Talk:Airbus A380: Difference between revisions
TG-article (talk | contribs) →New Image: Reply |
|||
(428 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{British English}} |
|||
{{ArticleHistory |
|||
{{Article history |
|||
|action1=PR |
|action1=PR |
||
|action1date=20:12, 30 May 2006 |
|action1date=20:12, 30 May 2006 |
||
Line 31: | Line 32: | ||
|action5result=listed |
|action5result=listed |
||
|action5oldid=324854516 |
|action5oldid=324854516 |
||
|action6=GAR |
|||
⚫ | |||
|action6link=Talk:Airbus A380/GA2 |
|||
|action6result=kept |
|||
|action6oldid= |
|||
|currentstatus=GA |
|currentstatus=GA |
||
|topic=Engtech |
|topic=Engtech |
||
⚫ | |||
|otd2date=2014-04-27|otd2oldid=605986670 |
|||
|otd3date=2015-04-27|otd3oldid=659255555 |
|||
|otd4date=2017-04-27|otd4oldid=777518549 |
|||
|otd5date=2020-04-27|otd5oldid=953083014 |
|||
|otd6date=2023-04-27|otd6oldid=1152022260 |
|||
|otd7date=2024-04-27|otd7oldid=1187962976 |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1= |
||
{{WikiProject Aviation|old-peer-review=yes |portal-link=Selected Aircraft/1 |Aircraft=yes }} |
|||
{{WikiProject Europe |
{{WikiProject Europe|importance=Mid}} |
||
{{WP1.0|WPCD=yes |category=Engtech |class=GA}} |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{ |
{{To do|small=yes}} |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{todo|small=yes}} |
|||
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age=180 |dounreplied=yes}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |
||
|maxarchivesize = 120K |
|maxarchivesize = 120K |
||
|counter = |
|counter = 7 |
||
|minthreadsleft = |
|minthreadsleft = 8 |
||
|algo = old(180d) |
|algo = old(180d) |
||
|archive = Talk:Airbus A380/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = Talk:Airbus A380/Archive %(counter)d |
||
Line 58: | Line 68: | ||
|leading_zeros=0 |
|leading_zeros=0 |
||
|indexhere=yes}} |
|indexhere=yes}} |
||
{{clear}} |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2022 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Airbus A380|answered=yes}} |
|||
To change Airbus a380 To airbus 380, the A in a380 is airbus. [[User:Planespotter37|Planespotter37]] ([[User talk:Planespotter37|talk]]) 21:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
: No, Airbus includes the A in its model numbers. See A220 and A350 on the [https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/commercial-aircraft/passenger-aircraft Passenger aircraft] page. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 21:36, 11 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Lufthansa's A380 operations == |
|||
{{Edit semi-protected|answered=yes}} |
|||
<!--Don't remove anything above this line.--> |
|||
*The statement regarding Lufthansa in the ''Operators'' section needs clarification and is currently misleading or at least a bit sparse as it can be misinterpreted as the airline bringing all A380s back to service soon which will not happen. |
|||
*Lufthansa already sold 6 of its 14 A380 back to Airbus, of the remaining 8 only 4 will be returned to service in 2023. |
|||
*See e. g. [https://www.aerotelegraph.com/lufthansa-gibt-a380-ab-oktober-zurueck-an-airbus aerotelegraph.com - "Six Superjumbos: Lufthansa returns A380s to Airbus" (in German)] and up to date from this week [https://reisetopia.de/news/lufthansa-rueckkehr-vier-a380/ reisetopia.de - "Lufthansa reactivates overall four A380s" (in German)], further sources and explaination is also found at [[Lufthansa fleet]]. |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/2001:A61:3A94:FC01:B442:1FCB:17EB:8AEC|2001:A61:3A94:FC01:B442:1FCB:17EB:8AEC]] ([[User talk:2001:A61:3A94:FC01:B442:1FCB:17EB:8AEC|talk]]) 08:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Wing fatigue cracks == |
|||
::I changed the phrase to "some of its remaining". [[User:Ruslik0|Ruslik]]_[[User Talk:Ruslik0|<span style="color:red">Zero</span>]] 19:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:By summer 2024 Lufthansa plans to return the remaining four A380 into service, than operating 8 A380 out of Munich [[Special:Contributions/144.64.84.39|144.64.84.39]] ([[User talk:144.64.84.39|talk]]) 09:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC) |
|||
<!--Don't remove anything below this line--> |
|||
What about adding the manufacturing defects in many of the first a380s for singapore airlines and quantis where the wings are getting fatigue cracks? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/108.29.40.201|108.29.40.201]] ([[User talk:108.29.40.201|talk]]) 15:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
{{reftalk}} |
|||
== Outdated elements need revision and tense corrections == |
|||
: This is mentioned in the article now with [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2084242/Airbus-A380-Worlds-biggest-planes-sky-worthy-say-engineers.html this article] as a reference. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 21:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
In several sections, e.g., "Post-production Problems" and "Teardown and second-hand Market", there is historical content inappropriately written in the present tense although several years old, counter to Wikipedia guidelines regarding encyclopaedic style. An example: "Additionally, major airlines are seeking compensation from Airbus for revenue lost as a result of the cracks and subsequent grounding of fleets. Airbus has switched to a different type of aluminium alloy so aircraft delivered from 2014 onwards should not have this problem". Rather than simply correcting the tense, a knowledgeable contributor might also update the content to confirm whether the anticipated solution was successful. Again: "The fifth plane coming back from SIA, owned by Doric, has been leased by Hi Fly Malta with a lease period of "nearly 6 years". Hi Fly Malta became the first operator of second-hand A380 (MSN006). Norwegian Long Haul briefly leased Hi Fly Malta A380 in August 2018..." --[[User:Humboles|Humboles]] ([[User talk:Humboles|talk]]) 10:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Talk:Sukhoi_Superjet_100#Vote_on_flag_removal]] == |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2023 == |
|||
This voting about flags and country info in orders might concern even this article. [[User:Tagremover|Tagremover]] ([[User talk:Tagremover|talk]]) 07:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Airbus A380|answered=yes}} |
|||
change "split scimitar winglets" to "split winglets" under the A380 Plus paragraph. |
|||
The scimitar moniker might be commonly associated with the 737-NG split winglets due to the extended curved tips, but is not an appropriate descriptor for the split winglets for the 737 MAX or the A380 Plus due to the lack of these curved tips. [[User:Timtamothy|Timtamothy]] ([[User talk:Timtamothy|talk]]) 00:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 00:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Reason for only 2 thrust reversers - need better sources == |
|||
: I am quite certain that Lufthansa's buying decision hinges on numerous factors, including but not limited to overall costs to benefit ratio (Please refer to Aircraft Direct/Indirect Operating Costs for more information). Airport sizes may have implications, however this is not their (airline's) responsibility and falls to the airport managers to address the issues. The analysis may be irrelevant to the A380 post. [[Special:Contributions/146.87.52.53|146.87.52.53]] ([[User talk:146.87.52.53|talk]]) 14:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC) Anon. |
|||
:: Also keep in mind that lots of airlines buy both nowadays. Take a look at how many airlines buy both a350's and 787's. And what about American airlines who bought a320neo and b737max (Why not only at one manufacturer, the discount would be higher right?) or Norwegian airlines with their mega order, again split between airbus AND boeing...[[User:Njirk|Njirk]] ([[User talk:Njirk|talk]]) 11:41, 29 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
The ''Engines'' section of this article says, "Sufficient braking capacity allowed for thrust reversers to be installed on only the inboard engines." The two sources provided are useless. The first is a sales brochure from the manufacturer of the brakes (Honeywell), bragging about how great their brakes are. The second source (which I've removed) says nothing about braking, only that Airbus was seeking new bids from contractors to design and manufacture engine nacelles with thrust reversers on the inboard engines and none on the outboards, so it's outdated and does not say anything about the statement. The idea that the brakes are so good that the A380 only needs 2 reversers seems to have come from the brake manufacturer. When I found another source that supported that claim, it gave a link to the Honeywell brochure as its source. |
|||
: Their seating is slightly different. The A380 can seat 525, while the 747-8 seats 467 in typical 3-class configurations. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 13:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
I've found 3 reliable, secondary sources that say the reason for only 2 reversers is to prevent the outboard engines from kicking up debris off the edge of the runway, which could then be ingested into the engines. One of those 3 articles provides much more detail. They point out the massive spooilers, which allow the wheel brakes to be more efficient as well as providing drag of their own, and the massive flaps, which allow the aircraft to land at much slower speeds than other heavy aircraft, about 20 kts slower than the 747, so less braking is needed. (I don't have a source at hand, but bigger flaps also slow aircraft down on the runway, more efficiently at the higher speeds when thrust reversers are also used. I see someone already reverted my edit, so I'll just add in those three sources I found. [[User:Dcs002|Dcs002]] ([[User talk:Dcs002|talk]]) 05:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Wing-clip incident between AF A380 and Comair CRJ700 at JFK == |
|||
:Done. I reverted that revert, which makes me VERY nervous. (I don't want a struggle or bad juju or any of that. If that editor would like to discuss this section and what's best, I'd like that.) I only added one of the 3 sources. The best of the three was already in the article, so I used it a couple times, and the third article I decided to leave out. It was from USA Today, but it was one of those "Ask a Pilot" articles (''appeal to authority''). I thought the other two sources were quite solid, and there was no need to add another source that was a little weaker than what the article already has. I removed the self-serving bit where Honeywell was taking the credit for this decision because of their awesome brakes. They're good brakes, and I left that in the article because it was mentioned in at least one of the sources, but none of the neutral (non-sales) sources I found gave them credit for reducing the number of thrusters in the design from 4 to 2. [[User:Dcs002|Dcs002]] ([[User talk:Dcs002|talk]]) 06:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Although minor incidents are not supposed to be mentioned in the Incident and Accident section of the article I did decide to add it there. Not so much because the incident itself was that large (no fatalities or serious injuries and the structural damage to both planes was relative small as well) but because of the main discussion (mainly in the US and maybe fueled by Boeing) that the A380 is to large to be handled safely, especially on some airports. |
|||
The taxi-ways at JFK are officially to small (narrow) to handle the wingspan of the A380 and JFK can only receive those flights because they have a special exempt-permit to do so. This discussion is imho reason enough to mention this incident as it could have major consequences to the operation of the A380 if they loose their permit to fly to airports where the taxiways aren't equipped to handle them. [[User:Tonkie|Tonkie]] ([[User talk:Tonkie|talk]]) 23:26, 24 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:* Well done and thanks! Don't worry much about multiple citation in places, especially if none of them support all the details in the text. [[User:Fnlayson|-Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 23:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC) |
||
== Add Global Airlines to list of operators? == |
|||
:: [[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] had already removed above mentioned incident as non-notable. As I also mentioned above I do think that the incident IS notable: not for the small collission between these two jets, but the effect it had on the (Boeing led) lobby to keep the A380 away from some of the most important destinations in the USA. On [[User talk:Fnlayson|Fnlayson talk page]] I reacted to his removal and asked to discuss this: either mention something under incidents, or maybe better on another section of the A380 page as it says also something about the fierce competition and fight between Airbus and Boeing and how far the parties will go to make it difficult for the others to do business. So if you have any ideas on that please comment here... Any thoughts are welcome. |
|||
::And to Fnlayson: further study of the history learned me indeed that it was discussed in length - so I do fully understand why you removed it without discussing it again: that was done already. Nevertheless I still do think that the discussion about banning the A380 from some (US) airports should be discussed and there a reference to this incident and the NTSB comments on it should be found. But again: I have no intention to start any edit-war so I would love to reach some concensus with the main contributers to this page how to handle this "controversy" (which is,as said, probably fueled by Boeing). Thanks again, [[User:Tonkie|Tonkie]] ([[User talk:Tonkie|talk]]) 23:45, 24 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::And one last comment on you mentioning that it sounds like a conspiracy: that would be if someone claimed that Boeing had paid Air France to hit the Comair on purpose (or 2 months later repeat the action at Paris airshow): that I don't believe at all - but I do think that Boeing would very much like it when the A380 would be banned from (US) airports with narror runways, such as JFK. [[User:Tonkie|Tonkie]] ([[User talk:Tonkie|talk]]) 23:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::My main problem with this entry is that other planes, the Boeing 747 and Airbus A330, or even just the 737, have been involved in wing-clip incidents - It would be blatent [[WP:Undue weight]] to not list the collision incidents on the other aircraft but only that of the A380. Either they should all get incidents mentioned, or the A380 shouldn't have these incidents mentioned at all, which would be equal treatment. A rather fun statistical appearence is that the CRJ700 has been involved in many times more wing-clip incidents than the A380 - perhaps that should be made a big deal out of! [[User:Kyteto|Kyteto]] ([[User talk:Kyteto|talk]]) 11:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Can global airlines be an operator despite not commencing operations yet? [[Special:Contributions/174.225.75.4|174.225.75.4]] ([[User talk:174.225.75.4|talk]]) 16:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: Regarding the initial post in this section, I would just like to warn against [[Wikipedia:SPECULATION|speculation about possible future events]]. Thanks. --'''[[User talk:U5K0|U5K0'sTalk]]'''<sub>Make [[WP:LOVE|WikiLove]] not [[WP:EDITWAR|WikiWar]]</sub> 16:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:No. You answered it yourself there. They're not operating it right now therefore they cannot be an operator. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 17:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@All - I do agree that wingclippings have happened with other type aircraft (less spanwidth) but the design of -in this example- of the taxiways at JFK didn't take a plane like A380 into consideration and these wingclips can happen even when each plane is in a seperate (parrellel) (taxi) way, while I think that the other winclips probably happened because planes didn't stay on their own path (eg directly around dthe gates and not while craft are passing eachother in different/seperate ways). Although I did see a documentary or newsstory where a (former?) Boeing design engineer and a lawyer of whom was said he was paid by Boeing I can't find this video (not sure in which programma I saw it); the only videos and/or statements I can find only report the incident in itself, which -I agree- on itself is not that notable. So because I can't find proper proof for the "war on size" fueled by or on behalf of Boeing I won't add the above discussed info for now: this until I do find the sources about Boeing (ab)using the event to get the A380 banned or restricted on airports: So not because I think that this info shouoldn't be in the article but because I can't find the proper sources to make this hardly notable event notable. Discussion closed? (for now)?? [[User:Tonkie|Tonkie]] ([[User talk:Tonkie|talk]]) 18:57, 26 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::Should it at least be shown as an airline that owns it but hasn’t commenced yet? [[Special:Contributions/2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8|2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8]] ([[User talk:2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8|talk]]) 18:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::In the A380/CRJ700 incident at JFK, the CRJ700 was parked 15-20 meters away from its correct parking position, and that is the only cause of the collision, it had nothing to do with the fact that the other aircraft involved was an A380 or the runway being to close from the parking stands. Discussion closed, I agree. [[User:Slasher-fun|Slasher-fun]] ([[User talk:Slasher-fun|talk]]) 19:18, 26 June 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::We can cover it should they ever actually operate. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== consumption l/h == |
||
I would like to see absolute values for the fuel consumption, not |
|||
I have decided to change the thumbnail of this article, to a more recent photo of an Airbus A380 operated by Qantas. These Airbuses have been widely covered on the news and international media due to the recent problems with engine and turbine explosions. I believe that a newer image such as this will allow the viewers of the article to understand what the Airbuses look like and will be able to relate to the recent events. This image also provides a better look at the fuselage and wing spans of the aircraft as it has been taken in such a position where the wings do not cover much of the image and block out views of the main fuselage area, such as on the Emirates photo. Now that Qantas has signed a 10-year partnership with Emirates Airlines, due to start early 2013, I figured that it did not matter which airline operates the aircraft in the image, as it is flown alongside the Emirates branded A380s. If you wish to change the articles thumbnail back, please at least leave a reason why, as I have no idea what is wrong with the current, newer, clearer image, that manages to show more of the aircraft. The older Emirates photo has half of the back and tail of the fuselage covered as the wing is in the viewing angle. The image was sourced from the Wkimedia Commons and does not appear to have any copyright or reproduction restrictions on it. [[User:John.dinsdale|John.dinsdale]] ([[User talk:John.dinsdale|talk]]) 00:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
“<i style="color:darkgreen;">the Airbus A380 consumes 2.4 liters of kerosene per 100 passenger kilometers</i>”. |
|||
Nice try. But the world is bigger than that. [[Special:Contributions/2001:41D0:FE50:F000:9EB7:DFF:FEB7:76EB|2001:41D0:FE50:F000:9EB7:DFF:FEB7:76EB]] ([[User talk:2001:41D0:FE50:F000:9EB7:DFF:FEB7:76EB|talk]]) 17:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: But that is an absolute value? [[User:OverlordQ|<span style="color:#171788;font-weight:bold">Q</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:OverlordQ|T]] [[Special:Contributions/OverlordQ|C]]</sup> 17:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: Changes to the main image in the infobox should be discussed and [[WP:Consensus|agreement]] reached first. I believe that Qantas image was used previously for the main image [for whatever that's worth]. The image in the Infobox image should be one that best shows the aircraft, and not about current events. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 01:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== New Image == |
|||
I am not quite sure what you mean? When you say that the Qantas image was previously used, why was it changed? Its a better photo than the current Emirates photo on the scale of photo quality and camera angles. You seem confused as to the standard of the photo. The photo I have selected of a Qantas operated A380, displays more of the actual aircraft, as stated in the firstplace. The Emirates image is partially ruined due to the fact that the left wing is covering and hiding a substantial amount of the rear fuselage and it cuts of a bit of the tail. The image too, looks discoloured compared to the Qantas image that shows full white colours. The Qantas image too is newer and therefore includes the modifications made by Airbus. It is good to keep an article refreshed containing current content, instead of older content. I am sorry, I did not realise these things had to be discussed as many things have been changed before on this website without prior agreement. Would we be able to somehow ask the editors on here as too which image they prefer so that we can reach an agreement? Thanks. [[User:John.dinsdale|John.dinsdale]] ([[User talk:John.dinsdale|talk]]) 07:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Hello, this [[Emirates (airline)]] image is too whitish. Replace it with [[All Nippon Airways|ANA]] livery! [[User:BuddyHeigh|BuddyHeigh]] ([[User talk:BuddyHeigh|talk]]) 20:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: You can check on previous discussions on changing the main image in the archive using the search box near the top. Usually someone finds an image that is better or from a different angle, etc. Either the Qantas image you wanted or another Qantas image was the main image for a few months a while back. Singapore and Emirates have also had images there. -[[User:Fnlayson|Fnlayson]] ([[User talk:Fnlayson|talk]]) 12:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Please suggest an image to replace it with. However ANA only has 3 A380s, it's not a major user so shouldn't be represented by an image in the infobox, that would be [[Wp:UNDUE]]. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 20:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I have read through a few of the top archives based on changing the info box image and have found many have wanted to change it due to quality, camera angle, advertising because of aircraft livery and agree that some of the reasons behind wanting to change it were quite absurd. However, I have found this image of a Qantas A380 taking off from Perth International Airport and I believe this is an improvement on the current image shown in comparison below. |
|||
::Canterbury Tail is right, ANA only has 3 Airbus A380s. Therefore, they are not a major operator of the aircraft type. '''[[User:TG-article|<span style="color: yellow">TG-article</span>]]''' ([[User talk:TG-article|talk to me]]) ([[Special:Contributions/TG-article|contributions]]) 20:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<gallery> |
|||
File:A380_Emirates_A6-EDC.jpg|Current Infobox Image |
|||
File: Qantas Airbus A380-800 at Perth Airport Monty-1.jpg|Proposed Infobox Image |
|||
</gallery> |
|||
[[User:John.dinsdale|John.dinsdale]] ([[User talk:John.dinsdale|talk]]) 11:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:58, 17 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Airbus A380 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 6 months |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Airbus A380. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Airbus A380 at the Reference desk. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Airbus A380 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do: Updated 2015-04-29
|
Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2022
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
To change Airbus a380 To airbus 380, the A in a380 is airbus. Planespotter37 (talk) 21:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- No, Airbus includes the A in its model numbers. See A220 and A350 on the Passenger aircraft page. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Lufthansa's A380 operations
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
- The statement regarding Lufthansa in the Operators section needs clarification and is currently misleading or at least a bit sparse as it can be misinterpreted as the airline bringing all A380s back to service soon which will not happen.
- Lufthansa already sold 6 of its 14 A380 back to Airbus, of the remaining 8 only 4 will be returned to service in 2023.
- See e. g. aerotelegraph.com - "Six Superjumbos: Lufthansa returns A380s to Airbus" (in German) and up to date from this week reisetopia.de - "Lufthansa reactivates overall four A380s" (in German), further sources and explaination is also found at Lufthansa fleet.
2001:A61:3A94:FC01:B442:1FCB:17EB:8AEC (talk) 08:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- I changed the phrase to "some of its remaining". Ruslik_Zero 19:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- By summer 2024 Lufthansa plans to return the remaining four A380 into service, than operating 8 A380 out of Munich 144.64.84.39 (talk) 09:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Outdated elements need revision and tense corrections
[edit]In several sections, e.g., "Post-production Problems" and "Teardown and second-hand Market", there is historical content inappropriately written in the present tense although several years old, counter to Wikipedia guidelines regarding encyclopaedic style. An example: "Additionally, major airlines are seeking compensation from Airbus for revenue lost as a result of the cracks and subsequent grounding of fleets. Airbus has switched to a different type of aluminium alloy so aircraft delivered from 2014 onwards should not have this problem". Rather than simply correcting the tense, a knowledgeable contributor might also update the content to confirm whether the anticipated solution was successful. Again: "The fifth plane coming back from SIA, owned by Doric, has been leased by Hi Fly Malta with a lease period of "nearly 6 years". Hi Fly Malta became the first operator of second-hand A380 (MSN006). Norwegian Long Haul briefly leased Hi Fly Malta A380 in August 2018..." --Humboles (talk) 10:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2023
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "split scimitar winglets" to "split winglets" under the A380 Plus paragraph.
The scimitar moniker might be commonly associated with the 737-NG split winglets due to the extended curved tips, but is not an appropriate descriptor for the split winglets for the 737 MAX or the A380 Plus due to the lack of these curved tips. Timtamothy (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. BilCat (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Reason for only 2 thrust reversers - need better sources
[edit]The Engines section of this article says, "Sufficient braking capacity allowed for thrust reversers to be installed on only the inboard engines." The two sources provided are useless. The first is a sales brochure from the manufacturer of the brakes (Honeywell), bragging about how great their brakes are. The second source (which I've removed) says nothing about braking, only that Airbus was seeking new bids from contractors to design and manufacture engine nacelles with thrust reversers on the inboard engines and none on the outboards, so it's outdated and does not say anything about the statement. The idea that the brakes are so good that the A380 only needs 2 reversers seems to have come from the brake manufacturer. When I found another source that supported that claim, it gave a link to the Honeywell brochure as its source.
I've found 3 reliable, secondary sources that say the reason for only 2 reversers is to prevent the outboard engines from kicking up debris off the edge of the runway, which could then be ingested into the engines. One of those 3 articles provides much more detail. They point out the massive spooilers, which allow the wheel brakes to be more efficient as well as providing drag of their own, and the massive flaps, which allow the aircraft to land at much slower speeds than other heavy aircraft, about 20 kts slower than the 747, so less braking is needed. (I don't have a source at hand, but bigger flaps also slow aircraft down on the runway, more efficiently at the higher speeds when thrust reversers are also used. I see someone already reverted my edit, so I'll just add in those three sources I found. Dcs002 (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done. I reverted that revert, which makes me VERY nervous. (I don't want a struggle or bad juju or any of that. If that editor would like to discuss this section and what's best, I'd like that.) I only added one of the 3 sources. The best of the three was already in the article, so I used it a couple times, and the third article I decided to leave out. It was from USA Today, but it was one of those "Ask a Pilot" articles (appeal to authority). I thought the other two sources were quite solid, and there was no need to add another source that was a little weaker than what the article already has. I removed the self-serving bit where Honeywell was taking the credit for this decision because of their awesome brakes. They're good brakes, and I left that in the article because it was mentioned in at least one of the sources, but none of the neutral (non-sales) sources I found gave them credit for reducing the number of thrusters in the design from 4 to 2. Dcs002 (talk) 06:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
- Well done and thanks! Don't worry much about multiple citation in places, especially if none of them support all the details in the text. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Add Global Airlines to list of operators?
[edit]Can global airlines be an operator despite not commencing operations yet? 174.225.75.4 (talk) 16:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- No. You answered it yourself there. They're not operating it right now therefore they cannot be an operator. Canterbury Tail talk 17:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Should it at least be shown as an airline that owns it but hasn’t commenced yet? 2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8 (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- We can cover it should they ever actually operate. Canterbury Tail talk 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Should it at least be shown as an airline that owns it but hasn’t commenced yet? 2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8 (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
consumption l/h
[edit]I would like to see absolute values for the fuel consumption, not “the Airbus A380 consumes 2.4 liters of kerosene per 100 passenger kilometers”. Nice try. But the world is bigger than that. 2001:41D0:FE50:F000:9EB7:DFF:FEB7:76EB (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- But that is an absolute value? Q T C 17:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
New Image
[edit]Hello, this Emirates (airline) image is too whitish. Replace it with ANA livery! BuddyHeigh (talk) 20:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please suggest an image to replace it with. However ANA only has 3 A380s, it's not a major user so shouldn't be represented by an image in the infobox, that would be Wp:UNDUE. Canterbury Tail talk 20:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Canterbury Tail is right, ANA only has 3 Airbus A380s. Therefore, they are not a major operator of the aircraft type. TG-article (talk to me) (contributions) 20:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- Wikipedia good articles
- Engineering and technology good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- GA-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Technology
- GA-Class vital articles in Technology
- GA-Class aviation articles
- GA-Class aircraft articles
- WikiProject Aircraft articles
- Aviation articles used on portals
- Old requests for aviation peer review
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- GA-Class Europe articles
- Mid-importance Europe articles
- WikiProject Europe articles
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists