Posted on 11/22/2005 3:05:00 AM PST by lowbuck
Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines.
The standards released to the industry by the International Civil Aviation Organization earlier this month are tentative and almost certainly more cautious than the formal rules expected next year. But if the final air-traffic procedures end up close to ICAO's initial proposal, they could undermine one of Airbus' top selling points for the largest passenger plane ever built: greater efficiency at congested hub airports.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I don't know if they've done an analysis of the wake turbulence behind the A-30 yet. I doubt it will be any worse than other jumbos.
airbus = yugo with wings
Ain't nothing new to discuss here that hasn't already been hashed out before. Not to mention the need for larger airstrips, larger emergency response aircrews and larger mortuaries. The question isn't IF, but rather WHEN one thousand people meet their doom one day; what the public response will be. I have to believe that Liberals designed this flying titanic to freight Liberals. Hmm......
Probly doesn't set well with the competition, the notion of having to wait twice as long before they can takeoff either. Oh well, the analogy here is: to hell with the world, we're gonna build and fly this thing regardless !.........Ok by me......BTW / I'll be the one with both feet firmly on the ground with camcorder in hand.
there will be about fifty airports that will handle it, they are being modified as we speak. the wake turbulence issue is serious, it will affect all other traffic. it has to do with law of physics called the area rule. bigger thing with more area moving makes lots more turbulence. do the test, put a needle in a bathtub full of water and go from side to side, you will see the turbulence. now do the same with a big spoon, huge difference. air is a fluid btw.
They have, and it is. I don't have my source in front of me, but the preliminary findings are requiring about double the spacing a 747-400 needs. I'm not sure whether the higher measurements of A380 wake turbulence vis-a-vis the B747 are proportional to its increased size, or whether it generates more wake turbulence per unit of mass than other jumbos.
On the other hand, it's important to remember that the spacing requirements for the 747 were originally much greater than they are now, and were lowered as experience showed safer operating limits in real-life situations. Also, it's not only sheer mass that determines wake turbulence; wing size, design, and loading also comes into play. The 757 has its own special category for wake spacing as it generates turbulence as great as some of the largest jumbos.
Exactly.
Weight and landing distance are easy; there are larger and heavier cargo aircraft that operate in and out of many large fields worldwide. The problem is parking at the gate; international airports have been designing basically to the 747's wingspan for the past 35 years, and all but a very few would have to build or modify terminals to fit an A380 without blocking adjacent gates.
The reason the A380 won't see many airports in the U.S. is that U.S. routes don't need them. Other than cargo, even 747s are used on only a few routes to, from, or within the U.S. Most American airlines, and foreign airlines that serve America, have shifted to smaller twinjet widebodies in the 250-350 seat range, and use multiple frequencies if they need more capacity. The A380's market is intra-Asian and Asia-Europe service, where slot-restricted airports and high "bulk" demand for travel make one huge plane more cost-effective and expedient than several smaller planes.
wake turbulence is a function of the mass of air moved to keep the massive p
lane flying AND the nature and efficiency of the wing's airfoil (and wingtips), particularly when it is flying 'down and dirty' -- flaps/leading edge extended .
By nsture this jumbo will produce a massive wake, can't say about ant vortices.
'ant' = any ;-)
That thing is a monstrous mistake.
I can't wait for the first "scientific" study to come out saying that the A-380 causes global warming..
Thank you.
Oops. Well, can't think of everything, can we.
And get tons of $$$ in government subsidies to do it, too.
Comments from a Dutch World website:
One of the biggest hurdles is reportedly evacuating passengers from the plane. According to international regulations, in the case of an emergency, 873 passengers must be able to leave the aircraft in the dark within 90 seconds by using slides.
Airbus however insists there are no more hitches on that front.
"I'm confident that there won't be any problems there," said Tore Prang. But, Airbus has delayed tests so far and an evacuation check is now slated for Feb 2006.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.