You want the A380 to be a failure?

[say again]

I hope the 380 succeeds. Remember, more planes= more jobs. The same goes for the 787. Regardless of the company, jobs will be secured for thousands here in the US, and all over the world. Like someone said, these planes (Airbus/Boeing) are made all over the world, not just France or the US.

 

[Grumman guy]

Reality

There is nothing wrong with being nationalistic. Its like rooting for your favorite sports team.

Airbus blows !!!!!!!!!!

 

[TonyC]

Tony C:

I always thought a proper Freudian slip was somehow sexually related?

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One man is telling his friend: "I had the worst Freudian Slip the other day."[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"What is a Freudian Slip?" the friend asks.[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"You know, it's when you mean to say one thing, but you say something else that reveals what you are really thinking about. Like the other day I was at the airport and this really beautiful lady was helping me. Instead of asking her for 'two tickets to Pittsburgh', I asked her for 'to Pickets to Tittsburgh."[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Oh, now I know what you are talking about," the friend says, "It's like the other day when I was having breakfast with my wife. I wanted her to pass me the Orange Juice, and instead I said, 'YOU RUINED MY LIFE!'"[/font]

================= rim shot ====================


A Freudian slip is not a Jewish undergarment, but rather a verbal mistake that is thought to reveal an unconscious belief, thought, or motive. And, no, Sigismund (or Schlomo, as I prefer to call him - - his Jewish name) was not a crossdresser. He called these "faulty actions." (Well, actually I think he called them "Fehlleistung" in his native language.) We agree that they are mistakes; we get to disagree on what motivated them. Maybe sex motivates YOUR mistakes, but we don't need to discuss that, right?

I suppose my fingers were unconsciously motivated to express that trying to raise bocefus's discussion to an intelligent plain was tiring.




One more:

A Freudian slip is when you mean one thing but say your mother.

Prey tell you have no such feeling for certain members of this board..?...

Prey or pray, either way. Absolutely not.

And as long as my wife knows where Flightinfo is, I'll deny having those feelings for Ravengirl and ResumeWriter, too.

 

[say again]

There is nothing wrong with being nationalistic. Its like rooting for your favorite sports team.

Airbus blows !!!!!!!!!!

In that case, GO YANKS!!!

 

[Shalam]

There is nothing wrong with being nationalistic. Its like rooting for your favorite sports team.

Airbus blows !!!!!!!!!!

All the employees of Boeing who lost their jobs to outsourcing must say the same thing.

I am glad there are two completely different planes being developed by the two leading aircraft manufacturers. All the negative said towards Airbus on this thread is a rehash of 1969 dogma about the 747. There is a lot of talk on this board about RJ's and airspace / airport congestion (meaning little planes do not help this problem). Now, if Boeing also decided to build a 747 model with a double deck all the way to the tail 5 years ago, along with plans for the 7E7, I wonder what all these anti-Airbus people would be saying about that? What I think the A-380 is going to do in a few years, is force Boeing to make a new model of 747 to compete.

 

[shamrock]

If it were to fail, the A380 could become the next Concorde, a financial failure that continued to fly, but only on a few select routes.

Just a thought.

 

[CSY Mon]

Maybe sex motivates YOUR mistakes,

You got that one right Mr. Tony C.
All my adult life has been a series of expensive mistakes motived by sex..

Now that I am getting older, the focus is more on good food, good drink and days off

Prey or pray, either way. Absolutely not.

Aye, finally caught doing a typo...A non-sex slip perhaps...

 

[tlax25]

Who Cares...

40% of the A380 is supposedly manufactured in the US. I'm sure it will be a success. But as a passanger, I will do everything in my power to avoid flying one. I am prety sure no airline is actually going to put the spas, work out areas, bars into them as has been marketed. Instead they will cram them with 600 plus people...just what I want when flying Chicago to Hong Kong...600 - 800 smelly passangers around me and screeming kids, an hour to deplane at the end of the trip, and another hour or more waiting for luggage to be unloaded. Sounds like too much fun after sitting in a metal tube for 17+ hours, though I suppose the business class and first class will be nice, like most modern airliners.

Not sure why people get so worked up about the whole boeing v. airbus thing. Both companies receive government "aid" in one form or another. Both have more than likely offered huge discounts on models to win marketshare, and both turn out a decent product. And being a professional pilot, like most of you are, does it matter if you are getting paid the same wages to fly a boeing or an airbus? I mean, I love Apple products, but my firm only uses PC's. Maybe I should quite my job.

 

[414Flyer]

All the employees of Boeing who lost their jobs to outsourcing must say the same thing.

I am glad there are two completely different planes being developed by the two leading aircraft manufacturers. All the negative said towards Airbus on this thread is a rehash of 1969 dogma about the 747. There is a lot of talk on this board about RJ's and airspace / airport congestion (meaning little planes do not help this problem). Now, if Boeing also decided to build a 747 model with a double deck all the way to the tail 5 years ago, along with plans for the 7E7, I wonder what all these anti-Airbus people would be saying about that? What I think the A-380 is going to do in a few years, is force Boeing to make a new model of 747 to compete.

Its by no means a certainty if there is a market for Airbus to make money on this project, let alone for Boeing to join in too. I think if Boeing had started their own design a while back that was coming out now too, it would just ensure both companies would lose their A$$es on it.

There is probably some sort of niche for the A380, but the 787 is probably going to work out better for Boeing, than the A380 will for Airbus. 787 is a far better use of Boeing R&D money than into a A380 competitor type pissing match.

McD had a MD-12 design in the mid-90s, but they decided against it.

A380 can be financially good for its owners if it is packed to the gills, but also seems to me that it could also be quite a financial liability if required load factors are not met either.

 

[Floyd R. Turbo]

I suppose I should know this, or be able to figure it out, but what is the advantage of the 5000 psi hydraulic system? Smaller lines and actuators? Or something else?

 

[Whale Rider]

Doesn't the A380 look like Humpty-Dumpty on steroids???.......

 

[Shalam]

Doesn't the A380 look like Humpty-Dumpty on steroids???.......

No, it looks like an airplane.

 

[Whale Rider]

Really???????? No????????????

 

[Whale Rider]

No, it looks like an airplane.

No??????? Really??????????????????

 

[350DRIVER]

It's entertaining to see all of the posts in another thread on the A380. There seems to be several posts that imply they want the project to be a failure. One can't help but think that most of these posts are driven by a juvenile nationalist anti France mentality......playing into the hands of the pro Iraq invasion spinmeisters. France has made many valuable contributions to aviaton.

Sure I'd like to see Boeing selling more planes than Airbus. However, from an aviator's perspective, I wish the best for Airbus. Congratulations to all involved for your first flight!

http://old.marseillaise.org/francais/audio/marseillaise.au

I wish Airbus and France only the best. . They have a great prooduct in the A380 and it will be a success. Some of the anti-France posts are hilarious though.


3 5 0

ps> going to head over in either July or August to spend a some $$$$$ and try and help the tourism industry out.


(great wine(s) )

 

[coolyokeluke]

I suppose I should know this, or be able to figure it out, but what is the advantage of the 5000 psi hydraulic system? Smaller lines and actuators? Or something else?

I was thinking about that one myself. I'm guessing so here I go. Since actuation power is by surface area X hydraulic pressure you could get away with smaller actuators and perhaps less hydraulic fluid, thus saving weight. I wonder if it's enough of a benefit to offset the thicker hydralic lines and fittings to contain that kind of pressure. Anybody got any better ideas?

What else are they doing to save weight these days besides composites? Anybody care to guess? Put pilots and flight attendents on diets?

 

[TonyC]

I suppose I should know this, or be able to figure it out, but what is the advantage of the 5000 psi hydraulic system? Smaller lines and actuators? Or something else?

From an article I found on the web: "The increase in pressure from 3000 psi to 5000 psi allows the necessary power to be transmitted with smaller piping and hydraulic components. That in itself reduces the aircraft's weight by about 1 metric ton."

A380 pushes5000 psi into realm of the common man​

 

[JimNtexas]

I am prety sure no airline is actually going to put the spas, work out areas, bars into them as has been marketed. Instead they will cram them with 600 plus people...just what I want when flying Chicago to Hong Kong...600 - 800 smelly passangers around me and screeming kids, an hour to deplane at the end of the trip, and another hour or more waiting for luggage to be unloaded.

.

You got that right Tlax25! You're talking living hell in A380 economy. A hell that will engulf any airport terminal where an 800 seat airplane arrives or departs.

Most airlines will stuff any airplane they get with as many seats as the regulators will allow. The market demands cheap seats.

I think they will sell enough A380s to justify the existance of the aircraft. They won't make any money on them, but Airbus's real customers (the goverments of Europe) don't care about that.

 

[EagleRJ]

From an article I found on the web: "The increase in pressure from 3000 psi to 5000 psi allows the necessary power to be transmitted with smaller piping and hydraulic components. That in itself reduces the aircraft's weight by about 1 metric ton."

A380 pushes5000 psi into realm of the common man​

It's the first airliner to use a 5000 PSI system, but it's also one of the first aircraft in general. As far as I know, the only other production aircraft to use a 5000 PSI system is the V-22 Osprey, and from what I've heard from friends who work on that project, the hydraulics system has been nothing but problems. We'll see if Airbus is able to provide the reliability airlines demand with what little expertise the engineers have with these components.

 

[hawg2hawk]

I've never flown a military aircraft with a 5000 psi hydraulic system. And how the hell does an A380 equate to "the common man"?