hot and high take of and landing with full payload, and MTOW departure with sudden engine fails etc.)
On route proving flights, the A380 will show the exellent performance, (fuel burning, cabin comfort) and regarding how calm the a/c is flying thru turbulence's.
(It seems, the A380 will provide a new standard in airtravelling, since the a/c flys so calm in turbulent weather conditions)
PyroGX41487 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 280 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (7 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 11506 times:
Quoting Glidepath73 (Reply 24): On route proving flights, the A380 will show the exellent performance, (fuel burning, cabin comfort) and regarding how calm the a/c is flying thru turbulence's.
(It seems, the A380 will provide a new standard in airtravelling, since the a/c flys so calm in turbulent weather conditions)
So, essentially what your saying is that you know this and the route proving hasn't happened yet. How do you know it flies calm in turbulence when that hasn't even been tested yet...?
Props (no airplane related pun intended) for the A380! W00tw00t!
25 RayChuang: I think the big sticking point for CX ordering the A380-800 is can the plane fly a full 555 pax load from LAX to HKG non-stop on a year-round basis. I
26 Starlionblue: No surprise there. More mass = more inertia = harder for turbulence to push it around.
27 Widebodyphotog: Does it really mean good news? Without knowing the specifics it's difficult to say with certainty that this blurb corresponds well to what actual in
28 KC135TopBoom: It is in Airbus's best interest to see nothing but positive results from the A-380 flight tests program. Has anything gone less than pridicted? How ca
29 Keesje: First it knocks out the 747-500/600, then it gets 140 orders before first flight, then it isn't overweight, then has a flawless first flight, now it
30 NoUFO: KC135TopBoom, One of the reasons for test flights is to evaluate fuel burn and to compare estimated performance with reality. There's nothing unusual
31 KC135TopBoom: All I am saying is it is too early in the flight test program to confirm fuel burn. They must establish higher priority things like speed at differen
32 Danny: Really? Because Boeing already claimed 747adv (which they haven't designed yet) will beat it by 19%. Now that is kinda early don't you think?
33 Sebolino: We must admit that Boeing made a really laughable advertisement with that precise 19% economy argument.
34 KC135TopBoom: That is the goal Boeing established for the B-747-ADV. Airbus did the same when the A-380 was just a power point program and called the A-3XX. So wha
35 FDXMECH: Generally speaking. The airframe makers have learned it's better to underpromise and exceed expectations rather than overpromise and underperform. Tha
36 Sebolino: None. And ? Unlike you, I'm not in a holy war for an Aircraft manufacturer.
37 AMSSpotter: Since the question still hasn't been answered: his point is probably that it's an A. and not a B. but I guess it was a rhetorical question anyway. Af
38 Mark_D.: Seems like it's working out fairly well so far. Personally I don't think they should paint MSN002 in SQ livery just yet, at least not until they're wa
39 Jacobin777: not according to Leahy.. "Leahy added that Airbus is also in talks with Cathay Pacific regarding the A380, "and we're confident they will place an or
40 Lightsaber: For every flight they are tracking fuel burn vs. aircraft weight, thrust required vs. predicted, TSFC, etc. like hawks. Trust me, MANY engineers will
41 NorCal: With those enormous wings and powerful engines, its no surprise it is a rocket off the field. (The 388 is the equivalent of a A318/319 or 736) I wond
42 Mark_D.: KC135TopBoom -- That is the goal Boeing established for the B-747-ADV. Airbus did the same when the A-380 was just a power point program and called th
43 Mark_D.: Jacobin777--.but its nice to know that it is doing at the very least..."OK"...as opposed to something terrible... See this is what I mean though. Who
44 Mark_D.: Lightsaber-- Thanks for the details! Very interesting! You're gonna have to thank Jacobin though (for linking the atwonline article mentioning the top
45 Hamlet69: Exactly why is that? When Airbus first pitched the A3XX to airlines, they stated that it would have a total operational efficiency 18-20% better than
46 Revelation: Feel free to post them here on A.Net! The GEnx engine won't even enter test till 2006.
47 Glidepath73: The pilots said that direct after the first flight. (Remember, the first lasted over four hours. In this time they bumped in a few turbulence's for s
48 WhiteHatter: As mentioned above, the interesting phase will be when the GP7200 starts flying on the A380 wing. It's a new project and another radical repositioning
49 Daedaeg: Matt_D, you are a piece of work you know that? This is coming from a guy who is always tougthing about how Boeing has know idea how the 787 is going
50 Lehpron: Look people, a fuel burn rate (mass flow per time) has nothing to do with airplane's MTOW or fuel load, it affects parameters associated with time su
51 MD-90: I wonder if most of that is due to the sheer mass of the aircraft itself. I'll bet that the wingloading isn't as high as some other aircraft, such as
52 Magyar: And the weather forecast for today after this news piece: Expect heavy eastward nay-saying over the North Atlantic!
53 Prebennorholm: Untrue. The MD-11 fuel figures were well known long time before it entered service. At that time MDD was already working hard on improvement programs
54 Lightsaber: Alas, a little of the opposite. Current wing theory would require that the A380 have a wingspan about 10% greater than it is for optimal efficiency.
55 Pihero: Lehpron, Although you're quite vocal, you've just emitted an interesting series of misconceptions regarding flight dynamics : 1/-The Vmax referred to
56 B744F: This is all just marketing hype. Didn't the A340 series have the same nonsense with great fuel efficiency??? We see what that turned into.
57 PyroGX41487: B744F, The A343 at least came closer than the MD11...
58 WAH64D: I must say, I'm totally sick of the attitude of some of the Americans on the forum toward the A380. Boeing has stuck it to the European manufacturers
59 Jacobin777: couldn't agree with you more...and though I'm not a fan of The Leviathan (for a few reasons I've mentioned a million times on other threads), I've AL
60 Daedaeg: Actually your post was the most childish in this entire thread. Totally unnecessary. Europe show America how to build an aircraft? Come on now...LOL.
61 Davejondi: Boeing and Airbus have both co-existed as commercial airline makers for some time now and neither of them are going anywhere anytime soon. Although a
62 WAH64D: Read my post again and you will see that I mentioned that Boeing had the upper hand on all but one of the Civil aircraft you have mentioned. While yo
63 Prebennorholm: Not really. It is a lot of things, tiring, childish etc, but fun? Maybe my sense of humor is too advanced? Just put a small red flag besides all the
64 B744F: "Now its Europe's turn to show America how to build an aircraft! Many of you clearly don't like it but take it like men, congratulate Airbus on a mass
65 Theredbaron: Weird thing.....if Airbus were silent about the A380 testing, a lot of people here would say " they must be hiding something ", "they are so quiet bec
66 ComeAndGo: hilarious ! Giv'em a brake. The A340 was launched into a recession. A. is still around isn't it?
67 DeltaA380: Enough about A vs. B; let's bring back Convair and DeHaviland so we have C and D to talk about as well. The Comet 5... complete with 6 engines in the
68 WAH64D: Errm,,, No sir, I did not. Surely I do not need to explain why the A380 is a landmark achievement in aviation.
69 Astuteman: Lightsaber, is this correct? Even at 560t, such a huge wing gives the A380 one of the lowest wing loadings of any widebody flying (if my maths is cor
70 Widebodyphotog: Astuteman, You've pretty much got it right. The A380 wing was designed for growth of the aircraft above 600t. Initially the A3XX concept was a three a
71 OldAeroGuy: Pihero, Post #55 was very complete, factual, and accurate. Another good example of why you are on my respected users list. Fuel mileage testing usuall
72 FlyAUA: Thanks you guys for some really interesting posts! It's good to read stuff from people who know what they're talking about
73 Avek00: On a related note, unsubstantiated rumor has it that the A380 is currently running 3-6% ABOVE projected weight targets during testing. Therefore, whil
74 RJ111: The first planes off the line are often overweight, although i doubt it's as high as 6%, you realise that's 16t. If it's burning low fuel whilst over
75 Avek00: The exact range given to me was 3-6% - take it with any appropriate grain of salt.
76 TrevD: This whole topic is comical... Airbus has not even started NAMS testing - which is the ONLY accurate way to determine fuel burn performance. After see
77 Astuteman: Can I add my thanks, Widebodyphotog for an excellent and thoroughly informative reply to my query. It makes it worth wading through some of the crap
78 Udo: What would a.net be without rumors? Regards Udo
79 NoUFO: That may very well be the case, because the prototype is said to be heavier than the full production aircraft that will be delivered to airlines.
80 ComeAndGo: Which means fuel efficiency should be even better.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, 
By how much has it exceeded and up to M0.89, was that Vmax? 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1017 posts, 
From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1401 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, 
From Chile, joined Jun 2004, 1277 posts, 
From UK - Wales, joined Oct 2004, 453 posts, 
From France, joined May 2005, 489 posts, 
How could I have forgotten these ones? It's not allowed, especially when you had a work experience at the Flight Test Centre.
.
From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2777 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
