[saganite]

Your post is misleading. All new wings are tested to failure. The 380 wing failed a little short of it's design specification. I remember that the C-17 wing also failed short of it's design specification but production went on anyway. Here's a related article



On Friday came the shocking report that the wings on an Airbus A380 had ruptured and failed during testing. That led to lurid reports like "Airbus: On a wing 'n' a prayer?" in the Financial Times of India.

But the fact is that the wings were supposed to fail during the tests. Both Boeing and Airbus test key components (like wings) "to failure." Basically, they put them in big monster machines and torque the suckers until they snap. I've seen videos and it's pretty dramatic, and my inner 8-year-old is seriously hoping to be on hand when Boeing does that kind of test on the 787.

What the test is designed to prove is that the wings will withstand 1.5 times the stress that they'll encounter during normal operations, and that's what's significant about the news - the A380 wings ruptured 3.3 percent short of the target.

Airbus downplayed the event. Alain Garcia, Airbus' executive vice president for engineering, told an industry publication that "essentially no modifications" would be required to production aircraft as a result of the tests.

And Airbus spokeswoman Barbara Kracht told the Associated Press that while the wing may need to be tweaked, that shouldn't be a major issue.

Airbus engineers and officials from the European Aviation Safety Agency and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration will decide what if any modifications are required, she told AP. "We will need to find out from the data what is really needed, but it's certainly not a redesign of the wing."

But that is the issue. If U.S. or European regulators require changes, that will send Airbus back to the digital drawing board to design and build a new wing, which means further delays for a program already running six months late.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Also,

Keep in mind that one benefit of testing to failure is that they learn WHERE it fails, and can strengthen that aspect, without the weight cost that a blind effort to add strength throughout would add.

[Pukin Dog]

And Airbus spokeswoman Barbara Kracht told the Associated Press that while the wing may need to be tweaked, that shouldn't be a major issue.

That little admission probably means that instead of strengthening the wing, AirBus has decided to lower the gross weight rating for the aircraft. I don't blame them, since they are already way over budget for the aircraft, but it will cost them down the road.

[TommyDale]

I wasn't being misleading. The Airbus A380 wing snapped between the engines and failed to make the 150% mark that is required. Period.

[wildcatf4f3]

Navagator: The wings are crevulating Captain

Mitty: Let them crevulate