Airbus A380 Superjumbo To Make Stop In Bangkok

[kayo]

Landing on December 5th, someone at Airbus has done their research.

They could always leave it at the airport as a Birthday present to H.M.

May help Thai Airways reconsider their reconsideration.

December 5th is a holiday in Thailand, just imagine all the Thais who will be heading to Suvarnabhumi to take a look at the "Super Jumbo". If you are flying from Suvarnabhumi on the 5th I suggest you give yourself plenty of time, the traffic may well be horrendous.

Is not Dec 5 also the Kings Birthday?

Thanks,

Randy

Me too. Though the chicken little brigade will always take a sliver of info, blow it all out of porportion and say that it's a flying deathtrap. These are the same panic-stricken people who get killed off in disaster movies. If I don't have to share an aircraft cabin with them, all the better.

What disaster movie are you gonna be in Vic?

I'll join you in the downstairs bar! First plane that makes me look forward to flying in 20 years.

Edited December 1, 2006 by kayo

[Johpa]

I still can't figure out how Airbus got their knickers in a twist over the wiring?

Or their wiring in a twist over their knickers?

Europeans have always tended towards being a bit kinky.

[Johpa]

I can read the headlines now: Worlds Largest Plane breaks new airport's cracked runways, Thai(s) forced to reopen Don Muang.

Ah-ha the technically challenged !

It will be landing light as it will not be carrying any great loads.

I don't know the LCN(Load classification number) but looking at the undercarriage

I doubt whether there will be any problems.

The A380 flies very well. It has just done some crosswind trials in Iceland.

It dealt with a 43 knot! crosswind without any trouble.

I still can't figure out how Airbus got their knickers in a twist over the wiring?

Or their wiring in a twist over their knickers?

Did you ever own a Peugeot 405, or Citroen ZX with the full electric pack? If so, you have answered your own question...

Thanks for the memories. I owned a Peugeot 504 and it was the most comfortable car to drive when it was not in the single shop in the city that would even bother to work on the ever troublesome wiring. I even remember walking into a respected shop closer to home only to be greeted by a sign "We do not work on Peugeots."

[Head Snake]

-->

QUOTE(Basil B @ 2006-12-01 21:01:50) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How many of you actually believe that "wiring" is the reason for the delay?

I watched a Discovery Channel episode on the flutter test. I was beside myself when they showed that the composite body almost came apart during the test. The body actually did come loose from some of its fasteners and moved.

I was originally excited to fly on the A380 Now, well I just think its a Scarebus. I can do without getting on one of those for the first few years of operation.

Wiring. yeah, right!!!! It takes you 2 years to get the wiring right? OK!!!

Have you actually seen French wiring???

Yes I saw that documentary too, they were testing the aircraft’s maximum window of operation, they were flying in a manor that the plane should never be flown in normal use, a part failed, there was a bang and… the aeroplane did not instantly break up mid air, it landed safely, no one was hurt, they looked at the part that failed, re engineered it, and the plane was flying within a few days.

Personaly I am looking forward to my first flight on a A380.

BB

And CDNvic

[/color] Though the chicken little brigade will always take a sliver of info, blow it all out of porportion and say that it's a flying deathtrap. These are the same panic-stricken people who get killed off in disaster movies. If I don't have to share an aircraft cabin with them, all the better.

I love that I am part of the Chicken Little Brigade. Where do I get my shirt? haha. I can barely control my panic anxieties. I think I just peed myself.

I had looked forward to flying the A380. Its just my chicken enthusiasm was a little bit dashed when a wire problem delays delivery of an aircraft by over 1-1/2 years. I'm telling ya boy, sumpin don't add up.

We all know how to white lie don't we. We all do it. If you can't recognize when somebody is giving you a load of something, you might consider yourself to be in the lemming brigade.

I am sure the boys at Airbus will put out the best wired aircraft in the world.

[Head Snake]

Here is a site for some interesting forum talk on the A380 harness issue.

http://www1.airliners.net/discussions/tech...ad.main/157173/

[leemond]

Q. I would have thought that if living under a flight path was likely to bother you why move their in the first place?.

A. Beacause you are a bell end!

[backflip]

"I have been reading that installation of "electrical harnesses" is delaying production of the A380.

Can someone explain what an electrical harness is?"

From the above example, it's evident that the referred URL contains discussions that do not involve knowledgeable engineers, outspoken insiders, or those clever enough to ask substantive questions.

Speculation, innuendo, and rumor - similar to TV.

[Mid]

Can someone explain what an electrical harness is?"

every thing is wired ,

from your remote controlls at your seat ,

to the captains toys ...............

aparently no two carriers require the same configeration ,

and there is miles of it ............................

[sting01]

I can read the headlines now: Worlds Largest Plane breaks new airport's cracked runways, Thai(s) forced to reopen Don Muang.

Ah-ha the technically challenged !

It will be landing light as it will not be carrying any great loads.

I don't know the LCN(Load classification number) but looking at the undercarriage

I doubt whether there will be any problems.

The A380 flies very well. It has just done some crosswind trials in Iceland.

It dealt with a 43 knot! crosswind without any trouble.

I still can't figure out how Airbus got their knickers in a twist over the wiring?

Or their wiring in a twist over their knickers?

Did you ever own a Peugeot 405, or Citroen ZX with the full electric pack? If so, you have answered your own question...

Thanks for the memories. I owned a Peugeot 504 and it was the most comfortable car to drive when it was not in the single shop in the city that would even bother to work on the ever troublesome wiring. I even remember walking into a respected shop closer to home only to be greeted by a sign "We do not work on Peugeots."

504 and 405 are different technology. The 504 as her little sisters (404,304.204 and with some extend the 104) was vehicules specifically designed for extrem conditions. More specifically 504 for hot weather climate (africa), 104 for cold weather (north east of france where you can find minus 40 celsius (Pontarlier or Valdahon) during the winter), 204 and 304 for urban driving, 404 for an upcountry usage (as the citroen 2 CV, the initial specifications precised a basket full of eggs can be carried on the rear seat while driving upcountry roads). The quality of those vehicules is remarquable because here in Bangkok you can still witness 3 504 that are daily used near Rangsit ( I saw those vehicules everyday, but never had the chances to met the owners). The weakness of the 504 stay in the electrical lines, who used to be somehow very "upcountry", the initial specifications stating than even a garage in Bamako, or in Bouar or in KM5 in Bangui should be able to make it working in less than 2 hours. So it's easy to patch, but very complicate to do a 'state of art' fix. The condition, the goal, was not to deliver a vehicule that the usual 'johnny' will be able to drive (I am amongst the usual 'Johnny') but to deliver vehicules that can always be patched , even if upcountry in africa or asia. that is similar to the very old 4cv, that was designed for Sahara at first (even if they were sold also in europe), or the motor engine M from Berliet. All those vehicules were designed for EXTREM usages, not for normal usages.

405 (and with some extents the 205) are modern vehicules with very different technology, and appart the models designed for rally, they are more usual vehicules as any other european cars. Anyway the electrical wiring (faisceau electrique in good french) is a bit complicate as usually the person working on have to have a specialisation on it. the reason is the same as for the 04 cars, it must be possible for a non tech person to patch quickly the wiring in case of problems and bypass the normal wiring.

[baboon]

How many of you actually believe that "wiring" is the reason for the delay?

I watched a Discovery Channel episode on the flutter test. I was beside myself when they showed that the composite body almost came apart during the test. The body actually did come loose from some of its fasteners and moved.

I was originally excited to fly on the A380 Now, well I just think its a Scarebus. I can do without getting on one of those for the first few years of operation.

Wiring. yeah, right!!!! It takes you 2 years to get the wiring right? OK!!!

This Titanic of a plane is a bigger boondoggle than the Concorde - Boeing's new 787 Dreamliner will take the entire market.

I think you are both worrying about nothing. Airbus produce splendid aircraft and the A380 will be no exeption. However I doubt there will be any on board bars as the airlines are just going to want to cram in more seats.

A thought for the Boeing fans out there. Aibuses have 3 main computers talking to each other, the programming all done by different companies to ensure safety. 2 out of the 3 must agree before a pilots command is carried out. The B777 has only one Hmm.

[Head Snake]

I'm sure the A380 will attract a crowd tomorrow.

I remember when they were testing the shuttle on a 747 and it landed in old Stapleton Airport in Denver.

I can understand the fascination, particularly for kids. Big planes are just fun to watch.

C130's

Those Russian Freighters

B52's

I can watch those for hours.

[bubba]

I don't know about you, but I will be very happy if TG cancel their A380 order. In fact, I will be very happy to never set foot in one. A full 747-400 is bad enough, but imagine as many as 800 passengers passengers boarding the plane, finding overhead space and getting seated. Then it's 800 passengers deplaning, huge queues at immigration and probably the most fun: pushing and crowding around while waiting for literally thousands of bags to hit the baggage carousel. And of course after that, it's the 800 passengers plus hundreds of meeters, greeters, and taxi touts in that wonderful exit area in arrivals at Suvarnabhumi.

But then there is Boeing's 787. Fewer than 300 passengers (some configs with only 220), cabin air from electric compressors with higher humidity (instead of from engine bleed air), cabin pressurisation at 5000 feet (rather than 8000 feet in other aircraft, incuding the A380), a quieter cabin due to advanced insulation and engine ducting design, large (18.5") cabin windows using electrochromic window shading (no window shades), soft "mood lighting" using all LED cabin lighting. It even comes with an Active Gust Elimination System to improve ride quality and smooth out chop.

And there are less than one third as many passengers and bags as the A380!

I am wondering whether Airbus might have a PR backlash after the A380 begins flying and passengers begin moaning about the hordes of people and massive queues. I know already I will avoid any flights using A380 equipment for that simple reason.

[LindsayBKK]

So what time is the big bird arriving?

[bubba]

Oops...forgot this link...a review comparing the A380 to the B787

http://www.smarttravelasia.com/AirbusVsBoeing.htm

[cdnvic]

All this Airbus vs. Boeing stuff is just silliness. It's as if it was a football game or something. Reviewing a 787 compared to an A380 is like reviewing a Fourtuner against a Smart Car.

Where it's more economical to use the 380 or 747, they get used. Where it's more economical to use a 787 or A330, they'll use that.

Airlines will choose depending on route economics and what the best deal is on that particular day and most people will book by price and schedule. Aircraft choice simply doesn't matter to most travellers.

Edited December 4, 2006 by cdnvic

[bubba]

All this Airbus vs. Boeing stuff is just silliness. It's as if it was a football game or something. Reviewing a 787 compared to an A380 is like reviewing a Fourtuner against a Smart Car.

Where it's more economical to use the 380 or 747, they get used. Where it's more economical to use a 787 or A330, they'll use that.

Airlines will choose depending on route economics and what the best deal is on that particular day and most people will book by price and schedule. Aircraft choice simply doesn't matter to most travellers.

OK, I agree that airlines choose the aircraft that makes the most money. But as a passenger, would rather be boarding, deplaning, queuing for immigration, and fighting for baggage and taxis with:

- 800 people, or;

- 250 people?

And let's say TG use A380 equipment for BKK-NRT, and ANA are using B787 equipment (they ordered 50 of them), and both flights are priced equally and they both leave at the same time. (And both are Star Alliance, so don't worry about your miles!).

Which one would you choose?

I don't think I am the only one who considers what sort of aircraft is being used when selecting flights and airlines.

Edited December 4, 2006 by bubba

[cdnvic]

I'd fly ANA over Thai even if they were flying 707s.

[cclub75]

Airbus produce splendid aircraft and the A380 will be no exeption. However I doubt there will be any on board bars as the airlines are just going to want to cram in more seats.

That's the problem. Bars, children room, even gym room are good for the commercial presentations...

B747s economy class are already a nightmare. For that matter, A380 Superjumbo will be a super nightmare.

More seriously, regarding the delay issue. It doubt it's related to technical problems. It's more a production capacity issue. As a good european company, Airbus suffers from high staff cost. Thus, it can't hire enough manpower.

I mean, a production line based in China would build A380s like "pains au chocolat" in a bakery a saturday morning.

[Kan Win]

Anyone know what time it will land tomorrow ?

Yours truly,

Kan Win

[Florin]

Anyone know what time it will land tomorrow ?

Yeah, that and other such ON-TOPIC details would indeed be nice to know as opposed to this "Ooh, I'm not getting on an 800-person plane" or "Somchai is surely gonna forget his wrench in there" foolishness...some people have waaay too much time on their hands.

[logpoacher]

ITV News just said it's "dton bai" which I understand to mean sometime between about 1300h and 1600h. I take absolutely no responsibility for this being wrong! I think I'll aim to get there about 1200h.

Any advice on where to go to see it? I've never been to the new airport before. Would I be better off somewhere nearby or actually in the terminal?

[Mid]

air craft choice matters to me ........ aka seat room ,

just don't have much say in it

[Hermano Lobo]

The Boeing B787 hasn't flown yet. Aircraft manufacturers make lots of claims for their new aicraft.

It will be interesting how the A380 proves itself in service, whenever that happens. Seats will be larger and leg-room extra in economy.

This is all nothing more than speculation.

I flew a three month old Etihad Airbus A340-500 in October.

I don't think I want to fly in any other aircraft, it was that good.

I liked Etihad as well.

[Pomrakuhn]

I don't know about you, but I will be very happy if TG cancel their A380 order. In fact, I will be very happy to never set foot in one. A full 747-400 is bad enough, but imagine as many as 800 passengers passengers boarding the plane, finding overhead space and getting seated. Then it's 800 passengers deplaning, huge queues at immigration and probably the most fun: pushing and crowding around while waiting for literally thousands of bags to hit the baggage carousel. And of course after that, it's the 800 passengers plus hundreds of meeters, greeters, and taxi touts in that wonderful exit area in arrivals at Suvarnabhumi.

But then there is Boeing's 787. Fewer than 300 passengers (some configs with only 220), cabin air from electric compressors with higher humidity (instead of from engine bleed air), cabin pressurisation at 5000 feet (rather than 8000 feet in other aircraft, incuding the A380), a quieter cabin due to advanced insulation and engine ducting design, large (18.5") cabin windows using electrochromic window shading (no window shades), soft "mood lighting" using all LED cabin lighting. It even comes with an Active Gust Elimination System to improve ride quality and smooth out chop.

And there are less than one third as many passengers and bags as the A380!

I am wondering whether Airbus might have a PR backlash after the A380 begins flying and passengers begin moaning about the hordes of people and massive queues. I know already I will avoid any flights using A380 equipment for that simple reason.

Typical no nothing &lt;deleted&gt; !!

Very few Airlines are opting for the 800 seat config this is only for prospective future budget airlines.

Most customers (Thai included) will have a mix of economy, business and economy totalling around

540 passengers.

The 787 is not a competitor in any shape or form except to the A350 !!

Edited December 4, 2006 by Pomrakuhn

[bubba]

I don't know about you, but I will be very happy if TG cancel their A380 order. In fact, I will be very happy to never set foot in one. A full 747-400 is bad enough, but imagine as many as 800 passengers passengers boarding the plane, finding overhead space and getting seated. Then it's 800 passengers deplaning, huge queues at immigration and probably the most fun: pushing and crowding around while waiting for literally thousands of bags to hit the baggage carousel. And of course after that, it's the 800 passengers plus hundreds of meeters, greeters, and taxi touts in that wonderful exit area in arrivals at Suvarnabhumi.

But then there is Boeing's 787. Fewer than 300 passengers (some configs with only 220), cabin air from electric compressors with higher humidity (instead of from engine bleed air), cabin pressurisation at 5000 feet (rather than 8000 feet in other aircraft, incuding the A380), a quieter cabin due to advanced insulation and engine ducting design, large (18.5") cabin windows using electrochromic window shading (no window shades), soft "mood lighting" using all LED cabin lighting. It even comes with an Active Gust Elimination System to improve ride quality and smooth out chop.

And there are less than one third as many passengers and bags as the A380!

I am wondering whether Airbus might have a PR backlash after the A380 begins flying and passengers begin moaning about the hordes of people and massive queues. I know already I will avoid any flights using A380 equipment for that simple reason.

Typical no nothing &lt;deleted&gt; !!

Very few Airlines are opting for the 800 seat config this is only for prospective future budget airlines.

Most customers (Thai included) will have a mix of economy, business and economy totalling around

540 passengers.

The 787 is not a competitor in any shape or form except to the A350 !!

By "no nothing" presumably you mean "know nothing." It is true that the A380 will hold "as many as 800", and it is also true that most airlines will opt for a mixed confirguration of classes with as few as 555 passengers (with a typical three class config). Actually, depending on configuration, the aircraft will hold anywhere from 555 up to 853 people. No matter how you count it, that is a lot of passengers - anywhere from double to more than triple the number of passengers in a B787.

Now if you could kindly point out the "no [sic] nothing &lt;deleted&gt;" contained in the post above, I shall stand corrected.

[Pomrakuhn]

I don't know about you, but I will be very happy if TG cancel their A380 order. In fact, I will be very happy to never set foot in one. A full 747-400 is bad enough, but imagine as many as 800 passengers passengers boarding the plane, finding overhead space and getting seated. Then it's 800 passengers deplaning, huge queues at immigration and probably the most fun: pushing and crowding around while waiting for literally thousands of bags to hit the baggage carousel. And of course after that, it's the 800 passengers plus hundreds of meeters, greeters, and taxi touts in that wonderful exit area in arrivals at Suvarnabhumi.

But then there is Boeing's 787. Fewer than 300 passengers (some configs with only 220), cabin air from electric compressors with higher humidity (instead of from engine bleed air), cabin pressurisation at 5000 feet (rather than 8000 feet in other aircraft, incuding the A380), a quieter cabin due to advanced insulation and engine ducting design, large (18.5") cabin windows using electrochromic window shading (no window shades), soft "mood lighting" using all LED cabin lighting. It even comes with an Active Gust Elimination System to improve ride quality and smooth out chop.

And there are less than one third as many passengers and bags as the A380!

I am wondering whether Airbus might have a PR backlash after the A380 begins flying and passengers begin moaning about the hordes of people and massive queues. I know already I will avoid any flights using A380 equipment for that simple reason.

Typical no nothing &lt;deleted&gt; !!

Very few Airlines are opting for the 800 seat config this is only for prospective future budget airlines.

Most customers (Thai included) will have a mix of economy, business and economy totalling around

540 passengers.

The 787 is not a competitor in any shape or form except to the A350 !!

By "no nothing" presumably you mean "know nothing." It is true that the A380 will hold "as many as 800", and it is also true that most airlines will opt for a mixed confirguration of classes with as few as 555 passengers (with a typical three class config). Actually, depending on configuration, the aircraft will hold anywhere from 555 up to 853 people. No matter how you count it, that is a lot of passengers - anywhere from double to more than triple the number of passengers in a B787.

Now if you could kindly point out the "no [sic] nothing &lt;deleted&gt;" contained in the post above, I shall stand corrected.

It is uncharacteristic of me to write No nothing when I meant Know nothing and I would have responded in the same way as you have. But the negativity you were and still are invoking about the 800 passengers is biased and irritating. I know of only one airline who is considering a full economy seating configuration and it is highly unlikey that you or I will be travelling on it.

[Head Snake]

You bunch of no nothing shites. I love it

I just thought this might be Thai related because with each new airplane (either Airbus or Boeing) , we can expect perhaps some added comfort/ better seating arrangements hopefully.

Singapore Airlines started a new service today with new B777 planes.

http://www.singaporeair.com/saa/en_UK/cont...class/index.jsp

Check out even the economy seats. Those have better amenities now too.

I hope to try out the Singapore-Hong Kong flight with this new aircraft configuration.

How is this post Thai related? Will Thai International follow suit? My bet is not because it seemed like they were chasing profit since an announcement a few years back about not making profit.

How is this post A380 related? It appears the Singapore Airlines "First to Fly A380" was to have these amenities featured; but, now its advertised on the new B777s arrival to Singapore starting today.

[Axel]

AFAIK, Suvarnabhumi Airport got five gates prepared for the A380. Boarding for sure will go by compartments through rear and front dorrs and hopefully upper doors as well.

Immigration? What impact will the landig of a 380 have compared to the other five 747 arriving about at the same time?

Suvarnabhumi waiting area for people picking up passengers is a bit small. Let's hop that by the time the A380 is operational the train from the airport will be so as well and people pick up their beloved at downtown railway station, like done in Hong Kong.

[george]

It has landed at Suvarnabhumi:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=95664

[Head Snake]

The over 800 passenger version will be the ultimate in cattlecar transportation.

MOOO!!

MOOO!!!!