A380 wing cracks
01-09-2012, 05:52 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
A380 wing cracks
Wing cracks no threat to safety, insists Airbus chief
I'm certainly no engineer, but I'm not sure if I've heard of wing cracks not being called a safety issue in the past.
Imagine the consequences if a A380 were loss to *possible* structural issues after 3 years while they waited for "heavy maintenance" to get around to finally inspecting a certain aircraft.
Does anyone have an opinion that this approach is more of face saving maneuver on the part of Airbus vice just inspecting the whole operational fleet. I mean a 5 for 5 inspection rate certainly leads to doubts about the rest of the fleet in my mind.
USMCFLYR
I'm certainly no engineer, but I'm not sure if I've heard of wing cracks not being called a safety issue in the past.
Imagine the consequences if a A380 were loss to *possible* structural issues after 3 years while they waited for "heavy maintenance" to get around to finally inspecting a certain aircraft.
Does anyone have an opinion that this approach is more of face saving maneuver on the part of Airbus vice just inspecting the whole operational fleet. I mean a 5 for 5 inspection rate certainly leads to doubts about the rest of the fleet in my mind.
USMCFLYR
01-09-2012, 04:54 PM
#4
Working Class Dog
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Spares Pusher
Posts: 1,668
If there truly is a problem, they will come up with a fix. It may require some strengthening and some additional weight, but if that wing can hold after that Number 2 uncontained failure on Qantas 32, that's one tough bird. As more checks are performed, the inspection periods may decrease, not waiting until the next Heavy Check.
There's always going to be gremlins that surface in the first few years. It's the nature of the beast.
The biggest enemy will be the media.
There's always going to be gremlins that surface in the first few years. It's the nature of the beast.
The biggest enemy will be the media.
01-09-2012, 05:20 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,096
This does not surprise me at all. I have never seen an A380 land smoothly. Never. On YouTube there are already lots of videos of A380 hard landings.
Last week after landing at JFK, I witnessed an Air France A380 land on 31L abeam our position. Granted the winds were crossing the runway and gusting, the AF "super" had a very hard landing, and then a hop and a skip. The wing flex and resultant sine wave like motion that imparted through the wing looked awful.
Last week after landing at JFK, I witnessed an Air France A380 land on 31L abeam our position. Granted the winds were crossing the runway and gusting, the AF "super" had a very hard landing, and then a hop and a skip. The wing flex and resultant sine wave like motion that imparted through the wing looked awful.
01-09-2012, 05:39 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by 11Fan
If there truly is a problem, they will come up with a fix. It may require some strengthening and some additional weight, but if that wing can hold after that Number 2 uncontained failure on Qantas 32, that's one tough bird. As more checks are performed, the inspection periods may decrease, not waiting until the next Heavy Check.
There's always going to be gremlins that surface in the first few years. It's the nature of the beast.
The biggest enemy will be the media.
There's always going to be gremlins that surface in the first few years. It's the nature of the beast.
The biggest enemy will be the media.
USMCFLYR
01-09-2012, 05:49 PM
#8
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Whoah!
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
Is it me or does this A380 land short?
And again: That looked WAAAY short. It appeared the nose had just barely crossed the threshold when the mains hit.
Where is DXB? Are these videos both at Dubai? If so, I am 99.99% convinced the night landing was 500 ft short of the threshold.
As to cracks: one of the big delays in the 787 was cracking in the fuselage/wing-join area.
The F-18A had bulkhead cracks where the vertical fins bolt-on shortly after entering service (one of the fixes is that cheesy plate on top of the LEXs; it diverts the LEX vortex away from the vertical fins).
ALL the Block 50 F-16s (the one that 'replaced' my "worn out" F-4G) had their wings replaced (whole fleet) less than a year after entering service. Fatigue cracks in a 9-G wing (turns out it wasn't designed for the flexing caused by carrying two 800 lb HARMs). All the F-16Ns (used by Navy Weapon School) were grounded, I believe within three years of delivery...for fatigue cracks (and they were the lightest F-16s ever built, with no gun, and no bomb-dropping hardpoints).
As 11Fan said, there are always gremlins that surface during the initial operating period.
01-09-2012, 06:12 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
When you have 400+ networked digital monitors, theres bound to be some delay at some seats, just from the network traffic alone. Add in compression and decompression and the image might be several seconds delayed at some seats...
Its pretty easy to spot when lost of people watch a game, there will easily be a 2-3 second delay between the fastest and the slowest in-seat monitor...
So, my guess top video filmed off a monitor that falls into the delayed category when filmed. Bottom video filmed from a monitor that was close to real-time.
As for the cracks: no different than 757 and 737 fuselages at every airline - go look up the ADs...
Cheers
George
Its pretty easy to spot when lost of people watch a game, there will easily be a 2-3 second delay between the fastest and the slowest in-seat monitor...
So, my guess top video filmed off a monitor that falls into the delayed category when filmed. Bottom video filmed from a monitor that was close to real-time.
As for the cracks: no different than 757 and 737 fuselages at every airline - go look up the ADs...
Cheers
George
01-09-2012, 06:15 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
That looked WAAAY short. It appeared the nose had just barely crossed the threshold when the mains hit.
Where is DXB? Are these videos both at Dubai? If so, I am 99.99% convinced the night landing was 500 ft short of the threshold.
As to cracks: one of the big delays in the 787 was cracking in the fuselage/wing-join area.
The F-18A had bulkhead cracks where the vertical fins bolt-on shortly after entering service (one of the fixes is that cheesy plate on top of the LEXs; it diverts the LEX vortex away from the vertical fins).
ALL the Block 50 F-16s (the one that 'replaced' my "worn out" F-4G) had their wings replaced (whole fleet) less than a year after entering service. Fatigue cracks in a 9-G wing (turns out it wasn't designed for the flexing caused by carrying two 800 lb HARMs). All the F-16Ns (used by Navy Weapon School) were grounded, I believe within three years of delivery...for fatigue cracks (and they were the lightest F-16s ever built, with no gun, and no bomb-dropping hardpoints).
As 11Fan said, there are always gremlins that surface during the initial operating period.
I hated that thing. It always looked like it was held in place with silly putty too. If you look close - there are brackets inboard the vertical stab that fixed that problem too. Ever wonder why after so many Lots of Hornets and the fact that the LEX fence was required so early that they didn't end up molding into airframe eventually. Instead - even the Lot21s still had silly putty on them
USMCFLYR
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
