a380 woes

[KHills]

March 15, 2009


Airbus said on Sunday it was taking very seriously the issues Dubai airline Emirates had raised about its A380 superjumbos and was working on solving any problems.


Germany's Der Spiegel weekly said Emirates officials had presented Airbus managers with a list of defects in the world's largest aircraft at a meeting in Toulouse in February.


"We take the criticism and the feedback from Emirates very seriously," an Airbus spokeswoman said. "We are doing everything we can to overcome the issues and we are working very closely with our customers to solve that."


"We have a lot of minor, unrelated issues. We are working with them to solve the issues as quickly as we can," she said, adding that Airbus held regular meetings with its customers to get feedback on its aircraft and discuss any issues.


Emirates, the biggest buyer of the A380, has ordered 58 of the superjumbos and received its fourth plane in December.


An Emirates spokeswoman confirmed on Sunday that the carrier had met Airbus executives to give them feedback on the A380's reliability performance.


"Technical issues are expected with new aircraft, particularly one that uses many new technologies," she said. "Emirates has a good relationship with Airbus and we continue to work closely with them to address these technical matters. Airbus is pulling out all stops to sort things out."


The spokeswoman said that Emirates' remained confident in the A380, adding that it was an "excellent" aircraft and that feedback from its customers had been "very positive". She said the company had no plans to cancel any orders.


Der Spiegel said said that Emirates gave a 46-page presentation in Toulouse, telling Airbus officials about heat-damaged power cables, defective engines and numerous malfunctions.


The planes have lost 500 hours of flying time due to grounding to deal with problems, Der Spiegel said.


*Reuters

I don't know why they didn't see the aluminium wiring a problem...we switched to copper in houses for a reason...

I wonder if they will start cancelling some orders.

[Cobra64]

I wonder if they will start cancelling some orders.

Well, seeing as the airline spokesperson is quoted in the article as saying that they don't plan to, I'm going to bet on no.

[mcconnell14]

please don't comment one this but i have a very bad feeling about the a380.. im just waiting for the first big design falt to come up that was overlooked in construction.
i hope the best to airbus, and hope it a major success since i never like to see things/people fail ever.
(please i know i should keep my true feelings like this to myself, but im just bored and thought i would post my own thoughts


and i know others are thinking the same they just keeping it themselves

[TG]

40 years ago.

please don't comment one this but i have a very bad feeling about the 747.. im just waiting for the first big design falt to come up that was overlooked in construction.
i hope the best to Boeing, and hope it a major success since i never like to see things/people fail ever.
(please i know i should keep my true feelings like this to myself, but im just bored and thought i would post my own thoughts

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/ ... R9904e.htm
747: BOEINGS MASTERPIECE (From page 16 of FLUG REVUE 4/99)

During test flights it became apparent that there were grave problems with the original version of the Pratt 7 Whitney JT-9D. During the 1,400 hours flight and 1,013 flights of the test program, the engines were exchanged 55 times. However, the Jumbo finally received its certification through the FAA on 30 December 1969. When the "Baby Boeing" 737 was being tested, there was only engine change. Four of the five test aircraft were later fitted with airline interior and supplied to customers. The first 747 stayed with Boeing for further test purposes.

Pan Am took her first 747 into service on 21 February as scheduled. "Clipper Young America" was supposed to fly 336 passengers from New York to London. However, an "obstinate" door and problems during loading the cargo made the flight late. When the Jumbo finally rolled out to take off, one of the engines overheated. The aircraft finally had to be replaced. The substitute 747 took off after a delay of seven hours. This would not be one off occurrence. Delays and cancelled flights soon gave the 747 the nickname "Dumbo Jet", the flying white elephant. At the beginning of the 70s problems with the engines went so far that up to 30 completed Jumbos had to be stored in Everett with concrete blocks instead of engines under their wings. Moreover there were rising costs and delays in supplying the aircraft. The tight schedule was to blame for this, because it was simply unrealistic to build up a new organisation, a new production plant and a new aircraft all at the same time in only 34 months.

[Tim]

please don't comment one this but i have a very bad feeling about the a380.. im just waiting for the first big design falt to come up that was overlooked in construction.
i hope the best to airbus, and hope it a major success since i never like to see things/people fail ever.
(please i know i should keep my true feelings like this to myself, but im just bored and thought i would post my own thoughts


and i know others are thinking the same they just keeping it themselves

mcconnell, youve said before you dont even have a ppl yet. so im wondering what you think makes you qualified to make that statement?

and you cant make comments in a public forum and not expect people to comment on it

[xsbank]

Tim, what makes you equate having a pilot's license with having a brain? A comment may be asinine or brilliant but I can assure you it has NO relevance with your current ability to fly.

[mcconnell14]

Tim buddy, im sure there are thousands, no probably millions of people, thinking the same thing as me they just don't come onto avcanada and say it (maybe i shouldn't have, but i dont see the problem in saying it). Aren't forum boards meant to be there for people to share there OWN opinions?? if you beleive im wrong reply by saying :I dissagree, i think the a380 will go onto be exactly what airbus thought it would be, or even better then expected. Not trying to diss someone you don't even know. yea sure i dont have my PPL yet, but dosent mean my IQ is 50 does it? Dosent mean SHIT.
oh and when i said dont comment thats because I didnt want this topic to turn shitty, by replying like you did in your last post.

[ihavecontrol]

One of the backwards aspects of our industry is that there's a few of us who feel entitled to give what they consider a qualified opinion or disqualify those of others based purely on their license, current position, or accumulated flying time. It is true that with more experience one usually develops a greater depth of knowledge, but this is far from a firm fact. If someone says something completely ignorant or misinformed, let them be held accountable, but let's base our judgements on their input. Forums are after all designed for open and frank discussion. At the same time, let's keep it civil, there's no need for swearing (yeah, I know I'm turning into a grandpa). Back to the topic at hand, when any immensely complex project such as the A380 is finally introduced into the "real world" of flight operations, there are bound to be teething problems and growing pains. This is a normal part of the development of any aircraft. I personally think the A380 will be a mainstay for the next 50 years just like the 747 has until now (and will continue to be).

[Tim]

mc14, i didnt take anything personally, you didnt offend me, just wondering what you based your opinion on...which is evidently nothing...well, maybe the john travolta special on TLC (speculation). if you feel like im picking on you, youre right. ive had something aginst you ever since the KBUF crash in which you posted the first post after the inital report. to paraphrase: 'beat me to it', regarding who got to start the thread on the crash. a bunch of people died and you were worried about your post count and starting a thread. if youre wondering it was me who submitted a complaint and got your post yanked, it was me.

xsbank, without trying to start an argument, if were talking about aviation, an 'educated' person (talking about something other than a pilot, ame, atc, ramp, aeronautical eng, etc) is about as qualified to make 'opinions' as i am to comment on nasa, or submarines, or medicine, or politics or whatever else. at this point, im thinking mcconell is nothing more than a passenger wondering why were still flying in circles waiting to land during a snow storm.

so here's my question to you. what is it about having an opinion, that makes you smart enough to qualify the opinion? im all for posting said opinions, but expecting people to think what you say is right just because you HAVE an opinion isnt good enough for me. like i said i, im not looking to start an arugment with you, i like what you have to say on avcan. i am happy to discuss things civily (sp?) with you though.

i know youve got more experience in aviation than i do, so without trying to overstep my qualifications: ...ever feel like 'what the @#$! is this guy talking about' when pax bitch? they arent qualified to be bitching because they dont know what theyre talking about.

if someone says something stupid on a public forum, i have as much right to call them out on it as they have to say it (right or wrong i suppose...but we are talking about opinions after all)

ihavecontrol, i like the way you put it

[KHills]

I wonder if they will start cancelling some orders.

Well, seeing as the airline spokesperson is quoted in the article as saying that they don't plan to, I'm going to bet on no.

touche. i guess that went in one eye and out the other

[kevenv]

but we are talking about opinions after all)

Opinions are like a**holes, unless it's your own it's probably sh*tty

[mcconnell14]

mc14, i didnt take anything personally, you didnt offend me, just wondering what you based your opinion on...which is evidently nothing...well, maybe the john travolta special on TLC (speculation). if you feel like im picking on you, youre right. ive had something aginst you ever since the KBUF crash in which you posted the first post after the inital report. to paraphrase: 'beat me to it', regarding who got to start the thread on the crash. a bunch of people died and you were worried about your post count and starting a thread. if youre wondering it was me who submitted a complaint and got your post yanked, it was me.

xsbank, without trying to start an argument, if were talking about aviation, an 'educated' person (talking about something other than a pilot, ame, atc, ramp, aeronautical eng, etc) is about as qualified to make 'opinions' as i am to comment on nasa, or submarines, or medicine, or politics or whatever else. at this point, im thinking mcconell is nothing more than a passenger wondering why were still flying in circles waiting to land during a snow storm.

so here's my question to you. what is it about having an opinion, that makes you smart enough to qualify the opinion? im all for posting said opinions, but expecting people to think what you say is right just because you HAVE an opinion isnt good enough for me. like i said i, im not looking to start an arugment with you, i like what you have to say on avcan. i am happy to discuss things civily (sp?) with you though.

i know youve got more experience in aviation than i do, so without trying to overstep my qualifications: ...ever feel like 'what the @#$! is this guy talking about' when pax bitch? they arent qualified to be bitching because they dont know what theyre talking about.

if someone says something stupid on a public forum, i have as much right to call them out on it as they have to say it (right or wrong i suppose...but we are talking about opinions after all)

ihavecontrol, i like the way you put it

my opinions are based on my own thoughts, just how many aircrafts of this magnitude/ engineering marvals, fly without hidden defects? before a major accident, shows up? i thinks its maybe just something that i have a bad feeling about.

Tim your first post in the thread states "very sad indeed. more trouble with the q400 could be very bad for bombardier. looking forward to hearing the details." Seems like your A little more worried about the company of the plane, then the victims themselves. what makes you qualified to say that about the q400? you seem to think your the smartest person on this board. your probably very smart, not saying you aren't not dude, im not a complete moron. lots of folks on here were speculating pilot error of that crash before we knew anything! i think thats more rude/ and wrong to say than "you beat me to it" . and your i guess your saying unles were an "air crash investigator" everyone should keep there mouths shut, cuz obviosuly were not qualifed to make an opinnion,are we? Or is speculating about a crash after it happens different than specualting before it happens?

if people didnt make there own opinions, on topics, then these boards would be no-existant, or atleast be pointless. Its people like you that have to make stupid posts, like "what makes you qualified to make that opinion" well obviously nothing.

i guess i should just keep things to myself, cuz people like Tim will think your a moron for thinking them. and yes ihavecontrol you said it very well i agree with you,

Tim, stop trying to dumb down other people especially one's you dont even know, or have met before.