someone
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,235
|
Post by someone on Nov 5, 2014 12:52:55 GMT 1
It just mean they have had to many employees when looking at their needs, and probably a lot of administrative staffs Companies need to do this from time to time on order to trim of some extra weight
|
|
|
Post by airboche on Nov 5, 2014 14:13:16 GMT 1
OT: So you flew airberlin did you?
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Nov 5, 2014 14:52:28 GMT 1
I also think that the new programmes (Advance and Ultrafan engines) will be preserved.
EDIT : this is the wrong thread for that discussion
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Nov 18, 2014 0:00:05 GMT 1
The Financial Times has a story (behind a paywall) about an Airbus patent concerning a new BWB design. Here is a link to the Avia forum (in French) which published two Airbus drawings. avia.superforum.fr/t1243p180-airbus-group-eads(see a post from 'Beochien' dated November 16th)
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Nov 18, 2014 0:26:06 GMT 1
The Financial Times has a story (behind a paywall) about an Airbus patent concerning a new BWB design. Here is a link to the Avia forum (in French) which published two Airbus drawings. avia.superforum.fr/t1243p180-airbus-group-eads(see a post from 'Beochien' dated November 16th) Will this work? tinyurl.com/o4bpetfInteresting design for sure.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Nov 18, 2014 2:21:51 GMT 1
It does work ! Thank you, Baroque !
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jan 12, 2015 20:50:43 GMT 1
I couldn't find a better thread, so I thought I'll put it here. Mods, feel free to move it to some place else if more appropriate. Airbus to equip long-haul jets with floatable black boxesThe last point is significant. I always wondered why it was necessary to equip two separate recorders for the Flight Data and the Cockpit voice. With the SSD technology they use these days, they could record both onto one memory module. So, in terms of costs, the new plan shouldn't be that expensive as you still have only two recorders to equip and maintain.
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 18, 2015 1:35:11 GMT 1
Air-Cobot. Pretty neat!
|
|
Taliesin
Final Assembly Line stage 1
In Thrust we trust
Posts: 228
|
Post by Taliesin on Jun 16, 2015 15:41:50 GMT 1
It seems that both A and B are struggling to sell their quadjets. DO you think it would be possible to make a twinjet version of the A380? I know each engine would have to produce ~150,000 lb of thrust each but do you think it could be done? At some point, we're probably going to see a Twin VLA, but not in the near future. The A380's problem is not that it's a Quad, but rather that its engines were "frankensteined" to save cost. The TrentXWB has some 7% better TFSC, the RR Advance promises to be some 10-12% better. This tells you how conservatively these engines were built. There was a longer post about this somewhere, I'll dig it up if anyone's interested. The second problem is sheer size. This would of course not go away with a Twin VLA. The rumour has been that the A320 successor will be called A30X. 2030 is a long while away, but I don't think Airbus will come up with a successor to the A320 then. If you had to, what would you change, really? NEO it, sure, maybe rewing it, but the fuselage? Maybe put some CFRP here and there for good measure, but keep the overall shape and design. What's looking to be an increasingly hot topic is the Middle of Market (MoM) prospects - an airplane sized between the narrowbody line up and the smallest widebody available today to replace the 757/762/A310/A300 market. But at this point, Boeing seems to be more pressed to find a solution than Airbus is. Another possible interesting prospect is an A350-1100 stretch which Airbus says are carrying out studies on. The problem with the MoM airplane is that you need to make a decision as to whether you want it to a narrowbody or a widebody. The space between 200 and 300 passengers is a weak spot for both designs, a narrowbody would be too long, a widebody would be too short. The A350-1100 sounds interesting, but it really needs to be seen if it could deliver acceptable performance for both range and take offs. Acceptable range affords you nothing if you can only use it from 4km runways at ISA-15. If it works out, great, but it just feels like that "one stretch too far".
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jun 16, 2015 15:47:32 GMT 1
If it works out, great, but it just feels like that "one stretch too far". Like the 787-10 it would be a double stretch (the A350-900 is the baseline).
|
|