Are A380's safe enough to fly? [hairline cracks found in wings]

[Limewood]

Going on this report the 380's are very flexible and strong...

"a jumbo jet's wings can be flexed about 7.6 metres upwards two storeys!!"

Read more: How much can a superjumbo really take?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Going on this report the 380's are very flexible and strong...

"a jumbo jet's wings can be flexed about 7.6 metres upwards two storeys!!"

Read more: How much can a superjumbo really take?

no one is doubting the a380, like any other aircraft, is strong and flexible. all new passenger aircraft have to go through that wing bending test.

I don't think anyone is even suggesting for a moment the wing is going to fall off.

what some of us (maybe just me) are concerned about is the impact on other systems in the event of another failure. we know that often, if not checked, that small cracks become big cracks, and big cracks can cause problems.

just because we had one engine failure and the wing held together, doesn't mean that with larger cracks, the same would happen. I would certainly hope it does. but it might be that extra cracks mean a larger hole is formed, and that might affect something like the hydraulics and subsequent control of the plane during an emergency.

there are many cases of accidents where there have been close calls. one pitot tube icing up might be recoverable. in fact many dozens of that incident might be recoverable (and indeed are). but it is the next one that not be.

I previously (obviously erroneously) didn't think that a plane would need to be inspected after serious turbulence. I too have seen the pictures of wing flexing and thought 'all in a day's work', these planes can handle it and can just fly on. I would have especially thought that for a brand new aircraft. if severe turbulence leads to inspection, does that mean that severe turbulence can cause structural damage?

if it can, could that make small cracks into big cracks? if you have severe weather (hail etc) that causes an engine surge triggering something else that then leads to an uncontained failure, do the small cracks which are now big cracks due to severe turbulence still hold everything together?

the likelihood of that happening may be minuscule, but the consequence is potentially major.

that being said, the only reason I would not currently book an A380 belonging to lufthansa, qantas or Singapore airlines is the risk of a fleet wide grounding for further inspection which would disrupt my travel plans. for other carriers I might hold off a bit until the their pilots get more experience in terms of flight hours.

 

[Limewood]

I guess some would not fly on 380 due to this new problem, I would as long as the inspecting authorities allow them to fly.

I have a JASA booking DFW/BNE In Aug on 747, been trying to get the JASA changed to 380 LAX/SYD.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I guess some would not fly on 380 due to this new problem, I would as long as the inspecting authorities allow them to fly.

I have a JASA booking DFW/BNE In Aug on 747, been trying to get the JASA changed to 380 LAX/SYD.

The Project (10 network) is doing a poll on whether people would fly the a380 given the recent issues. 14% said never, 52% say 'no problem', 33% say 'nervously'. in reality is suspect aircraft type won't matter as much as price.

 

[NM]

A day is a long time in aviation.

Indeed it can be!

jb747, are you able to give us some indication of how many of QF's A380 fleet fit into each category of flight cycles identified in the new AD? Fully understand if the answer is "No".

Does anyone know how long it takes to perform the require inspection? Are we talking about somethig that can be done in a matter of hours, say overnight, or is it multiple days? Does this inspection require fuel tank access and hence a fairly time consuming activity?

Can the inspection be done in Sydney by Qantas engineers? What about the repairs? Does the aircraft need to go somewhere else, such as Singapore, Frankfurt, etc??

Obviously, if any crack are found and require repairs then the time to complete the repair is going to depend on many factors and likely to vary greatly by aircraft involved.

 

[bat21]

no one is doubting the a380, like any other aircraft, is strong and flexible. all new passenger aircraft have to go through that wing bending test.

I don't think anyone is even suggesting for a moment the wing is going to fall off.

what some of us (maybe just me) are concerned about is the impact on other systems in the event of another failure. we know that often, if not checked, that small cracks become big cracks, and big cracks can cause problems.

just because we had one engine failure and the wing held together, doesn't mean that with larger cracks, the same would happen. I would certainly hope it does. but it might be that extra cracks mean a larger hole is formed, and that might affect something like the hydraulics and subsequent control of the plane during an emergency.

there are many cases of accidents where there have been close calls. one pitot tube icing up might be recoverable. in fact many dozens of that incident might be recoverable (and indeed are). but it is the next one that not be.

I previously (obviously erroneously) didn't think that a plane would need to be inspected after serious turbulence. I too have seen the pictures of wing flexing and thought 'all in a day's work', these planes can handle it and can just fly on. I would have especially thought that for a brand new aircraft. if severe turbulence leads to inspection, does that mean that severe turbulence can cause structural damage?

if it can, could that make small cracks into big cracks? if you have severe weather (hail etc) that causes an engine surge triggering something else that then leads to an uncontained failure, do the small cracks which are now big cracks due to severe turbulence still hold everything together?

the likelihood of that happening may be minuscule, but the consequence is potentially major.

that being said, the only reason I would not currently book an A380 belonging to lufthansa, qantas or Singapore airlines is the risk of a fleet wide grounding for further inspection which would disrupt my travel plans. for other carriers I might hold off a bit until the their pilots get more experience in terms of flight hours.

Great post MEL_ which is not going overboard and sets out the concerns that many have. Not necessarily paranoia just old fashioned concern. On top of all that, not one bloody CFX, LHR, QFF, PAX etc etc. Plain old English and I bet it didn't take you 2 hours to post despite no acronyms or abbreviations. Have a great weekend all.

 

[john john]

I thought readers of this thread might be interested in this article on the Conversation:
The Airbus A380 wing cracks: an engineer’s perspective
The Airbus A380 wing cracks: an engineer's perspective

 

[rmelombo]

I am sure that if it was dangerous that the pilots would not fly them. Scare mongering will not prevent me from flying in this aircraft.

 

[jb747]

I am sure that if it was dangerous that the pilots would not fly them.

I doubt that that's necessarily a good guide. It would most likely be called industrial action in Oz, and would therefore be illegal. In the gulf, it would simply get you fired, and someone else would always be ready to take your seat.

But, from all that I know of the issue, it is being treated seriously, and I have no problem flying the aircraft. And I'm close enough to the end of my career to simply walk if I was unhappy.

 

[oz_mark]

There was an interesting article on this and the publics perception of safety on the NYTimes in the last day or two.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/b...stry-faces-publics-pereception-of-safety.html

 

[jb747]

I consider the biggest threat to aviation is the commoditisation of pilot training, and the cavalier attitude to crewing in general, that is becoming the industry norm.

 

[straitman]

I consider the biggest threat to aviation is the commoditisation of pilot training, and the cavalier attitude to crewing in general, that is becoming the industry norm.

As someone who has a lot of military and civil training experience I have to agree entirely.

 

[The Rok]

Well Emirates are not happy about the situation….. I wonder if this will be the start of similar claims from QF, SQ & LH?


Emirates berates Airbus over superjumbo cracks - CNN.com

Emirates Airline, the world's largest operator of Airbus's A380 superjumbo, has lambasted the aircraft maker and plans to seek compensation after complaining of widespread disruption to the carrier following the discovery of wing cracks on the jet.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Well Emirates are not happy about the situation….. I wonder if this will be the start of similar claims from QF, SQ & LH?


Emirates berates Airbus over superjumbo cracks - CNN.com

I would dare say there are already moves underway from all those airlines to seek compensation for any groundings or down time. That only makes good business sense.

 

[jb747]

Emirates is, of course, in an extremely powerful position. Saying they aren't happy with the aircraft, and then cancelling their orders, would most likely lead to the cancellation of the entire program.

Actually, if I were in their position, I'd buy all of the slots on the 777 and 748, and then cancel the remaining 380s. A380 program gone, and no alternatives for the other airlines.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

ahhh... death by a thousand cracks... (or thereabouts )

 

[The Rok]

I do wonder how much longer Airbus will continue to build the A380. It has such a limited market. What will happen to the A380 Program as soon as all the existing orders are fulfilled?

 

[Mal]

I do wonder how much longer Airbus will continue to build the A380. It has such a limited market. What will happen to the A380 Program as soon as all the existing orders are fulfilled?

The 747 has had a similar market, yet continues to get orders. I think the A380 as a plane will be around for the long haul, and the technologies and advancements learnt by Airbus will feed into other planes of theirs.

 

[jb747]

The 747 has had a similar market, yet continues to get orders. I think the A380 as a plane will be around for the long haul, and the technologies and advancements learnt by Airbus will feed into other planes of theirs.

I disagree. It's a very expensive niche player now, that offers few advantages for most airlines. I will be surprised if the eventual numbers built even reach the current order numbers. Basically, I expect cancellations, without enough new orders to balance them.

Which new technologies? The coughpit is firmly locked in 1985, and is, at best a sideways step from the 747-400. I don't see much else that I would consider a great leap...

I don't expect the 748 to be a big player either, but I would not be surprised if its numbers eventually exceed the French offering.

 

[Awesom Andy]

Noone is happy about having unscheduled downtime on their equipment, and it's generally not a bad way to get some discounts off future deliveries and parts. It's not really an uncommon situation, in aviation and also some other industries.

With the 748, I think we'll know more about its sales once more operational data becomes available, especially regarding the costs and efficiencies. Although I think that the success of the 777 series means airlines have less incentives to get larger types such as the 748 since there isn't that much more that can be gained by doing so.