i can see a HUGE design flaw in the Airbus A380 when they land um=nless they grease it and EVEN IF they grease it usually it BOUNCES AND BOUNCES many times which will make for a very uncomforatable landing for all :/
@thefsxandREALpilot ummm they do not grease it for every flight . commercially they dont because the landing gear works well and it has no flaws they fixed all the flaws in the PRODUCTION of the plane . why would a company send planes with flaws? please get ur facts right b4 u post comments
Tamil tiger terrorist (L.T.T.E) affiliated orgnisation is planing to buy 2NO A380 S and run a air line call EELAM AIRLINE.
these terrororist are known to hire their quipment and expertist,logistics to other terrorist groups arround the world.
If they suceed in buying A30 with their ransom money collected from Tamil people living in Europe,Uk,US,Canada it will be very bad for the security of the Western world.
The A380 is ugly i mean: Who the hell made a bed in a Airplane..... It can be the biggest airlines bbut not the nicest!! i rather choose the 747-400!!
The more I see this plane the more I like it. At first I thought it just looked too big but now I've gotten used to seeing it flying, it looks just right. Now it's the 747 that looks weird and unbalanced with its half double deck.
This plane has really nice clean lines. A future design classic! (imho ; )
the answer is because if the engines being so powerfull it would damage something or the aircraft itself if they deploy all four engines on reverse thrust the inner engines is sufficient to make the aircraft stop because of their amazing power..
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
here some awesome info: a380's is so similar to the Mcdonnel Douglas MD-12 concept look it up they look almost exactly the same , some times i wonder if airbus took the idea lol and the MD-12 was suppose to launch in 1997 but got cancelled. and MD-11 was a double Decker like the a380 also...hmm ?
Don't believe me?? well look it up on Google or etc
i don't know where you got your awesome wisdom... the MD-11 NEVER was a double-decker. The concept of the MD-12 was developed 1990. The A380 was first "thought" in 1988. Incredible what people write here. Really.
@Techno04335 yes, but it was a concept, the 747 has a wierd retarded, but cool half double decker design, is it no suprise that someone did a actual double decker plane?
@cpsuperbrain You are very correct. But I have always wondered why McDonnellDouglas didn't try to complete the project. It would have tremendously change competition today i believe.
because the wings are very wide on the aircraft, the outer engines woud suck up and spit out a lot of dirt if deployed on landing, they could pick up things from the edge of the runway not viisible to the flight crew, hope that answers your question.
la respuesta es porque al ser motores tan potentes, si las 4 turbinas ejercieran el empuje inverso la fatiga estructural del avion seria aun mayor sin contar el choque tan brusco de fuerzas que seria para los pasajeros y las cargas. Los ingenieros decidieron así, pues la gran superficie de las alas servirian de freno contando tambien el enorme peso del aparato. Espero que te haya solucionado la duda :D
Only the inboard engines have thrust reversers. Airbus engineered more than ample braking power to stop the plane completely without the help of TR (read about Brake to Vacate which makes TR sadly obsolete) but the FAA did not agree. Also, it's a question of weight and the increased risk of # 1 and 4 picking up debris because they overhang the runway.
So they are testing this at toulouse? (Sorry I didn't spell that correctly.) But why did they bother to paint the vertical stabilizer and not the whole plane?
Ce n'est pas la peinture définitive de la compagnie, ceux sont des peintures de protection, à la sortie de l'assemblage final et pour le flight test !
i love the A380, but i'm a boeing guy and i'm not sure how boeing can beat this. they will probobly start going for speed and make a safer concord or sumthin
All I know is that I've been on 747's at least 100 times and when it's comes time to disembark I look around after a 12 hour flight and wish everyone would just remain in there seats until I get off the plane, well, that never happens and I can only imagine what it's like getting off of a A380, let alone if there was an emergency.
To me, it isn't even about beoing/airbus thing. This just looks super huge. If I am a pilot, I wouldn't want to fly something so big. It'd probably feel like flying a building. A340s are the best in my humble opinion.
1st, What is any plane going to do in an emergency? What's better about sitting in an 100 tonnes piece of crashing metal rather than a 500 tonnes?
The a380 isn't more likely to crash due to its size. Rather the opposite. The 21st century state of the art design sets new standards for flight safety. The size makes it subject to the most experienced pilots and the most thorough maintenance.
2nd, Claiming that the 747 is better is purely an emotional statement.
I just that so many - what I would call - fallacious worries is attached to the A380. E.g: "Twice as many people die if it crashes", but only the half the number of flights is needed for transporting the same number of people which evens out the probability of dying in a plane crash. Moreover the reduction of air traffic that the A380 provides takes pressure of the airports where by far most accidents happen.
ure wrong about fewer flights...since it is so big, only certain airports can handle it, meaning most people that fly on one have to get on another flight at the big airport to get where they were going. That plane does not reduce pressure on airports at all b/c of its size, its a burden and big waste, the new 747-8 holds more passengers than the a380
First: OK, I'm no expert in this field. But I don't think most people choose destination based on the aircraft. If some secondary airports already serve a few long distance non-stop flights with mid-sized aircrafts I think they will continue doing that regardless of the A380. The reason why we have flights with transfer is because the large hubs serve more destinations. It is at those big international airports the A380 reduces the # of takeoffs pr. passenger
Second: What do you mean by "Burden"? Surely it poses a burden to the transit halls that needs to be rebuild to be able to absorbe the many passengers. But we are discussing flight safety here. And as far as I know, nothing suggests that the A380's physical dimensions pose any increased danger in the critical moments of landing and takeoff. It even burdens the runways less than some smaller planes because its many wheels apply less force pr. square inch.
Third: How does the fact that the new 747-8 can take more passengers than the A380 support your argument? It's not even true. In 3-class configuration the 747-8 takes 467 passenger, the A380 takes 525. In 1-class configuration the A380 takes 853. I couldn't find data about a 1-class configuration for 747-8. Bear in mind that the 747-8 is a stretch of a smaller body foundation with a wing area of 5,500 sq.ft. (...)
(...) The A380 has a 9,100 sq.ft. wing area. Airbus plans to extend the A380 when the production reaches 40 pr. year. I doubt that the 747 body can be extended much further than it already is.
By burden i mean massive sucker on the ramp, all the international airports that can house it had to build and make room for the plane, they could already handle the passengers....by safety, airbus has a bad habit of overdoing the safety crap, I would never get on an airbus because of it, its pretty sad when a bunch of Phd aerospace engineers wouldnt either
Junk!!!!! TIme will tell with the airbus. Cold weather..hot weather. corrosion and moisture. All of this has an effect upon the wiring system over time. No thanks. Boeing, Lockheed or Mcdonnel D for me. Bring back the L-1011. Long live the tri-star. the best passenger jet ever!
If im ever at the airport and this thing pulls up to the gate and i have to ride on it...i'll pass. ...and wait for a boeing or a lockheed to pull up. that monster ...with fly by wire..no thanks.
Fly by wire should only be used when needed. And that need is only for fighters which can not fly without it, f-16 for example. No need for FBW on heavies. Old cable control to hydraulics has been proven to work just fine. Also there is more redundancy with cable/hydraulics. The pilot is physically connected to the flght controls at all times. Unlike sending a signal to hydraulic actuator. failure of computer system override led to crash at air show of a 300 or 320 at airshow. no thanks
Sorry, but thats absolute rubbish. the FBW system was designed with giving fail safe control to aircraft of all sizes, from GA to something as large as the A380. quote- "Old cable control to hydraulics has been proven to work just fine", do some research on the souix city crash, the DHL A310 incident near baghdad, JAL 123 (the 3rd worst aviation accident in history) and you'll find that all of these were caused by loss of control because of a crippling of the hydraulic system.
And that incident you refer to with the A320 was caused by the pilot not clearing a wooded area in time, absolutely nothing to do with FBW systems. please look up the incidents I stated above before saying such crap.
The a380 is currently the most advanced and performant jetliner in service. Saying the contrary means that you're a blind frustrated boeingfan unable to see what's actually true. I'm french, do I have to criticize all the videos made about boeing planes ? No I don't and I will not ! You're all free to choose your favorite aircraft, but like it or not, the a380 rocks no matter what it looks like. As a famous french author said : "loving is not comparing".
Airbus, in their infinite wisdom, didnt want to put reversers on it at all. It would absolutely be safer with reversers on all 4 engines but it only has them on the inboards because the FAA forced them to. Its purely a costcutting measure.
That is a beast. Reminds me of USAF cargo. Scary watching it go down the runway because stopping that beast would be very hard if something became amiss.
We flew the upper rear economy section, which itself was very spacious with plenty of room to move around, the rear galley is huge allowing folks to mill around, chat and drink etc. Below the windows are very large storage compartments, useful for books, pillows laptop etc. Once you've been on one it makes 777's 747's like getting herded into an old bus!
xxquiker is talking shit. lol. the reason is that the 2 other engines are to close to the field. (the runway is not wide enough). thats the reason ;-)
The A380 is less polluting than an average family car with only the driver inside. It is the most fuel efficient aircraft in service. It makes me laugh when people go on about pollution with the A380. It's quieter than a 747, much more fuel efficient and carries double the passengers of a 747. Obviously this means every 747 in the world can be replaced with half the number of A380s and still carry the same number of passengers!! So it's more like a Mini than a Hummer SUV. Go A380 (",)
Looks like 22 wheels? Who signed off on building this beast in the age of high fuel prices and 100 seat regional jetliners in the market? The oriental and arab airlines will be able to afford them mostly for showing off. I can only see maybe practical use of this aircraft in an American company fleet like FedEx and that's about it.
Sounds like you're afraid a European a/c is better than a Boeing. A380 uses less fuel than a 747-400 and can carry more passengers which means it's more economical simple really.
beautiful landing
ilham007fly 1 month ago in playlist Airbus A380
I also have a great sense of humor naneedj.info
ksusantha 1 year ago
Bumby Landing. But well done ;)
xZany321 1 year ago
Quite fast takeoff
SingaporeAirflyer 1 year ago
The a380 is coming on to be a v.v. good aircraft.
viceroytennis 1 year ago
i can see a HUGE design flaw in the Airbus A380 when they land um=nless they grease it and EVEN IF they grease it usually it BOUNCES AND BOUNCES many times which will make for a very uncomforatable landing for all :/
thefsxandREALpilot 1 year ago
@thefsxandREALpilot ummm they do not grease it for every flight . commercially they dont because the landing gear works well and it has no flaws they fixed all the flaws in the PRODUCTION of the plane . why would a company send planes with flaws? please get ur facts right b4 u post comments
thejack544 1 year ago
The 747 is the queen of the skies and no airbus will take that title from her, punkt slut!
moroccy85 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Tamil tiger terrorist (L.T.T.E) affiliated orgnisation is planing to buy 2NO A380 S and run a air line call EELAM AIRLINE.
these terrororist are known to hire their quipment and expertist,logistics to other terrorist groups arround the world.
If they suceed in buying A30 with their ransom money collected from Tamil people living in Europe,Uk,US,Canada it will be very bad for the security of the Western world.
Gamunubala 1 year ago
A380 is the BEST!
Ryunaufal123 1 year ago 3
The A380 is ugly i mean: Who the hell made a bed in a Airplane..... It can be the biggest airlines bbut not the nicest!! i rather choose the 747-400!!
foreveygames 1 year ago
What a nice plane!!
Zereshk248 1 year ago
Bad landing.
Raahorakhty 1 year ago
Sur quelle piste il a décollé ?
lecastorlapon 1 year ago
The more I see this plane the more I like it. At first I thought it just looked too big but now I've gotten used to seeing it flying, it looks just right. Now it's the 747 that looks weird and unbalanced with its half double deck.
This plane has really nice clean lines. A future design classic! (imho ; )
tobuslieven 1 year ago
what a hard landing of a380
Ahmedhsan 2 years ago
i went on this aiprlane from sydeny to singapore takes a year 2 take off but it is the best airbus to date
JAH9495 2 years ago
the answer is because if the engines being so powerfull it would damage something or the aircraft itself if they deploy all four engines on reverse thrust the inner engines is sufficient to make the aircraft stop because of their amazing power..
liki20 2 years ago
sorry i meant md-12 was a double Decker i never noticed the mistake i made lol
Techno04335 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
here some awesome info: a380's is so similar to the Mcdonnel Douglas MD-12 concept look it up they look almost exactly the same , some times i wonder if airbus took the idea lol and the MD-12 was suppose to launch in 1997 but got cancelled. and MD-11 was a double Decker like the a380 also...hmm ?
Don't believe me?? well look it up on Google or etc
Techno04335 2 years ago
I agree, they totally took the same concept.
ejc45 2 years ago
md11 is not a double decker but md12 is.
hamad1994 2 years ago
meant md -12 whops
Techno04335 2 years ago 2
whopse im sorry i meant md -12
Techno04335 2 years ago 2
i don't know where you got your awesome wisdom... the MD-11 NEVER was a double-decker. The concept of the MD-12 was developed 1990. The A380 was first "thought" in 1988. Incredible what people write here. Really.
imalang99 2 years ago
@Techno04335 yes, but it was a concept, the 747 has a wierd retarded, but cool half double decker design, is it no suprise that someone did a actual double decker plane?
cpsuperbrain 1 year ago
@cpsuperbrain You are very correct. But I have always wondered why McDonnellDouglas didn't try to complete the project. It would have tremendously change competition today i believe.
Techno04335 1 year ago
fking amazing
bmwmatt 2 years ago
Love the curvature of the wings, very pretty..... and yes im a girl so im using the word pretty!
isaiahsaurus 2 years ago 2
im not a big fan of Airbus....but for some reason I think my opinion is going to change......lol very impressive aircraft
blueflame53 2 years ago
why a380 after landing only engine 2 &3 engaged the reverse thrust?? pls someone ans my question...
lokman9800 2 years ago 5
because the wings are very wide on the aircraft, the outer engines woud suck up and spit out a lot of dirt if deployed on landing, they could pick up things from the edge of the runway not viisible to the flight crew, hope that answers your question.
lennylovesit 2 years ago 4
la respuesta es porque al ser motores tan potentes, si las 4 turbinas ejercieran el empuje inverso la fatiga estructural del avion seria aun mayor sin contar el choque tan brusco de fuerzas que seria para los pasajeros y las cargas. Los ingenieros decidieron así, pues la gran superficie de las alas servirian de freno contando tambien el enorme peso del aparato. Espero que te haya solucionado la duda :D
sportman1986 2 years ago 3
Only the inboard engines have thrust reversers. Airbus engineered more than ample braking power to stop the plane completely without the help of TR (read about Brake to Vacate which makes TR sadly obsolete) but the FAA did not agree. Also, it's a question of weight and the increased risk of # 1 and 4 picking up debris because they overhang the runway.
Twinman2 2 years ago
oHH>.. thats a bumpy landing ^_^,,,
astoniz 2 years ago 4
Great plane
GGGunitNextLevel 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dat Plane Has a Ugly Color and a Big ASS HEAD'
BlackChromeJoker 2 years ago
That's the standard "aluminum grade" color for test aircraft...
LordFerrand 2 years ago
Terrible paint scheme, but that thing is massive...Just watching it take off, as if its in slow motion....Wow!
TurboDally 2 years ago
that not the paint scheme, thats the primer
BezemerPeter 2 years ago 8
that's not a paintskin at the beginning...it's an unpainted a380
NSRacerMods 2 years ago
I think it was a hard landing !!
amrzahir 2 years ago
adam basıyor havasını
karayel2009 2 years ago
So they are testing this at toulouse? (Sorry I didn't spell that correctly.) But why did they bother to paint the vertical stabilizer and not the whole plane?
T966ER 2 years ago
That will be another job for Airbus factory over Hamburg. The plane will be painted at Toulouse then sent to Hamburg for furbish the cabin.
Danielyeoh5885 2 years ago
that paint scheme looks like the backend of my food lol
midege029 2 years ago
HATE THE PAINT SCHEME.
chewi4u 2 years ago
Ermm, yeh, they paint it after first click. Dumb Twat
windowspczone 2 years ago
Ermm, yeh, I could care less. Dumb Twat
chewi4u 2 years ago
Hmm you could care less? doubt tha, as you showed your opinion for the paint scheme in the word "hate" =/
windowspczone 2 years ago
Ce n'est pas la peinture définitive de la compagnie, ceux sont des peintures de protection, à la sortie de l'assemblage final et pour le flight test !
0665claude 2 years ago
i love the A380, but i'm a boeing guy and i'm not sure how boeing can beat this. they will probobly start going for speed and make a safer concord or sumthin
crazynonsenceman 2 years ago
i saw a few of Singapore Airlines A380 landing at changi airport,i was at east coast park at that time.
LowQuanWei 2 years ago
It left the ground pretty quick and easy on takeoff, maybe it was barely loaded so there wasn't much weight to make it settle on landing.
gsxr750k2 2 years ago
Indeed. 3 or 4 crew and a little fuel for the short test flight.
jeffreyklm 2 years ago
they had a hard landing look when the gear hit the runways
Elvin1202 2 years ago 3
nice aircraft
AirbornMitch 2 years ago
excellent vid
AirbornMitch 2 years ago
Awesome!
AirbornMitch 2 years ago
great suspension
Woggles333 2 years ago
It may be the biggest, but is not as pretty an airplane as the 747
gunnmetalblue 2 years ago 6
this one on that video maybe not... but a normal A380 is much more pretty than a 747... especially the wings of the A 380...
TheofanisVarnavas 2 years ago
Wow, you're retarded.
agentfazexx 2 years ago
Yeah I like the 747 better
fordsuckbigtime 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am gay
Raffzeee 2 years ago
Congratulations. Welcome to the club. You should receive your welcome pack in a few weeks.
jsj24uk 2 years ago 18
well that was random.
rania3830 2 years ago
landing wasnt the best.
gc1994 2 years ago
We saw it's great suspension though.
Raffzeee 2 years ago 5
true
gc1994 2 years ago 3
yeah, it has a great suspension.
bebebex 2 years ago
Lol, it's half painted and looks sorta like a military plane, lol.
razinblazer 2 years ago
Wow, what a short t/o run....
rafalweb 2 years ago
That's what I thought
martybhoy72 2 years ago
Wow! That was a bouncy landing!
This is my favorite plane! (:
clubpenguinbuzz 2 years ago
You know I'll tell you all something, I've never been on a plane and said to myself " you know I wish there were more passengers on this plane".
rocksinger45 2 years ago
yeah i bet the airlines arent saying that.
italianluvah83 2 years ago
All I know is that I've been on 747's at least 100 times and when it's comes time to disembark I look around after a 12 hour flight and wish everyone would just remain in there seats until I get off the plane, well, that never happens and I can only imagine what it's like getting off of a A380, let alone if there was an emergency.
RS45
rocksinger45 2 years ago
To me, it isn't even about beoing/airbus thing. This just looks super huge. If I am a pilot, I wouldn't want to fly something so big. It'd probably feel like flying a building. A340s are the best in my humble opinion.
kif868 2 years ago
it's been designed to be easy to fly. If you have flown a A340-600 before, this is just as easy to the pilot
windowspczone 2 years ago
Comment removed
goldenismonica 2 years ago
What a load of BS
1st, What is any plane going to do in an emergency? What's better about sitting in an 100 tonnes piece of crashing metal rather than a 500 tonnes?
The a380 isn't more likely to crash due to its size. Rather the opposite. The 21st century state of the art design sets new standards for flight safety. The size makes it subject to the most experienced pilots and the most thorough maintenance.
2nd, Claiming that the 747 is better is purely an emotional statement.
jesperlett 2 years ago 2
wow! thanks for the info...i guess.
goldenismonica 2 years ago
Oh well, your welcome.. I guess.
I just that so many - what I would call - fallacious worries is attached to the A380. E.g: "Twice as many people die if it crashes", but only the half the number of flights is needed for transporting the same number of people which evens out the probability of dying in a plane crash. Moreover the reduction of air traffic that the A380 provides takes pressure of the airports where by far most accidents happen.
jesperlett 2 years ago 2
ure wrong about fewer flights...since it is so big, only certain airports can handle it, meaning most people that fly on one have to get on another flight at the big airport to get where they were going. That plane does not reduce pressure on airports at all b/c of its size, its a burden and big waste, the new 747-8 holds more passengers than the a380
msuviper 2 years ago
First: OK, I'm no expert in this field. But I don't think most people choose destination based on the aircraft. If some secondary airports already serve a few long distance non-stop flights with mid-sized aircrafts I think they will continue doing that regardless of the A380. The reason why we have flights with transfer is because the large hubs serve more destinations. It is at those big international airports the A380 reduces the # of takeoffs pr. passenger
jesperlett 2 years ago
Second: What do you mean by "Burden"? Surely it poses a burden to the transit halls that needs to be rebuild to be able to absorbe the many passengers. But we are discussing flight safety here. And as far as I know, nothing suggests that the A380's physical dimensions pose any increased danger in the critical moments of landing and takeoff. It even burdens the runways less than some smaller planes because its many wheels apply less force pr. square inch.
jesperlett 2 years ago
Third: How does the fact that the new 747-8 can take more passengers than the A380 support your argument? It's not even true. In 3-class configuration the 747-8 takes 467 passenger, the A380 takes 525. In 1-class configuration the A380 takes 853. I couldn't find data about a 1-class configuration for 747-8. Bear in mind that the 747-8 is a stretch of a smaller body foundation with a wing area of 5,500 sq.ft. (...)
jesperlett2 2 years ago
(...) The A380 has a 9,100 sq.ft. wing area. Airbus plans to extend the A380 when the production reaches 40 pr. year. I doubt that the 747 body can be extended much further than it already is.
jesperlett2 2 years ago
By burden i mean massive sucker on the ramp, all the international airports that can house it had to build and make room for the plane, they could already handle the passengers....by safety, airbus has a bad habit of overdoing the safety crap, I would never get on an airbus because of it, its pretty sad when a bunch of Phd aerospace engineers wouldnt either
msuviper 2 years ago
u would be amazed how many people would get on the a380 just for the hell of it and find out they have to get another flight
msuviper 2 years ago
i flew twice on singapore airlines a380. it's a fantastic plane. less noise than b747 and take off/landing is comfortable at best level.
fmulyanto 2 years ago
why wasnt it fully painted?
Nikedude109 2 years ago
Junk!!!!! TIme will tell with the airbus. Cold weather..hot weather. corrosion and moisture. All of this has an effect upon the wiring system over time. No thanks. Boeing, Lockheed or Mcdonnel D for me. Bring back the L-1011. Long live the tri-star. the best passenger jet ever!
uzda4ce 2 years ago
If im ever at the airport and this thing pulls up to the gate and i have to ride on it...i'll pass. ...and wait for a boeing or a lockheed to pull up. that monster ...with fly by wire..no thanks.
uzda4ce 2 years ago
And whys that then? what stupid reason do you have saying such stuff about the Fly-by-wire system?
99draiwil 2 years ago
Fly by wire should only be used when needed. And that need is only for fighters which can not fly without it, f-16 for example. No need for FBW on heavies. Old cable control to hydraulics has been proven to work just fine. Also there is more redundancy with cable/hydraulics. The pilot is physically connected to the flght controls at all times. Unlike sending a signal to hydraulic actuator. failure of computer system override led to crash at air show of a 300 or 320 at airshow. no thanks
uzda4ce 2 years ago
Sorry, but thats absolute rubbish. the FBW system was designed with giving fail safe control to aircraft of all sizes, from GA to something as large as the A380. quote- "Old cable control to hydraulics has been proven to work just fine", do some research on the souix city crash, the DHL A310 incident near baghdad, JAL 123 (the 3rd worst aviation accident in history) and you'll find that all of these were caused by loss of control because of a crippling of the hydraulic system.
99draiwil 2 years ago
And that incident you refer to with the A320 was caused by the pilot not clearing a wooded area in time, absolutely nothing to do with FBW systems. please look up the incidents I stated above before saying such crap.
99draiwil 2 years ago
landing was abit bouncy
nic777morrey 2 years ago
Damm birds 1:15 !!
RonaldrDeleon 2 years ago
it isnt that ugly
liki20 2 years ago
I'm assuming it looks bad because this is before this airliner has even had a full body paintjob.
It's just flyable and they wanted to show off.
;)
demonikreaper 2 years ago
The a380 is currently the most advanced and performant jetliner in service. Saying the contrary means that you're a blind frustrated boeingfan unable to see what's actually true. I'm french, do I have to criticize all the videos made about boeing planes ? No I don't and I will not ! You're all free to choose your favorite aircraft, but like it or not, the a380 rocks no matter what it looks like. As a famous french author said : "loving is not comparing".
mogofou 2 years ago
i still go with the b747-400 and 747-800
Vansers 2 years ago
boy the 747 sure is an ugly beast of a thing
qwe860 2 years ago
"Boeing is the worldleader in making airplanes. No doubt about that buddy. Now go home and play with your airbus toys" wat crap is that, davyace ??
qwe860 2 years ago
one of the greatest mankind's art
Donald3skywalker 2 years ago
Its a brilliant piece of engineering, yes, but its a fat and ugly looking plane. Concorde remains the most beautiful machine ever created.
fightingtemeraire 2 years ago 2
cool
revellsammler1 2 years ago
wicked video..........
burtonboy67 2 years ago
how come A380 use 2 reverse truster..but 747 use 4....
mecute333 3 years ago
maybe an a380 has more powerful engines
kozadongre 3 years ago
I think it's because of the engines risk of hitting the ground with the flex i think
mchlwany 3 years ago
The reverse thruster of the two inner engines and the brakes are enough to stop the A380,So there is no need to use four of these engines
fortesimo 2 years ago
Airbus, in their infinite wisdom, didnt want to put reversers on it at all. It would absolutely be safer with reversers on all 4 engines but it only has them on the inboards because the FAA forced them to. Its purely a costcutting measure.
fightingtemeraire 2 years ago
Nice. Beautiful heavy!
edyken77 3 years ago
That is a beast. Reminds me of USAF cargo. Scary watching it go down the runway because stopping that beast would be very hard if something became amiss.
Abebe345 3 years ago
uhh front wheels bounced when landing
JarvisMunji 3 years ago
Once sitting on a plane i sat next to a guy who made part of the engines.
JohnofBORGatWolf359 3 years ago
its difficult to comprehend on video but those engines are just as wide as a 757......BLOODY HUGE !
dubkat 3 years ago
JohnofBORGatWolf359: Who honestly gives a shit?
Evilhamster1876 3 years ago
Take a chill pill and go sit on a couch and watch steinfeld. You are over reacting I was just giving a casual statement.
JohnofBORGatWolf359 3 years ago
i thought singapore cancelled their order with airbus because of delays when they were being made.
Nikon05 3 years ago
Nah, singapore have at least two - I flew in one and saw another parked at Changi
nickthesafe 3 years ago
hows the a380s interior?
qwrt1r 3 years ago
We flew the upper rear economy section, which itself was very spacious with plenty of room to move around, the rear galley is huge allowing folks to mill around, chat and drink etc. Below the windows are very large storage compartments, useful for books, pillows laptop etc. Once you've been on one it makes 777's 747's like getting herded into an old bus!
nickthesafe 3 years ago
Just checked their inventory - looks like they've got FIVE!.
nickthesafe 3 years ago
wow very hard approche!!! nice!
OLT95 3 years ago
the landing gear was made by my fathers company ;)
dxroxman 3 years ago
tell your dad good job after seeing that landing! hhaha
PilotJamesD 3 years ago 2
your dad owns goodrich?
mynameisjoedavis 3 years ago
24 Seconds to take off!! incredible...
yogods 3 years ago
wow bouncy landing!
elmo11259 3 years ago
lol, the plane was painted like it was meant for the military.
lightsinthedistance 3 years ago
to my knowledge only the no 2 and 3 engines have t/r's (thrust reversers)
cheers
latetalent 3 years ago
could someone please tell me why the plane lands only to engines reverse and the other two dont could someone please tell me thanks
ahocknul04 3 years ago
the reason why the other 2 dont reverse is cause Airbus wanted to reduce the noise.
xxquiker 3 years ago
xxquiker is talking shit. lol. the reason is that the 2 other engines are to close to the field. (the runway is not wide enough). thats the reason ;-)
MyEmpire91 3 years ago
Ugly fuselage paint....
antro1767 3 years ago
Hmmm the fuselage is not painted yet they leave that part until later.
type2mike 3 years ago
ouch... front gear bounces...
iLoveYouDAR 3 years ago
jesus christ! How long does the runway have to be? It definetly cannot land in Phoenix Sky Harbor.
mrgeekishereagain 3 years ago
Idk about length but I heard they had to reinforce the runways at LAX just to operate them
AdmiralShat 3 years ago
Actually it could easily land at PHX even at full MTOW. Runways would need widening but the length is just fine!
VS242424 2 years ago
as a designer of airbus a380 i would just like tell you the runway no need widening
mynameisjoedavis 2 years ago
What specific length would the A380 really need to takeoff and land?
Clubhouse729 2 years ago
it need about same as 747
mynameisjoedavis 2 years ago
even less
adams8pjoy 2 years ago
Zo gaaf! Zo'n enorm toestel de lucht in!
MyrQn 3 years ago
Damn, that things a beast.
Are they in service yet?
aantill 3 years ago 4
yes they are in service, but not too much. Still a lot more to make.
mrgeekishereagain 3 years ago
I hope some US airline companys buy some, but with are economy failing, chances are unlikely.
aantill 3 years ago
Like the new paint job :-) would make it harder for the accident investigators to find the wreckage pmsl
dezzyblade 3 years ago
wtf
how can a high class commander of an a-380
do a bouncy landing like that?
talkyrocko 3 years ago 2
Not many hours of flying time under his belt in the a380, its to new.
guitaristguy20 3 years ago
yeah i know but it´s not like the first time he piloting a plane
i´m sure he was a 747 pilot before or a a340 pilot for him it should be piece of cake pilot a plane a little bigger
beside the fact that the pilot who are changing airplanes had to do ground school especific for the plane he wants to pilot
just a opinion
talkyrocko 3 years ago
ahahah give the guy a break it wasn't that bad
0173873 3 years ago
yeah you´re right
but know i will not hire him up to my company
i need better pilots
=D
hehehe
talkyrocko 3 years ago
That landing was not bad at all...for such a new plane. It was only a tiny hop on the front wheels...
BugattiVeyron123 3 years ago
yeah , i know
i was just joking
actually, that guy must be THE PILOT to be the
one choose to fly that baby
best wishes mate
talkyrocko 3 years ago
That's what I thought at the start but hey it's too new. :O
MajorYT 3 years ago
I'm glad to be among the designers for A380 wing panel.
dukeizam 3 years ago
Finally! The gas-guzzling Hummer suv can now fly while it pollutes.
SAVE THE PLANET
JILampropoulos 3 years ago
The A380 is less polluting than an average family car with only the driver inside. It is the most fuel efficient aircraft in service. It makes me laugh when people go on about pollution with the A380. It's quieter than a 747, much more fuel efficient and carries double the passengers of a 747. Obviously this means every 747 in the world can be replaced with half the number of A380s and still carry the same number of passengers!! So it's more like a Mini than a Hummer SUV. Go A380 (",)
mcpcshowcase 3 years ago 2
it can use other fuels and planes like the A380
and A350 are less polluting
thomsonfly645k 3 years ago
that was a test drive right?
fuzzyfaraz 3 years ago
i think so. they woldnt send it to singapore airlines before it's fully painted.
foucdeg 3 years ago
cool!!!!!
check out my vids too!!!!! :)
FerrariSlam 3 years ago
what a monster
Gamerfreak12345 3 years ago 2
Looks like 22 wheels? Who signed off on building this beast in the age of high fuel prices and 100 seat regional jetliners in the market? The oriental and arab airlines will be able to afford them mostly for showing off. I can only see maybe practical use of this aircraft in an American company fleet like FedEx and that's about it.
mchou2002 3 years ago
compared to 747 the cost per passenger fuel wise would be 20% less
Smelly196 3 years ago
bigger vehicles tend to use less fuel due to the ecomony of scale. This is why trains and buses use less fuel than cars.
Also, oil tankers are by far the most efficient vehicles on earth, transporting a gallon of gas thousands of miles for mere pennies.
Anonymity0 3 years ago
Still uses more overall fuel than a 747-400 going the same distance.
B. 747-8 will have lower cost per passenger than A380
andyplace 3 years ago
Sounds like you're afraid a European a/c is better than a Boeing. A380 uses less fuel than a 747-400 and can carry more passengers which means it's more economical simple really.
whitireia 3 years ago 2
singapores changi international to kingsford smith :D
emosandknives 3 years ago
how was it determined which airline launched the a380
tyspurs 3 years ago
the airline which ordered the A380 first is the launch airline
fortesimo 3 years ago
it looks like a military plane!
Quy4life 3 years ago
the A380 seems quite bouncy i seen a lot of A380 landings and they seem to be bouncy
fortesimo 3 years ago
your mom's bouncy
sidewalkpilot 3 years ago