A380

Originally posted by FredT

Yes Boing did do a little research on using BWB for commercial craft, but there are alot of limitations to be practical at this time.....
...... The BWB will as Murcielago pointed out will have military apps first. DARPA is doing research intot hem as well. From Cargo, to tankers to bombers they have alot of possibities.
www.boeing.com...

- Surely various applications for a BWB/flying wing have been considered since the time of the xb35 and the yb49?

This is nothing new really......and just as unlikely for a long time yet.


[edit on 7-8-2004 by sminkeypinkey]

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
I do not know where you get your information, but the BWB is just a civilian transport, it will come out as one, it says that in all of the economic information I have read about it.

Prove you wrong eh? Yes Boing did do a little research on using BWB for commercial craft, but there are alot of limitations to be practical at this time. The window issue is minor compared tot he fact that given the ride of the body, half the people on the either side of the plane would be pukeing thier lungs out from the active ride. The BWB will as Murcielago pointed out will have military apps first. DARPA is doing research intot hem as well. From Cargo, to tankers to bombers they have alot of possibities.
www.boeing.com...

I'm glad someone does research here onlike others.

AND I APOLIOGIZED FOR THE SWEETMAN misinformation, if you went back you would have seen that.

But I still stand by the fact that the BWB is being researched as a Civilian Craft.

I found that information on google with many websites and I will standby it, but thank you for putting some effort into actually posting a link(unlike Murcielago).

I always enjoy a bit of competition, it's better so that both sides of the story gets out.

And maybe so, the A380 will not b as luxurious as you think it might, when I used the word Luxury, I simply meant there are 3 class configurations.

All classes there will be more space between passengers and the service will be a little bit better.

I did not mean that the passengers in every configuration would be waited on head to toe.

You Murcielago are suggesting that these times will be like in the '50s where there was practically no space between passengers and people had to deal with poor conditions.

You put AirBus down as if it won't even make it for another 10-15 years.

The truth is AirBus is vital to European Civilian Transportation.

I do not flame anyone, I compete.

And I think that you using my "misinformation" found in ATS as reason for others to find me wrong, then I find you to be extremely upset with yourself and not being able to support your information, so you use people's mistakes to make them look wrong so you do not have to do the work in actually supporting your facts.

I can support my facts, why? Because I did take 10 seconds with google, not just that, I took half an hour.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 7-8-2004 by ShatteredSkies]

-----

[edit on 7-8-2004 by ShatteredSkies]

I apologize for the double post.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
I apologize for the double post.

Shattered OUT...

You apologize for posting twice with another post. thats funny.

Ok, back to topic.

here's some Links.
good and bad
Cool BWB Pic
BWB stats




I Believe the only thing stoping the BWB from becoming a tanker is if Lockheed builds there Box-Wing tanker.

If the A380 does very good boeing will strike back with there BWB.

I know that it might become a civilian craft but if lockheed doesn't make there tanker then it will become a miliatry jet before a Civilian.

Oh, and I just thought of something cool. If they dont build the BWB without a good look out area, with a lot of windows, then I think they should have LCD Screens behind every chair with an option on the screen of looking through different camera angles. On the outide of the plane they could have 6 cameras. front, back, sides, up, and down. So you kinda have your own personal window.

Heres a link to some pics of the first assembled aircraft the MSN001

www.airbus.com...

pics are huge and to big for me to post (not that Im really sure how to anyway)

I have a friend whos working for an AMERICAN company which supplies the machinary to make the wings.

This will be the first one to fly, a second aircraft has also built for destructive testing.

Originally posted by Debaser
Heres a link to some pics of the first assembled aircraft the MSN001

www.airbus.com...

pics are huge and to big for me to post (not that Im really sure how to anyway)

I have a friend whos working for an AMERICAN company which supplies the machinary to make the wings.

This will be the first one to fly, a second aircraft has also built for destructive testing.

Are they taking pictures of ramming it into the ground?

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Yeah that sure is one amazing plane.

(now cue those who've spent too long supping up Boeing's propaganda.

It's pretty funny they've gone through all the usual stages

1) it'll never sell/happen, there's no demand/market for it

Possible. People may think the 747 is more sexy and they may see it as a part of tradition; I find the 747 more amazing as well
I don't see anything amusing in Airbuses at all except maybe for the name

I think the A380 will either be a great success like that of the 747, and will fly for the next 50 years all over the world.

OR.

The A380 will take a place beside the Bristol Brabazon as a plane past its time; as too big, too slow, too much.

I don't see anything in between. Its all going to depend on the market in the next 20 years.

I must say, though, that a lot of goofy things are going on in terms of manufacturing that will eat up costs in good old fashioned socialist European ways. An example, If I remember correctly, is that they are either building the wings in Britain, then shipping them to France to attach to the plane, or something like the parts are made in France, shipped to Britain, then the assembly is sent back to France. That way everyone gets to touch it. Great politically, but fiscally a mistake for the quantities they are a expecting. Between French Union workers and British political meddling, they'll have a time of it making money. Just like the Jaguar....

Since when is the plane made in France? Thought the plane was made in Germany... is the plane always made in Germany or was it just for A310?

[edit on 1-10-2004 by AtheiX]

Here is a link showing where the pieces are made, and where final assembly takes place.

www.airbus.com...


For the A380, final assembly is Toulouse, France.

They build stuff all over Europe, then ship it around....


Even worse....they build it in France, then Fly it to Hamburg to furnish and paint it.....lol.....goofy.

[edit on 9/30/2004 by soulforge]

Well, I deleted the content on my second post and replaced it with ----, hence the Edited part at the bottom.

And that is still just an artist's rendering, it being real, well that is where the line between reality and fantasy end.

And besides, I could take a 747-400 and turn it into a tanker in a drawing of mine, doesn't make a difference, it has to be real in order to be said it is.

Shattered OUT...

Actually, the transporting of major assemblies to France for final assembly (which is the same for every Airbus BTW) is not really different to Boeings 7E7 where the wings will have to come from Japan. Whats the difference?

Mr ShatteredSkies, though I'm not a moderator I'd like to remind you that as far as I know it's forbidden to divide your opinion into several posts one under another

In terms of whether the air industry in the future will be point to point or hub and spoke all I can say is this, I spend two weeks a month traveling all of which is of course done by air travel. Like most business travelers I have flown on all manner of planes from small piston driven prop planes to jumbos like the 747. When scheduling a trip one thng I demand is non stop flights. Every other business traveleler I know does the same. Why, simple time. You see when you take flight from lets say London to istanbul, especially for business purpose the less time spent in the air or airports the more you can get done. The more stops the and layovers you have the less you get done. So even though non-stop flights are more expensive, they are also more economical because I spend less time in the air and airports. From what understand Airbus is betting on hub and spoke while boeing is betting on point to point, since business travelers make up the vast majority of airlines customer base (far more than vacation recreational trips) I suspect that boeing is makng better bet.

BTW is it just me or does ending every post with "Shattered out" make him sound like some kid who's playing army?

[edit on 6-10-2004 by mwm1331]

Boeings view certainly makes sense, hence the Airbus A350 project I suppose. That doesn't make the A380 into failure though as the market for very large aircraft will still be there and the A380 will be the only 'all-new tech' offering on the market. The A380 has already sold more than Boeing said it ever would and it hasn't flown yet, over the next 20 years who knows how many more will be sold?

Originally posted by mwm1331
BTW is it just me or does ending every post with "Shattered out" make him sound like some kid who's playing army?

[edit on 6-10-2004 by mwm1331]

oh man
Not very long ago I posted a request to ShatteredSkies not to divide opinion into several posts and you do the same. I might consider contacting a moderator

Originally posted by AtheiX

Originally posted by mwm1331
BTW is it just me or does ending every post with "Shattered out" make him sound like some kid who's playing army?

[edit on 6-10-2004 by mwm1331]

oh man
Not very long ago I posted a request to ShatteredSkies not to divide opinion into several posts and you do the same. I might consider contacting a moderator

Feel free to contact a moderator what do I care. The two posts were expressing two different opinions about two different subjects, thus two different posts. Who the hell are you supposed to be the king of ATS etiquette? Why don't you report yourself as well for posting somethng which just as easily could have been handled by U2u and did not advance the topic at hand one whit.

Originally posted by mwm1331

The two posts were expressing two different opinions about two different subjects, thus two different posts. Who the hell are you supposed to be the king of ATS etiquette? Why don't you report yourself as well for posting somethng which just as easily could have been handled by U2u and did not advance the topic at hand one whit.

I never said I'm the king of ATS etiquette. I just don't like people dividing their opinion into several posts without punishment
You could have wrote your 2 opinions on 2 subjects in one posts; you know it wouldn't look bad
As for the topic are there US or German companies that will participate in its creation?