Photos © Airbus
Airbus has been running load trials on a full scale A380 static test specimen in Toulouse since late 2004
Photos © Airbus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
To: A.A. Cunningham
Whatever happened to 2X safety factors?
71 posted on
02/16/2006 2:56:46 PM PST by
UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
(Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
To: A.A. Cunningham
Would it not be a routine procedure to take a critical element (like the wing) to the breaking point in tests? I'm no engineer, but I think I would want to know what the real limit is, and there's only one way to find out.
To: A.A. Cunningham
They're called AIRBUST for a reason...
For you English majors in the forum -- AIRBURST.
Semper Fi
77 posted on
02/16/2006 3:04:09 PM PST by
river rat
(You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
To: aculeus; dighton; Lijahsbubbe; martin_fierro
However Garcia says that the failure of the wing below the 1.5 target will require “essentially no modifications” to production aircraft: It surrendered as expected. Taping white flags to the wingtips did the trick.
82 posted on
02/16/2006 3:23:55 PM PST by
Thinkin' Gal
(As it was in the days of NO...)
To: A.A. Cunningham
Actually, this is not bad considering how
BIG the wings are and the fact the wings are built out a metal/composite combination that has never been tried before.
Airliner manufacturers have learned from the experiences of structural fatigue (ever since the unfortunate de Havilland Comet accidents of 1953-1954) and nowadays do a lot a static structural testing to ensure the plane can last through many thousands of takeoff and landing cycles.
To: A.A. Cunningham
"...We will use this calibration of the FEM to prove the adequacy of the structure on production aircraft."
They will use computer modeling to 'prove' that the structure is adequate? Ok, I'm not getting anywhere near that plane...
85 posted on
02/16/2006 3:33:50 PM PST by
dmanLA
To: A.A. Cunningham
Wings..?....WINGS....?????? We dont need no stinking WINGS..!!!!!
He77 we don't even have tails on the A300-600's
89 posted on
02/16/2006 4:05:45 PM PST by
Robe
(Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
To: A.A. Cunningham
It's France. There is something symbolic about a big disfunctional left wing on that eurobeast.
To: A.A. Cunningham
If it aint Boeing , I'm not going
To: A.A. Cunningham
The Airbus A380 is a safe plane
** BUSTED **
108 posted on
02/17/2006 6:59:00 AM PST by
kidd
To: A.A. Cunningham
It's not that I'm anti-social,it's just that I don't think I want to be on an aircraft of the size of The A-380!
To: A.A. Cunningham
"...but Airbus is confident that it will not need to modify production aircraft."
Hmmmm, or Airbus doesn't want to delay production again.
145 posted on
02/23/2006 12:09:25 PM PST by
CWOJackson
(Tancredo? Wasn't he the bounty hunter in Star Wars?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson