Search the archive:
Simviation Main Site
|
Site Search
|
Upload Images
Simviation Forum
›
Real World
›
Real Aviation
› A380 painted and with full 4 engines
(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)
‹
Previous Topic
|
Next Topic
›
Pages:
1
2
3
4
A380 painted and with full 4 engines (Read 1133 times)
Reply #15 -
Jan 11
th
, 2005 at 8:56pm
Boss_BlueAngels
Offline
Colonel
I fly airplanes upside
down for fun.
Snohomish
Gender:
Posts: 696
Dang, that is ginormous! I love how much the wings droop, that'll rock to see that thing lift off, and watch those huge wings bend up! Wohoo! The one time I wish I could go to France. lol
The day is always better when you're flying upside down.&&&&
www.fight2flyphoto.com&&&&Canon
RebelXT&&Canon 18-55mm&&Sigma 10-20mm F/4-6.3&&Sigma 100-300mm F/4-6.3&&Sigma 50-500mm F/4-6.3
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #16 -
Jan 11
th
, 2005 at 9:37pm
beefhole
Offline
Colonel
common' yigs!
Philadelphia
Gender:
Posts: 4466
Anyone have an idea what the minimum runway length for takeoff is? 14,000 ft, rotating at 225 kts?
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #17 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 10:15am
GWSimulations
Offline
Colonel
I am a developer, if you
want an addon, just ask*
UK
Posts: 746
Quote:
It wouldn't surprise me, new aircraft time to bring in a new era for airbus. The rumors have been floating around they would try a new logo/paint scheme.
I think I preferred the old colours.
GW_Simulations&&
http://www.freewebtown.com/gwsimulations&&Founder
& President, Advanced UK Scenery Project (AUKSP)&&
http://www.ukscenerydesign.co.uk/auksp&&Classic
Aviation&&
http://classicaviation.12.forumer.com/index.php&&&&*See
the GW_Simulations Website for more details.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #18 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 10:48am
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quote:
Anyone have an idea what the minimum runway length for takeoff is? 14,000 ft, rotating at 225 kts?
Which would mean that no commercial airport in the world could operate the A380.
For a ball park figure, about the same as a 747...
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #19 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 12:14pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
It was designed with the 747's takeoff length requirements in mind.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #20 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 2:46pm
Mr. Bones
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 4304
Quote:
It was designed with the 747's takeoff length requirements in mind.
but didn't it turn out heavier than expected?
Raw power...the J-58.&&
&&&&
My Anet collection.
&&
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #21 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 2:52pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
its 1% overweight now. It was alot more than that when the engines were redesigned but they sorted it out. Now how much of that is true, and how much of it is Airbus PR.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #22 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 3:16pm
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quote:
its 1% overweight now. It was alot more than that when the engines were redesigned but they sorted it out. Now how much of that is true, and how much of it is Airbus PR.
If it was PR it wouldn't be flying, and on an airliner which is going to have a (theorectical) 800 seat fit/150tonne payload, 1% proportionately small...
Anyway, nothing can be as overweight as the JSF/JCA F-35...
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #23 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 3:22pm
Hagar
Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica
Posts: 33159
Now you come to mention it I was wondering how much weight a coat of paint adds to an aircraft of this size.
Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the
Fox Four Group
Need help? Try
Grumpy's Lair
My photo gallery
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #24 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 3:40pm
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quite a lot I would imagine. Possibly a few tonnes on something this big...
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #25 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 3:51pm
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quote:
Quite a lot I would imagine. Possibly a few tonnes on something this big...
Ok, I was a bit out, but apparently on a 767 it is around 400lbs, so I reckon you could get a little under 1000lbs on a beast this big...
Charlie
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #26 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 4:03pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
1200lbs for a 747 so go from that.
As for the JSF, it isnt over weight, the requirements were that it could take off in a specific distance. It did so, as is customary with the MOD, they forgot to include in the wording fully loaded in combat configuration.
The A380 was a long way over weight only a few months ago and then Airbus were saying it wasnt a problem, recently they have said the same thing so i still am unsure as to if they are being truthful, one of their A340 series was overweight and it failed to meet the performance it was boasted as having, they didnt realise this till test flights, by then it was too late.
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #27 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 4:23pm
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quote:
1200lbs for a 747 so go from that.
As for the JSF, it isnt over weight, the requirements were that it could take off in a specific distance. It did so, as is customary with the MOD, they forgot to include in the wording fully loaded in combat configuration.
The JSF weight problem has nothing to do with the MOD at all. Its to do with the V/STOL version in any form, being US or UK...
What it has essentially lead to is a decrease in the size of the internal weapons bay, meaning if 2000lb class weapons were to be carried, they would have to be externally carried, which for the RAF is not a problem...
Charlie
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #28 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 4:27pm
Craig.
Offline
Colonel
Birmingham
Gender:
Posts: 18590
Its not helped by the complicated system required for supersonic flight while keeping V/STOL
Back to top
IP Logged
Reply #29 -
Jan 16
th
, 2005 at 5:30pm
C
Offline
Colonel
Earth
Posts: 13144
Quote:
Its not helped by the complicated system required for supersonic flight while keeping V/STOL
Don't worry, the control system for the JSF/JCA is probably going to be more unique than that of the Harrier. Particularly the one the UK is developing...
Back to top
IP Logged
Pages:
1
2
3
4
‹
Previous Topic
|
Next Topic
›
« Home
‹ Board
Top of this page
Forum Jump »
Home
» 10 most recent Posts
» 10 most recent Topics
Current Flight Simulator Series
- Flight Simulator X
- FS 2004 - A Century of Flight
- Adding Aircraft Traffic (AI) & Gates
- Flight School
- Flightgear
- MS Flight
Graphic Gallery
- Simviation Screenshots Showcase
- Screenshot Contest
- Edited Screenshots
- Photos & Cameras
- Payware Screenshot Showcase
- Studio V Screenshot Workshop
- Video
- The Cage
Design Forums
- Aircraft & 3D Design
- Scenery & Panel Design
- Aircraft Repainting
- Designer Feedback
General
- General Discussion
- Humour
- Music, Arts & Entertainment
- Sport
Computer Hardware & Software Forum
- Hardware
- Tweaking & Overclocking
- Computer Games & Software
- HomeBuild Cockpits
Addons Most Wanted
- Aircraft Wanted
- Other Add-ons Wanted
Real World
- Real Aviation ««
- Specific Aircraft Types
- Autos
- History
On-line Interactive Flying
- Virtual Airlines Events & Messages
- Multiplayer
Simviation Site
- Simviation News & Info
- Suggestions for these forums
- Site Questions & Feedback
- Site Problems & Broken Links
Combat Flight Simulators
- Combat Flight Simulator 3
- Combat Flight Simulator 2
- Combat Flight Simulator
- CFS Development
- IL-2 Sturmovik
Other Websites
- Your Site
- Other Sites
Payware
- Payware
Old Flight Simulator Series
- FS 2002
- FS 2000
- Flight Simulator 98
Simviation Forum
» Powered by
YaBB 2.5 AE
!
YaBB Forum Software
© 2000-2010. All Rights Reserved.
Pages: 
