Forum: Civil and General Aviation

Does anybody know when will the first A380 prototype be built and flown?

F-16.net Sponsor

The first prototype is actually almost finished, but it is a mock-up, which means it will never fly.

Photos

The second prototype which I don't know in what stage it is now will fly.[/url]

Joined: Feb 01, 2007 - 02:38 AM Posts: 0 Status: Offline

[Link pending approval]

Final assembly of the first airframe started in May 2004. First flight (with the Rolls-Royce engines) is scheduled for early 2005 and entry into service for early 2006. First flight with the General Electric / Pratt & Whitney Engine Alliance GP7200 is scheduled for November 2005. With certification and first deliveries to Emirates and Singapore Airlines by end of first quarter of 2006. Production intended to reach four per month by 2008.

112 A380s were on order with Airbus as of December 31, 2003.

We here at FedEx are supposed to get our first freighter version sometime in '08. Should be an interesting site. The Air Guard unit here is relocating to a new area south of the airport to accomodate their C-5 conversion, and FedEx has leased what will be the ex-Guard ramp to park the 380s (for now). As far as I know, we're the only American airline so far to order the thing. And before you ask, yes....we really are an airline. Boxes are are passengers. Wink

Don't tell me the C-130's are going to C-5's! What a slap in the face. Where are they coming from? I could handle it if they were getting C-17's.........
Chickenlegs

Joined: Feb 01, 2007 - 02:38 AM Posts: 0 Status: Offline

Hey, whenever the USAF has a problem supporting an airframe they give it to the ANG.

They wouldn't want to give thier "Brand-new" C-130Js to an ANG unit!? Rolling Eyes

Look at the Bone, the ANG fixed them up and got their FMC rates back to normal, then the USAF retired half of them and took the others back to active duty. Evil or Very Mad

Look at the F-16 Block 42s. They are "under-powered for combat duties" but the USAF gave them to 3 ANG units. USAF only uses Block 42s for pilot training. Hope they don't take them back after we upgrade all their engines to -229s!? Shocked

The days of the "old" USAF aircraft going to the ANG is over. There AREN'T old aircraft anymore, as they are ALL old! Now the USAF gives "problem" aircraft to the ANG.

I hope that unit takes their C-5s over 90% FMC! (That would be a wake-up for the USAF [Link pending approval])

But I'm getting off topic - sorry - my 2 cents.

Back to the topic

LinkF-16SimDude wrote:

...Boxes are 'our' passengers. Wink

That's ok, when I fly in government-owned cargo aircraft, I'm considered cargo and placed on the manifest!?

Is it gonna be as luxorious as Airbus says, couches, bars and gyms and duty-free shops and other things like that?
Or is it gonna be the 747 story all over again?

bix wrote:

Hey, whenever the USAF has a problem supporting an airframe they give it to the ANG.

They wouldn't want to give thier "Brand-new" C-130Js to an ANG unit!? Rolling Eyes

LinkF-16SimDude wrote:

...Boxes are 'our' passengers. Wink

Well, at least 1 Guard unit has the J model...that Special Ops bunch in Harrisburg, PA. Here's a pic. The thumbnail is in the lower right corner.

http://www.af.mil/photos/search.asp?q=c-130j&btnG.x=0&btnG.y=0

Not sure of any others.

And thanks for the correction. Sometimes the fingers are faster than the brain. Embarassed

KarimAbdoun wrote:

Is it gonna be as luxorious as Airbus says, couches, bars and gyms and duty-free shops and other things like that?
Or is it gonna be the 747 story all over again?

The "Deck 2 Disco" thing was, like the 747, a pure marketing thing. Will some do it? Perhaps. But my take is that it'll just get replaced with more seats. It's just too much real estate to configure into anything other than revenue seating. Just me opinionating.

chickenlegs wrote:

Don't tell me the C-130's are going to C-5's! What a slap in the face. Where are they coming from? I could handle it if they were getting C-17's.........
Chickenlegs

Our guys are givin' up their 141s for the C-5s. They've already received 3 (from where I dunno...thought I saw a Dover fin flash on one) and are expected to have 12 to 15 by 2008. And I believe they're programmed to get the glass cockpit upgrade later. I also heard a rumor of re-engining the fleet with CF6-80C2s (used on a lot of 767s, 747s and FedEx's A300 planes).

....hey....my 300th post! God...I need to get a life!! Laughing

How undignified it is when Air Guard pukes have to transition to trash haulers anyway Rolling Eyes

Bad enough when Kansas had to trade in their Vipers for BONES...

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

Well they had BONES, now they're sharing the ramp with active and reserves flying KC-135's. I've seen the active transition at McConnell go from F-105's, KC-135's, B-1's and back to KC-135's. The Guard from 105's, F-16's, BONES, to KC-135's. The amount of money spent on Infrastructure has been tremendous. I'll say it again......the Guard had the B-1's flying great and then someone's infinite wisdom took them away.

By the way, Rhode Island has the 'J' model as well.

We need to bring more of the BONEs back. I think that is what they are discussing in Congress as we speak. A particular senator, I don't recall whom (Hatch maybe?) was asking why we cut the program back so far, and why we actually still need some of these planes that are sitting, doing absolutely bupkus in the middle of AMARC.

Anyway, back to the A380...Isn't this the one that will replace the 747? I think this is the jet they were talking about on tv, and why they will have to renovate part of the LAX terminal to accomodate it. Could someone tell me its specs, as compared to the 747?

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

Replacing the 747 is definately Airbus' w*t dream! Very Happy

But as it is, it's Airbus' candidate for the ultra large capacity market. Boeing could take it on with a stretch-top version of the 747 with a full-length upper deck but have opted to pursue the 7E7 (ultra-long range but less capacity).

LAX is one of a few US airports (including here in Memphis; JFK and O'Hare are two others). It's mostly taxiway improvements to handle the extra width. Current runway widths are adequate to handle it. Amazingly the load distribution of the plane is comparable to the current 747 load footprint. What's also interesting is that the cockpit height will remain the same as what's on the A340, so crews won't have to worry about adjusting to being 10 or 15 feet higher than normal.

Specs? Everything about the beast is bigger than the 47. Wingspan, height, zero fuel weight, max passengers, and the biggie...Max Takeoff Gross Weight. Pushing almost 1.3 million pounds for the -900 version alone! Shocked

For more info check out http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/a380/index.shtml

Well the first prototype took off last Wednesday, but what was the people's intial reaction after the first flight, what did the pilots think?

Forum: Civil and General Aviation

Airbus A380