A-380 - will it fit?

[satpak77]

Will this damm thing even fit into ramps/taxiways at our airports?

just curious

 

[mattpilot]

nope...... gotta refit major airports at $800 mill a piece

**edit... well at least thats what LHR was and they expect MIA to cost.

 

[urflyingme?!]

Yay, American Taxpayers get to fund Airbus too!

 

[User546]

I saw on a Discovery Wings special one time that there are:

1) Currently very few taxiways in the world that can support the max gross weight of the A380,
2) There will have to be special gates and ramps built to accomodate the double decker (747 gates won't work),
3) The wingspan of the A380 exceeds the international standard which means its too wide to fit at any of the existing gates,
4) All the runways will have to be strengthened to handle the weight and force that a landing A380 will cause.

And... lets not forget that an A380 with max fuel, and max passengers has a calculated takeoff distance of nearly 20,000 feet!! Of which no runways currently in civilian existance accomodates!

Gotta love dem' French...

 

[urflyingme?!]

So i guess JFK, ORD, LAX will all be doubled in size in 16 months eh?

 

[minitour]

And... lets not forget that an A380 with max fuel, and max passengers has a calculated takeoff distance of nearly 20,000 feet!! Of which no runways currently in civilian existance accomodates!

Gotta love dem' French...

Holy le sh!te!

 

[DenverDude2002]

what about kden with our 16,000 ft runway? will it fit here?

 

[qmaster3]

Discovery Wings

I miss it.

 

[satpak77]

well, I am no rocket scientist, but...

Help me understand this....based on earlier posts (20,000 feet runway) and ramp space issues, why are carriers buying this thing and why is Airbus selling it

maybe a simple question, but this West Texas high school grad don't have the answer

thats like selling a new model cadillac that doesn't fit on any US streets

 

[mattpilot]

interesting document about the A380 from the FAA

http://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/att04/2004%20Track%20S.pdf/Bonvino%20and%20Bonvino_%20final%20paper.pdf


it is about hte take off distance and other interesting comparisons.

From what i gather, the "critical take-off" (assuming engine failure?) is 12000ft (4000m).

Normal takeoff seems to be roughly 3500m (10500ft) judging from a graph.

I didn't read through it all, so someone with more time and interest can go and read it and share with the rest of us


**edit.. oh, and thats "standard atmospheric conditions" that i've listed. Read the conclusion of the document

 

[User546]

Very interesting paper. I have to say though, those equations on Page 6 is enough to make my head spin. I'm going to take their words on what it says!

The special did specifically say 20,000 feet, cause I had the same question as SatPak: How could they have already sold all these airplanes with no current infrastructure in place to support it.

I could understand people like FedEx and cargo lines that won't necessarily be operating them at max gross weight, and won't need the infrastructure of gates, allowing them much more options of airports.

 

[Metro752]

Off Topic:

I read something, if they built a runway around the world, Republic Aircraft would build an airplane that required every bit of it.



On Topic:

Hahahahaha, I hope Mayor Daley strokes out about this joke!

 

[mattpilot]

Look at Figure 10 page 9

At max weight, its 10500ft normal takeoff and 12000ft with one engine out (assuming critical takeoff means one engine out - i don't know).

And thats for standard atmospheric conditions.

So perhaps if the aircraft were in denver, 6000ft up, something closer to 20000ft may apply?

 

[JonJohn82]

Was building this fancy A380 even logical? Will it sell well?

 

[Wolf King]

The 380 will more easily fit in the a$$ of the typical faggity frenchman than it will the typical gate.

 

[Kream926]

lets not forgett how long it will take to load/unload all dem peoples riding in it

 

[9GClub]

what about kden with our 16,000 ft runway? will it fit here?

Somebody crunch some density altitude numbers for us s'il vous plait...... my guess is that the Mega Lawndart would need 465,763' to reach V1 in Denver...... and it's not slated to fly out of there anyway, so..... Denver gets the award for the Longest Runway That's Completely Useless to the French Monstrosity.

 

[DenverDude2002]

Can we say Titanic of the 21rst century?

 

[DenverDude2002]

I would prefer we didnt serve the French, its bad enough with 318's, 319s, and 320s dominating a once 99& 727/737 airport. I miss the good old days.....

 

[Kawasumi_Kichou]

The February 14, 2005 edition of AW&ST cover stories are about the A380's startup and airport expansion plans. Some highlights:

154 orders, 50+ options to date.

Singapore will be the first operator starting in 2006 with London and Sydney being the first destinations. Initial cabin configuration is three-class with less than 500 seats.

Air France will be the first EU operator starting in 2007 with New York, Montreal, Tokyo, and Beijing being the first destinations. Cabin configured for 538 seats.

FedEx will be the first A380F operator starting in August 2008 between North American and Pacific Rim hubs. A380F will carry up to 150 metric tons; maximum range is 5,600 nm.

Airbus Training plans 9- to 11-day CCQ transition training for crews already qualified on the A330 or A340.

About 20 airports will be ready for A380 operations by mid-2006/2007 including Auckland, Abu Dhabi, Bangkok, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, JFK, London Heathrow, London Gatwick, LAX, Montreal, Paris CDG, Tokyo.

LAX and JFK will be early US destinations. SFO will follow as the second US west coast gateway.

Aircraft had to fit in an 80x80 meter box to meet ICAO Code F and FAA Group 6 size limits. A380 wingspan is 261.8 feet (79.8 meters).

Most airports have to upgrade taxiways, modify curves and build shoulders on each side of the runways to ensure that outboard engines remain above concrete, not grass.

20-wheel landing gear will achieve weight distribution that doesn't exceed that of present aircraft.

Aircraft has a relatively short wheel base and better turn radius than the B777-300 and A340-600.

Airports will install two- and three-bridge gates (and upper deck loaders for the A380F) to aim for turnaround times of less than 90 minutes.

 

[VaB]

people like FedEx and cargo lines that won't necessarily be operating them at max gross weight

What? That's all we do. Boxes weigh alot, ya know. There are exceptions of course, but the cargo guys operate their airplanes much heavier than the passenger types.

 

[minitour]

What happens when you have to cancel a 380 flight for mx and put up 500+ people in a hoe-tell for the night?

How about over 1,000 people in the terminal at one time. 500 deplaning, the other 500 waiting for their s**t to get loaded and get going.

It's a big sum-bich...thats-a-fursure

-mini

 

[Ivan]

Tenerife anyone? I'm not a fatalist, but can you imagine two of these f***ers colliding on a runway? Or how bout a terror attack with 600 peeps on board? I thought that's why everyone sorta cooled to the mass cattle carriers in the first place.

I want no part of the A380, not at FDX or as a passenger.

 

[minitour]

Tenerife anyone?

I think about that every time I hear "A380"...I can only hope it isn't gonna happen again.

-mini

 

[nosehair]

...(whisper)"Build it, and they will come."

Hey! Whass' all the complaining? That's what they said about the DC-3 (Yeah, they did!)
Lighten up, everybody! How are we gonna get a Mass Transit Space Shuttle to Mars going if we don't start somewhere?

 

[VaB]

Tenerife anyone? I'm not a fatalist, but can you imagine two of these f***ers colliding on a runway? Or how bout a terror attack with 600 peeps on board? I thought that's why everyone sorta cooled to the mass cattle carriers in the first place.

I want no part of the A380, not at FDX or as a passenger.

Is that you Chicken Little?

 

[SiuDude]

lets not forgett how long it will take to load/unload all dem peoples riding in it

Shouldn't take more than 90 seconds. Ha Ha Ha!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/32279_air23.shtml

 

[Ivan]

No, it's not Chicken Little and no I don't think it's a disaster waiting to happen or will be an unsafe jet. If companies will buy it and people will fly it, go for it. I just think it would be pain in the ass and all around miserable experience to fly with 600 people for 15 hours. Now, if Branson follows thru with bars, casinos and strip clubs on board, that might be a different story.

 

[minitour]

Shouldn't take more than 90 seconds. Ha Ha Ha!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/32279_air23.shtml

Jump! Jump! Don't take anything with you!

 

[User546]

As far as the idea of FedEx not operating at max gross... call me crazy but it seems to me... any weight wasted not hauling boxes or topping the tanks, is lost revenue.

I stand corrected in my previous statement about FedEx and other cargo companies. Was poorly thought out I guess, but everything you guys are saying makes sense!