Polistas 989, you call us stupid americans, but what your stupid ass doesn't realize is that its very likely that American does not take delivery of those aircraft. Because 1) not all 400 of those orders were firm 2) American Airlines may go out of business before taking on those planes.
@korencek Incorrect. if you look to the past, an Airbus A320 crashed at its own flight test, a Boeing 707 did a full loop on its flight test...which one wins?
@AirCanada04 I am talking about statistics of plane crashes, not statistics of loops.
9% boeing planes crashed, which makes it at 2nd place, while 0,4% airbus planes crashed. difference is so big that you don't even have the right to open your mouth any more.
@korencek but this is a result of market entry. boeing is by far an older company than airbus is. moreover the total world fleet of planes is dominated by boeing ..(think of 747.757.767.777.787.737 vs A320 series, A340, A330.A380)
Airbus must be consider same as boeing in quality of her aircrafts. Just all of you stupid americans who don't ride airbus how will you react to this: American airlines order 400 new planes from airbus!!! hehe :p
I´ve flown on this last weekend from Montreal to Paris. It was my best experience flying until now. I think that the engineers of Airbus have created a masterpiece of the aeronautics !. Good job!
It was a test, to find the shortest take-off distance. People who think that's not safety to travel in A380 are idiots. Because European engineers have fought to make fly the aircraft. Boeing lovers are just jealous.
@theHshoot The A380 is a failure, Airbus can't sell the piece of crap and will never recover the development costs, It is already outdated by the more efficient Boeings and more efficient Airbuses. And Airbuses safety record is not as clean as Boeings. But I guess you can build crappy airplanes when you have the governments of 5 different countries to bail you out. What is that 3 times now?
@theHshoot Well your partially right, Airbus does like to copy American technology. The A350 has already gone through design changes because the wings on the new Boeings are so efficient. But the ill fated A380 is going down faster than the Titanic. Nobody wants the thing
@prohelipilot1 Lets just say that both companies are doing very well to be in the top 2 spot of civil airliners. It's hard starting up your own aircraft company for the very first time and lasting this long..
I love how people have the audacity to write "Oh its probably the most safe airplane in the world today"....Yes, it is safe...but seriously guys, its barely been flying for a year or so, and already we've had a blown out engine and a couple of other incidents. Same can be said even of the most deadly aircraft in the past. The DC-10 was a piece of shit that killed thousands, Im pretty sure its track record was ok at the start too ;) Having said that, this is one GOOD bird :)
It's flying since 2007 with Singapore Airlines and i'm not aware of any serious incident regarding the plane itself, an engine which spills turbine blades isn't exactly the fault of the plane :-)
This was actually the first of a few MTO (Minimum Tak Off) speed tests conducted by the A380. We talk about tail strike but the one in the video was not an actuall tail strike as such. It was a Titanium block fitted under the tail cone to stop it from hitting the ground. Fernando Alonso the chief test pilot did actually pucture a hole in the tail on a later MTO test.
COMO SE FABRICAN Y DE QUE ESTAN HECHOS ESOS MATERIALES DEL TAIL SKID?? ES DECIR.. LA TEMPERATURA QUE DEBE ALCASZAR ESA ABRASION MAS LA PRESION Y QUE NO SE HAGA MAS QUE DESGASTAR.. ES INCREIBLE!!
@patko1610 the american gouvernement steald a huge number of german-brains during and after the world.war2 from germany,162 sciences-ppl to be exactly,they used them to developpe the aviation,the space programe,and the rocket-programe,NASA was buil by german-brains from the world war2, the whole world know that,even the american know that!! so tkx to the german
what happen to airbus now? from the making of it, it was designed to carry up to 800 passengers. why when i read the news regarding quantas a380 midair engine blast incident it says a380 can carry a maximum of 522 pass. why? dit they reconfigure the plane? or does it fell to the safety stadard and so they need to make it ligther? anybody answer me.
No, it still has a maximum capacity of 853 pass. in a 1-class config (all economy) but most airlines operate their A380 in a 3-class config (economy, business, first class).
@StratMatt777 - sorry mate. My point was that either plane isn't better than any other. I made the point using the same silly logic as the original poster. I would fly either Boeing or Airbus and feel completly safe on either.
@shakey3000 Thats to prevent the tail from being damaged. A damaged tail can get a problem in the plane futher lifetime.
@blondemax The engines are powerful enough but the pilots are taking the plane to its limits to find out what the actual minimal speed required for this plane is before it can take off. Now in it's checklist and specifications the speed where the plane lost contact to the ground is stated as the absolute minimal takoff speed.
Its completely innapropriate; why would you want to do that. clearly the engines should be wooshing much faster or the lifes of all the people on the plane could be put at risk especially if there was a fat-mama at the rear of the plane
@blondemax A380 engines have MORE than enough power and thrust to get a fully loaded plane with fuel, passengers and cargo fully airborne. This takeoff was likely at about 60% throttle if not a bit less.
This was a minimum velocity takeoff test where you try to get airborne with as low speed as possible. Yust look at other takeoffs from A380, it really has enough thrust.
@metrolecs this "tailstrike" actually was an official test for tailstriking with an A380. there is a TV-documentary available "building the A380" where u can see that the engineers added a yellow plate under the tale so they can test this "ultra-fast-takeoff" when a trailstrike could happen
actually that was not a tail strike. The intake vent hatch for the generator was left open instead of being closed as it should have been done after the engines was started. May have been due to the pilot not closing it.
The tail of all planes is where the main pressure bulkhead is located. If you damage any part of the tail it could weaken the bulkhead and lead to a catastrophic failure in flight. To me it looks like that bar is part of the design to be used in the situation of a minimum velocity takeoff .
That "bar" or tailskid is only present on the test versions of the aircraft. On all other A380s, if a tailstrike was to occur the plane would undergo inspection to make sure the bulkhead was not damaged as you said.
American made aircrafts isnt safe. Only thing Americans care is money, not safety. 70% of all aircraft accidents are caused of American made planes. European planes are more safe, but they are more expensive and less popular in aircraft companies. Finn air buys these expensive planes and it can be seen on aircraft accident countings. Finn Air have never been on accident which have killed people.
Ya byt it is still rustd 80s,90s,70s, and 60s concept LOL WHEEL COLLAPSING, ENGINE FALLING OFF LOL. GO AND SEE THE A380 OF AIR FRANCE, AND THE PASSENGER BOARDING IN ON YOUTUBE, 747 LOOKS LIKE BLOODY JUNK IN FRONT OF I. IT IS LIKE COMPARING QUEEN ELIZBETH PALACE TO A SLUM IN NEW ORLEANS LOL
737 to every Boeing fan is an aircraft that needs to go in an museum as an antique. 737 is an dangerous plane to travel . If you love your life go and sit in some other aircraft. This is now nothing but rusted antique of 70s. Recently in Jamaica a rusted 737-800 of the 70s and 80s crashed. LOL the engine fell off, and the wheel colapsed LOL.Check it out American airlines DEC 22, 2009
A350 will fucking rule the skies. Airbus is so much safer. Your rusted 737 took more life then all our Airbus crafts by 3 times combined. So again, King of the skies A380. Accept it. And please you Amerians are know for having a great jealousy. Stop getting jealous if you can't afford to buy a ticket of this A380 Go in that rusted 737,747,767, or 777 aging aircrafts of the 60s and 70s LOL
as impressive as this plane looks, honestly, I'm going to let it fly for awhile before I ride one, just 2 be sure they work out any bugs in the system. Also, while I'm far far far from paranoid, does anyone look at this and think 'hmmm that looks like an awfully big and tempting bulls eye for a surface-to-air missle'?
You know that 95% of this plane isn't British. And don't tell me about the RR engines, the RR aircraft division is controlled by middle eastern investors..
This is a British aircraft, and also French. The engines are designed by the British engineers. And RR are the number one engines of the world, and GE and 747 is no where near this aircraft. There can never be a relationship between birds flying in the air, and fish swimming in the water.
Man this is a British aircraft. British are number one. They make the world's number one car Rolls Royce Phantom which one in a million can afford. They made this beautiful A380. They even ruled the entire world from West to Asia. They are smart and intellegent people. Acceot it this is the reality. They wil always be unbeaten in technology.
You are totally wrong, it is a British car. It was founded by Sir Henry Royce. Go and read the history. It is British. Sir is only used in Britain by the British.
the company rolls royce was british, but now its owned by bmw, the phantom is the work of bmw engineers, and last time i checked they were german still
Boeing 787 is British also. It has Rolls Royce Engines. If Phantom has BMW engine and it is German, then Boeing 787 has RR engines it is British then.
@8stewiegriffin FYI wings are made in wales and landing gear is also british. RR engines are not controled by foregin (spelling fail) investors. maby the branch that produces cars. . .
Not entirely, it was more the crew's improper handling of being in those icing conditions that allowed the airplane to get to the stall condition. I've been flying ATRs for 4 years and am 'in the know'.
First of all concord had only one crash , and it was because of a piece of equipment a boeing of an american company lost while take off just before the concord took off......Hello....
I agree. Triple 7's are the best plane around.I've flown on them a lot and find them the most relaxing planes. The A380 looks like it shouldn't be up in the air. But before anybody comments, I do understand how it stays up in the air.
Plus most pilots prefer to fly Boeing's, they prefer the cockpit and controls, so they say.
Sorry, but it's not true, that most pilots prefer to fly Boeings...The Cockpit of Boeing aircrafts are at least 5 years behind airbus' cockpits. Thus pilots prefer airbusses. They don't have to work as "hard" as in a Boeing cockpit ;)
Airbus's may be the so called more modern but they have far too many restrictions on the flight envelope, as Porky says Boeings are a real mans Pilot aeroplane
Prefer Boeing! Airbus designs the plane around the concept that the pilot as a nuisance, Boeing designs the airplane around the concept of assisting the pilots when they want it.
All Boeing aircrafts are aging aircrafts. Recently a Boeing aircraft crashed in Japan, FedEx. Doughlas Md 11 is an Boeing aircraft. I fell like laughing how the crashed occured. The plane bounce like a Basket-ball, LOL, couldn't get off the ground. Now don't start cyying that Doughlas is not Boeing. It is Boeing. They merged. May god bless the Pilot's soul. I feel sorry for people who lost their packages LOL.
747-8 is nothing but a cheap and boring replacement for the classics 747-400 series in my mind's eye. Boeing did not want to invest in an all new 747 replacement as it was seen as too risky a buisness venture. I appluad Airbus once again for taking the risk and pushing the envelope in terms of innovation and design technologies. I think Airbus have pushed aviation 20 years into the future whereas LOL Boeing is still tinkering with a 1960's rusted, antique 747 design.
Concorde and Airbus is a joint venture with the United Kingdom, and France. The United States has never put a commercial supersonic aircraft in the air, and to date do not have an aircraft to match the power of Rolls Royce engines or the power of the Rolls Royce Trent engines. Europeans can work together, unlike the Americans.
The A380 is manufactured through out 4 countries. France, Germany, Spain and the UK. With Rolls Royce engines. This is not a French plane. I would be worried if it was just French. I would trust the Germans but France isn't famous for it's engineering. Next you will be telling me that the Bugatti is French.
Yes, and a fantastic aircraft Concorde is. Ironic that a piece of debris falling off a DC10 (one of the worst passenger planes) caused the end of Concorde. C'est catastophique!
@PorkyPiggles Silly. That reverser strip was being used on other aircraft, they just fell behind on maintenance. The debris was only a spark plug, Concorde's own design flaws, (with no flaps or slats to fly mach 2 it had to go faster for takeoff which put lots of force on the tires which burst often) and the lack of shock absorbency in the fuel tanks, causing the crash, as well as low ridership after 9/11 caused the end of Concorde. It was one hell of a fuel hungry bird too.
@PorkyPiggles the concorde-disaster in paris was caused by a lost-piece of metal from a boein from AA who toke off befor the concorde! it was nothing wrong with the concorde ! read some books pls, it typical-american, moron as hell :)
@lauriersroses333 Moron as hell? I'm not sure what that means, maybe English isn't your first language.
If you bothered to read my posts on this video you may realise that it is you who is the moron. I am not from the USA and the metal debris that caused the Concorde disaster was from a DC-10, that's not a Boeing.
@PorkyPiggles hello porky :) yes english is not my first language,so i do write and slep wrong some times LOL,i said moron to u bcz u said the disater in paris did finish the concorde,and it not true, the disaster was the only one in the whole concorde-history! never been any accident of concorde! ! they stoped it bcz it was toooo expensive,. and my mistake i tought it was a boeing,but actualy its the same shit, boeing bought DC for years agoo and did finish it :) :) have nice day and tkx
um hello you stupid fruitcakes!!! didn't you see the red thing. that's to prevent tail strike!!! (sorry i got a bit carried away there when i said fruitcakes lol)
Judging by that, if the strike arm wasn't there to protect the fuselage, wouldn't it have scraped the runway? What does it need to do to pass the test?
No, the point where the skid touches ground is not the minimum take-off speed. It is the point where maximum rotation (i.e. highest angle of attack) has occurred. The aircraft continues to gather speed while the "fireworks" continue. The minimum take-off speed (or Velocity Minimum Unstick) is the point when all the wheels lift off the ground (i.e. the plane unsticks).
This is how to paint the stripes on the runway...
czasamitrudno 1 month ago
The dislikes to this video are from the 6 airlines that alreay bought the A380 and wish they hadn't
prohelipilot1 3 months ago
airbuses are just worn out boeings
MrFeelingsofly 3 months ago
Did you see the tail registration? F - WWOW, haha!
AirCanada04 3 months ago
stupid Americans... i resent that statement sir..
Fummb1es 3 months ago
I woke up slow this morning, but this is the new definition of "draggin ass"!
krgrubbs 3 months ago
Polistas 989, you call us stupid americans, but what your stupid ass doesn't realize is that its very likely that American does not take delivery of those aircraft. Because 1) not all 400 of those orders were firm 2) American Airlines may go out of business before taking on those planes.
erumiselli 4 months ago
statistically airbus planes are a lot safer than boeing.
korencek 4 months ago
@korencek Incorrect. if you look to the past, an Airbus A320 crashed at its own flight test, a Boeing 707 did a full loop on its flight test...which one wins?
AirCanada04 3 months ago
@AirCanada04 I am talking about statistics of plane crashes, not statistics of loops.
9% boeing planes crashed, which makes it at 2nd place, while 0,4% airbus planes crashed. difference is so big that you don't even have the right to open your mouth any more.
korencek 3 months ago
@korencek but this is a result of market entry. boeing is by far an older company than airbus is. moreover the total world fleet of planes is dominated by boeing ..(think of 747.757.767.777.787.737 vs A320 series, A340, A330.A380)
lutschauto23 2 months ago
@lutschauto23
Don't forget the A300 and A310, which were the first 2 engined widebody planes ever developed.
blablubb12345 2 months ago
@korencek or by travel length, airbus planes are 5 times safer than boeing.
korencek 3 months ago
Airbus must be consider same as boeing in quality of her aircrafts. Just all of you stupid americans who don't ride airbus how will you react to this: American airlines order 400 new planes from airbus!!! hehe :p
polistas989 4 months ago
Why do people think Airbusses are unsafe? They're European they've got be safe if it's European
iliveonjupiter 4 months ago
@iliveonjupiter look at Airbuses safety record in comparison with Boeings.
RainbowManification 4 months ago
@RainbowManification absolutely correct lol. im always preferred airbus
ARCANINE6 3 months ago
@ARCANINE6 I actually meant that Boeing is safer
RainbowManification 3 months ago
@ARCANINE6 :(
ARCANINE6 3 months ago
watch?v=1mw-Z1hnR8I
juutubejaba 4 months ago
well i won't fly an airbus haha
itsjackyyy 4 months ago
Comment removed
caredhat 4 months ago
I´ve flown on this last weekend from Montreal to Paris. It was my best experience flying until now. I think that the engineers of Airbus have created a masterpiece of the aeronautics !. Good job!
youtuverazz 5 months ago 2
Safe to fly the A380? We will know after the first crash.
oracle2world 5 months ago
If they put a wheel on the tail the problem is solved :D
zederish 5 months ago
It was a test, to find the shortest take-off distance. People who think that's not safety to travel in A380 are idiots. Because European engineers have fought to make fly the aircraft. Boeing lovers are just jealous.
theHshoot 5 months ago 24
@theHshoot The A380 is a failure, Airbus can't sell the piece of crap and will never recover the development costs, It is already outdated by the more efficient Boeings and more efficient Airbuses. And Airbuses safety record is not as clean as Boeings. But I guess you can build crappy airplanes when you have the governments of 5 different countries to bail you out. What is that 3 times now?
prohelipilot1 3 months ago
@prohelipilot1 NO WAY ! Everytime, Boeing made concepts, like the 787-8. But Airbus made better, with the future A350, for example.
theHshoot 3 months ago
@theHshoot Well your partially right, Airbus does like to copy American technology. The A350 has already gone through design changes because the wings on the new Boeings are so efficient. But the ill fated A380 is going down faster than the Titanic. Nobody wants the thing
prohelipilot1 3 months ago
@prohelipilot1 I've got my opinion. You've got your opinion and I respect her.
For me, A380 is just the symbol that UE can make beautiful things. That's all.
theHshoot 3 months ago
@prohelipilot1 Lets just say that both companies are doing very well to be in the top 2 spot of civil airliners. It's hard starting up your own aircraft company for the very first time and lasting this long..
danoob2110 2 months ago
@theHshoot
100 % you are so right!
ThePilot314 2 months ago
Thatll do wonders for the tarmac.
chanctonbury63 5 months ago
This was a test called a "Minimum Velocity Take Off Test"
Drake3209 6 months ago 4
I love how people have the audacity to write "Oh its probably the most safe airplane in the world today"....Yes, it is safe...but seriously guys, its barely been flying for a year or so, and already we've had a blown out engine and a couple of other incidents. Same can be said even of the most deadly aircraft in the past. The DC-10 was a piece of shit that killed thousands, Im pretty sure its track record was ok at the start too ;) Having said that, this is one GOOD bird :)
jlebesis 6 months ago
@jlebesis
It's flying since 2007 with Singapore Airlines and i'm not aware of any serious incident regarding the plane itself, an engine which spills turbine blades isn't exactly the fault of the plane :-)
blablubb12345 6 months ago 2
A big plane with such a small dick.....shame...
sarhad421 6 months ago 4
@sarhad421 ????????????
fsxmaniac12 6 months ago
Bet the guys and gals at runway maintenance were chuffed w that...
chanctonbury63 6 months ago
They did this on purpose. This is a minimum velocity takeoff test.
TheAll4juan 7 months ago
@TheAll4juan i think this was to gauge the maximum angle of attack for take off.. hence the title 'tail strike test'
MGazT 6 months ago
great piloting to keep the tail just above the ground like that!!
willwoodhouse 7 months ago
fat ass
petemossinc 8 months ago
tail number should have been J-WW0W ;)
georgya3xx 8 months ago
@georgya3xx why?
Magicpianoteacher 8 months ago in playlist ░░▒▓ Airbus A380 ▓▒░
its not till you see one of these parked next to a 747 that you realise how big they are!!
NickSayle 9 months ago
The A380 is the most ungainly looking aircraft. Big, fat duck.
JET997u 9 months ago
@JET997u and also a marvel of engineering. a big fat lumbering chunk of metal, plastic, glass and rubber which cruises at 10000m at breakneck speeds.
AwesomeFab 8 months ago
This was actually the first of a few MTO (Minimum Tak Off) speed tests conducted by the A380. We talk about tail strike but the one in the video was not an actuall tail strike as such. It was a Titanium block fitted under the tail cone to stop it from hitting the ground. Fernando Alonso the chief test pilot did actually pucture a hole in the tail on a later MTO test.
tomcatter11 9 months ago 6
is it the first flight or testing it?
markallayban 9 months ago
Dragging one of the ariels on the ground for so long? Groovy!
MrAemandy 10 months ago
look at the tail ID: F-WWOW hahahaha look at that giant life getting off the ground with such as and sort of grace!
ghettoperson257 11 months ago
That is a half speed take of i isnt dangerous if u see it is a thiong on the bakc
Didrik0888 11 months ago
COMO SE FABRICAN Y DE QUE ESTAN HECHOS ESOS MATERIALES DEL TAIL SKID?? ES DECIR.. LA TEMPERATURA QUE DEBE ALCASZAR ESA ABRASION MAS LA PRESION Y QUE NO SE HAGA MAS QUE DESGASTAR.. ES INCREIBLE!!
boeingismyfriend 11 months ago
Check the wings, moving like a bird. He was made to fly, no doubt.
Aalvafaust 1 year ago
and americans can now say that we wloud be nothing without them (they forgot that they wloud be apsolutley nothing without us)
patko1610 1 year ago
@patko1610 the american gouvernement steald a huge number of german-brains during and after the world.war2 from germany,162 sciences-ppl to be exactly,they used them to developpe the aviation,the space programe,and the rocket-programe,NASA was buil by german-brains from the world war2, the whole world know that,even the american know that!! so tkx to the german
lauriersroses333 11 months ago
what happen to airbus now? from the making of it, it was designed to carry up to 800 passengers. why when i read the news regarding quantas a380 midair engine blast incident it says a380 can carry a maximum of 522 pass. why? dit they reconfigure the plane? or does it fell to the safety stadard and so they need to make it ligther? anybody answer me.
vernie4163 1 year ago
@vernie4163
No, it still has a maximum capacity of 853 pass. in a 1-class config (all economy) but most airlines operate their A380 in a 3-class config (economy, business, first class).
blablubb12345 1 year ago
@blablubb12345 thank you blablubb. did u work with such a plane?
vernie4163 1 year ago
@blablubb12345 desinged for 853 but theres only one airlne that did tat
patko1610 1 year ago
They should have these skid plates standard yet retractable on most large aircraft.
pelagic6 1 year ago
@StratMatt777 - sorry mate. My point was that either plane isn't better than any other. I made the point using the same silly logic as the original poster. I would fly either Boeing or Airbus and feel completly safe on either.
mattwebb02 1 year ago
is that the purpose of the metal under the plane?????
crevesencio 1 year ago
@shakey3000 Thats to prevent the tail from being damaged. A damaged tail can get a problem in the plane futher lifetime.
@blondemax The engines are powerful enough but the pilots are taking the plane to its limits to find out what the actual minimal speed required for this plane is before it can take off. Now in it's checklist and specifications the speed where the plane lost contact to the ground is stated as the absolute minimal takoff speed.
Qaatloz 1 year ago
@Qaatloz
Its completely innapropriate; why would you want to do that. clearly the engines should be wooshing much faster or the lifes of all the people on the plane could be put at risk especially if there was a fat-mama at the rear of the plane
blondemax 1 year ago
WOW Super TakeOff) super video
MRussia24 1 year ago
is it safe to ride A380?
metrolecs 1 year ago 22
@metrolecs Absolutly not as this video clearly shows the engines are not not powerful enough
blondemax 1 year ago
@blondemax A380 engines have MORE than enough power and thrust to get a fully loaded plane with fuel, passengers and cargo fully airborne. This takeoff was likely at about 60% throttle if not a bit less.
BCFSXCYYJ2010 1 year ago
@blondemax
This was a minimum velocity takeoff test where you try to get airborne with as low speed as possible. Yust look at other takeoffs from A380, it really has enough thrust.
blablubb12345 1 year ago
@blondemax lol read the description of the video first, buddy.
hagios9 1 year ago
Comment removed
mattwebb02 1 year ago
@mattwebb02 Who is flying unsafe 747s? Are you talking about a certain unsafe carrier or claiming that the 747 is less safe than the A380?
StratMatt777 1 year ago
@metrolecs this "tailstrike" actually was an official test for tailstriking with an A380. there is a TV-documentary available "building the A380" where u can see that the engineers added a yellow plate under the tale so they can test this "ultra-fast-takeoff" when a trailstrike could happen
mbensen 11 months ago
@metrolecs yes
fs10inator 9 months ago
@metrolecs no
jakefortwice 8 months ago in playlist ░░▒▓ Airbus A380 ▓▒░
@metrolecs Probably safer than any other commercial jet in production today.
EMT308 8 months ago
@metrolecs absolutely
Magicpianoteacher 8 months ago in playlist ░░▒▓ Airbus A380 ▓▒░
@metrolecs Yes id say its one of the safest
DingusHead4554 6 months ago
@metrolecs not really
polzowatel 6 months ago
@metrolecs of course it is this is just a test
JakubRacek1 5 months ago
@metrolecs Yes, Definitely.
Jiarten 4 months ago
Whoa that was awesome.
Is the VMU testing done with a full load ?
KurtWagnr 1 year ago
On the rear of the a380 there is a pipe just below the tail. Does anyone know what this is.
shakey30000 1 year ago
@shakey30000 it is part of the test, they don't actually strike the tail.
RainbowManification 1 year ago 40
Comment removed
frouwoulou 9 months ago
@RainbowManification it did on the test here: watch?v=F88oRypxreM&feature=related
ewmegoolies 4 months ago
@ewmegoolies That was part of the minimum velocity take off test.
RainbowManification 4 months ago
The Test pilots are trying to find VMU, the minimum unstick speed, which is a requirement for certification.
VMU is the lowest speed at which an aircraft can be forced can be forced into the air at MTOM and this is what gives us this spectacular video!
whoboys 1 year ago
actually that was not a tail strike. The intake vent hatch for the generator was left open instead of being closed as it should have been done after the engines was started. May have been due to the pilot not closing it.
Manongjojo 1 year ago
@Manongjojo no its part of the test.
RainbowManification 1 year ago
P O S
agviator 1 year ago
me gusta
pipe1174 1 year ago
is that stick thing at 0:33 to stop damage to the tail it looks pretty strong
roryj123ok 1 year ago
wow
marcbenjamsojayco 1 year ago
was the pitch up too early or its just a test flight?
rayyancooldude98 1 year ago 2
@rayyancooldude98 it was a test - minimum take off velocity test
RISINGTENSION 1 year ago
@RISINGTENSION something is coming out of the tail (see 0:17 )i reckon its for test..
rayyancooldude98 1 year ago
@rayyancooldude98 yes, it is to protect the tail, otherwise millions of dollars would be waisted
RISINGTENSION 1 year ago
The Aircraft is like; "OW OW OW OW THAT HURTS!!!"
snowcelica 1 year ago 2
ZZ Top "Master of Sparks" comes to mind
cesky69 1 year ago
why did they put a bar on the bottom instead of direct impact onto the plane?
scvs2 1 year ago
@scvs2 to stop damage
JackDooner 1 year ago
@JackDooner umm i thought they wanted to test it for real?
scvs2 1 year ago
@scvs2 think they just wanted to see how the aircraft would react during take off if a tail strike occurred.
JackDooner 1 year ago
The tail of all planes is where the main pressure bulkhead is located. If you damage any part of the tail it could weaken the bulkhead and lead to a catastrophic failure in flight. To me it looks like that bar is part of the design to be used in the situation of a minimum velocity takeoff .
DornanKD 1 year ago
That "bar" or tailskid is only present on the test versions of the aircraft. On all other A380s, if a tailstrike was to occur the plane would undergo inspection to make sure the bulkhead was not damaged as you said.
Twinman2 1 year ago
@Twinman2 Ya that makes sense. Thanks.
DornanKD 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
American made aircrafts isnt safe. Only thing Americans care is money, not safety. 70% of all aircraft accidents are caused of American made planes. European planes are more safe, but they are more expensive and less popular in aircraft companies. Finn air buys these expensive planes and it can be seen on aircraft accident countings. Finn Air have never been on accident which have killed people.
fachy1981 2 years ago
Ya byt it is still rustd 80s,90s,70s, and 60s concept LOL WHEEL COLLAPSING, ENGINE FALLING OFF LOL. GO AND SEE THE A380 OF AIR FRANCE, AND THE PASSENGER BOARDING IN ON YOUTUBE, 747 LOOKS LIKE BLOODY JUNK IN FRONT OF I. IT IS LIKE COMPARING QUEEN ELIZBETH PALACE TO A SLUM IN NEW ORLEANS LOL
fachy1981 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
737 to every Boeing fan is an aircraft that needs to go in an museum as an antique. 737 is an dangerous plane to travel . If you love your life go and sit in some other aircraft. This is now nothing but rusted antique of 70s. Recently in Jamaica a rusted 737-800 of the 70s and 80s crashed. LOL the engine fell off, and the wheel colapsed LOL.Check it out American airlines DEC 22, 2009
fachy1981 2 years ago
A350 will fucking rule the skies. Airbus is so much safer. Your rusted 737 took more life then all our Airbus crafts by 3 times combined. So again, King of the skies A380. Accept it. And please you Amerians are know for having a great jealousy. Stop getting jealous if you can't afford to buy a ticket of this A380 Go in that rusted 737,747,767, or 777 aging aircrafts of the 60s and 70s LOL
fachy1981 2 years ago
the 777 was introduced in 1995 dumb bimbo head.
goshem 2 years ago
I hope the tail doesn't fall off like it did on AA and AF.
adbirds 2 years ago
as impressive as this plane looks, honestly, I'm going to let it fly for awhile before I ride one, just 2 be sure they work out any bugs in the system. Also, while I'm far far far from paranoid, does anyone look at this and think 'hmmm that looks like an awfully big and tempting bulls eye for a surface-to-air missle'?
forestskog 2 years ago
you seriously airbus hasn't thought of that? I bet a390 is equipped with countermeasure flares and probably some missiles hidden in those wings =]
Quy4life 2 years ago
Lets hope so, but me having worked in war zones I was always more amazed by how governments DON'T prepare for certain things....
forestskog 2 years ago
Beautiful, British are number one.
fachy1981 2 years ago
You know that 95% of this plane isn't British. And don't tell me about the RR engines, the RR aircraft division is controlled by middle eastern investors..
8stewiegriffin 2 years ago
This is a British aircraft, and also French. The engines are designed by the British engineers. And RR are the number one engines of the world, and GE and 747 is no where near this aircraft. There can never be a relationship between birds flying in the air, and fish swimming in the water.
fachy1981 2 years ago
Man this is a British aircraft. British are number one. They make the world's number one car Rolls Royce Phantom which one in a million can afford. They made this beautiful A380. They even ruled the entire world from West to Asia. They are smart and intellegent people. Acceot it this is the reality. They wil always be unbeaten in technology.
fachy1981 2 years ago
rolls royce phantom is a german car. it has a bmw v12 under the bonnet
iPIITB 2 years ago
You are totally wrong, it is a British car. It was founded by Sir Henry Royce. Go and read the history. It is British. Sir is only used in Britain by the British.
fachy1981 2 years ago
the company rolls royce was british, but now its owned by bmw, the phantom is the work of bmw engineers, and last time i checked they were german still
iPIITB 2 years ago
Boeing 787 is British also. It has Rolls Royce Engines. If Phantom has BMW engine and it is German, then Boeing 787 has RR engines it is British then.
fachy1981 2 years ago
correct.
iPIITB 2 years ago
@8stewiegriffin FYI wings are made in wales and landing gear is also british. RR engines are not controled by foregin (spelling fail) investors. maby the branch that produces cars. . .
Jamz98 2 years ago
VMU
nanomiter 2 years ago
that thing must be hot lol
skat0r 2 years ago
Not entirely, it was more the crew's improper handling of being in those icing conditions that allowed the airplane to get to the stall condition. I've been flying ATRs for 4 years and am 'in the know'.
BA31Driver 2 years ago
First of all concord had only one crash , and it was because of a piece of equipment a boeing of an american company lost while take off just before the concord took off......Hello....
mrbrookz08
bogus0499 2 years ago
The part the Concord hit was off of a DC-10, NOT a Boeing.
MrExspert 2 years ago
i love those engines sound!! are those trent 900's??
19rsa 2 years ago
I agree. Triple 7's are the best plane around.I've flown on them a lot and find them the most relaxing planes. The A380 looks like it shouldn't be up in the air. But before anybody comments, I do understand how it stays up in the air.
Plus most pilots prefer to fly Boeing's, they prefer the cockpit and controls, so they say.
WalterWabbit 2 years ago
Sorry, but it's not true, that most pilots prefer to fly Boeings...The Cockpit of Boeing aircrafts are at least 5 years behind airbus' cockpits. Thus pilots prefer airbusses. They don't have to work as "hard" as in a Boeing cockpit ;)
Toby333999 2 years ago
It is true Toby. Boeing's are a pilots plane. They prefer the layout, the controls, the interface. I can only go by what they tell me.
PorkyPiggles 2 years ago
Airbus's may be the so called more modern but they have far too many restrictions on the flight envelope, as Porky says Boeings are a real mans Pilot aeroplane
rodstarr2001 2 years ago
tell that to the pilot who just recently flew his scarebus into the ocean.
jjjazzycraig 2 years ago
Prefer Boeing! Airbus designs the plane around the concept that the pilot as a nuisance, Boeing designs the airplane around the concept of assisting the pilots when they want it.
MrExspert 2 years ago
Boeing has more crashes than Airbus. Airbus is the best.
fachy1981 2 years ago
@fachy1981 SCAREbus has not been around so long. BOEING TAILS DON'T FALL OFF!
"If it's not Boeing, I'm not going". ;)
adbirds 2 years ago
All Boeing aircrafts are aging aircrafts. Recently a Boeing aircraft crashed in Japan, FedEx. Doughlas Md 11 is an Boeing aircraft. I fell like laughing how the crashed occured. The plane bounce like a Basket-ball, LOL, couldn't get off the ground. Now don't start cyying that Doughlas is not Boeing. It is Boeing. They merged. May god bless the Pilot's soul. I feel sorry for people who lost their packages LOL.
fachy1981 2 years ago
747-8 is nothing but a cheap and boring replacement for the classics 747-400 series in my mind's eye. Boeing did not want to invest in an all new 747 replacement as it was seen as too risky a buisness venture. I appluad Airbus once again for taking the risk and pushing the envelope in terms of innovation and design technologies. I think Airbus have pushed aviation 20 years into the future whereas LOL Boeing is still tinkering with a 1960's rusted, antique 747 design.
fachy1981 2 years ago
it's not wise to make another huge "gamble" rite after the beginning B787
scagliettileopard 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Concorde and Airbus is a joint venture with the United Kingdom, and France. The United States has never put a commercial supersonic aircraft in the air, and to date do not have an aircraft to match the power of Rolls Royce engines or the power of the Rolls Royce Trent engines. Europeans can work together, unlike the Americans.
fachy1981 2 years ago
Viva la Europa
Exagerative 2 years ago 20
Comment removed
Exagerative 2 years ago
A 380 is the greatest plane in the world
1JIb1H 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
airbus sucks!!!
pyromcr 2 years ago
The French know how to build planes...
64alpha2 2 years ago 3
The A380 is manufactured through out 4 countries. France, Germany, Spain and the UK. With Rolls Royce engines. This is not a French plane. I would be worried if it was just French. I would trust the Germans but France isn't famous for it's engineering. Next you will be telling me that the Bugatti is French.
PorkyPiggles 2 years ago
Concorde was half French..
gcowings 2 years ago
Yes, and a fantastic aircraft Concorde is. Ironic that a piece of debris falling off a DC10 (one of the worst passenger planes) caused the end of Concorde. C'est catastophique!
PorkyPiggles 2 years ago 35
Wrong. It was a consequence of the 9/11 attacks - lost customers and confidence in airlines - remember swiss air?
bertyUK 2 years ago
@PorkyPiggles Silly. That reverser strip was being used on other aircraft, they just fell behind on maintenance. The debris was only a spark plug, Concorde's own design flaws, (with no flaps or slats to fly mach 2 it had to go faster for takeoff which put lots of force on the tires which burst often) and the lack of shock absorbency in the fuel tanks, causing the crash, as well as low ridership after 9/11 caused the end of Concorde. It was one hell of a fuel hungry bird too.
ChainChomp2 1 year ago
@PorkyPiggles me and my friend call them Death Carriage 10's :)
abhiginimav 1 year ago
@abhiginimav There's an old joke that goes.. The DC10 isn't all that it's cracked up to be.
PorkyPiggles 1 year ago
@PorkyPiggles lol, thats a good one :D. when they start retiring all the DC10s in the world, its gonna be a sad day. they are gonna fall to pieces :P
abhiginimav 1 year ago
@PorkyPiggles it did not end the concorde, it was to exspensive to operate... they were talking about ending it before the accident...
iAirsoft69 1 year ago
@iAirsoft69 Don't be so pedantic. The Paris Concorde disaster was responsible for finishing off Concorde, regardless of its destiny at the time.
PorkyPiggles 1 year ago
@PorkyPiggles the concorde-disaster in paris was caused by a lost-piece of metal from a boein from AA who toke off befor the concorde! it was nothing wrong with the concorde ! read some books pls, it typical-american, moron as hell :)
lauriersroses333 11 months ago
@lauriersroses333 Moron as hell? I'm not sure what that means, maybe English isn't your first language.
If you bothered to read my posts on this video you may realise that it is you who is the moron. I am not from the USA and the metal debris that caused the Concorde disaster was from a DC-10, that's not a Boeing.
I suggest you wind your neck in. Thanks.
PorkyPiggles 11 months ago
@PorkyPiggles hello porky :) yes english is not my first language,so i do write and slep wrong some times LOL,i said moron to u bcz u said the disater in paris did finish the concorde,and it not true, the disaster was the only one in the whole concorde-history! never been any accident of concorde! ! they stoped it bcz it was toooo expensive,. and my mistake i tought it was a boeing,but actualy its the same shit, boeing bought DC for years agoo and did finish it :) :) have nice day and tkx
lauriersroses333 11 months ago
Concord alsow had a few crashes.
mrbrookz08 2 years ago
I think Saab used or still do, build some part of the tail wings. So there might be more then 4 countrys, doing other "small" parts.
blidderbla 2 years ago
that crash into oceans
sniperkillzzzzzzzzzz 2 years ago
um hello you stupid fruitcakes!!! didn't you see the red thing. that's to prevent tail strike!!! (sorry i got a bit carried away there when i said fruitcakes lol)
rossesc 2 years ago 2
Judging by that, if the strike arm wasn't there to protect the fuselage, wouldn't it have scraped the runway? What does it need to do to pass the test?
PorkyPiggles 2 years ago
Its needs to take off, as far as i know this is a minimum takeoff velocity test, where the minimum takeoff speed is recorded.
Gargantis2 2 years ago
I see. So I suppose the point where the block just touches would be the recommended minimum take off speed.
They probably have a pretty good idea already thanks to computer models.
PorkyPiggles 2 years ago
But still, computer model only provide theory not practical information.
Danielyeoh5885 2 years ago
No, the point where the skid touches ground is not the minimum take-off speed. It is the point where maximum rotation (i.e. highest angle of attack) has occurred. The aircraft continues to gather speed while the "fireworks" continue. The minimum take-off speed (or Velocity Minimum Unstick) is the point when all the wheels lift off the ground (i.e. the plane unsticks).
Twinman2 2 years ago
that is one big old hokin plane!
ndfootballch 2 years ago
wow i love this plane
imoteph9 2 years ago
great 5*
MyEmpire91 3 years ago
danken MyEmpire91
sussitube 3 years ago
Does it not damages the runway?
Exposianature 3 years ago
for asphalt runways maybe for concrete dont think so...
aznturtle1 3 years ago