If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Yee-hah! Don't get too close to this whale...
Change in Rules Needed for Wake Of Big New Jet By ANDY PASZTOR and DANIEL MICHAELS Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL November 22, 2005; Page B1 Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. The standards released to the industry by the International Civil Aviation Organization earlier this month are tentative and almost certainly more cautious than the formal rules expected next year. But if the final air-traffic procedures end up close to ICAO's initial proposal, they could undermine one of Airbus' top selling points for the largest passenger plane ever built: greater efficiency at congested hub airports. Interim air-traffic control guidance from ICAO says the mammoth plane, scheduled to go into service next year, produces "significantly stronger" air turbulence than the largest jetliners now in use. Because flight tests and data analyses "have raised concerns" about potential safety issues, according to the guidance, it calls for minimum separations of 10 nautical miles for all aircraft following a landing A380, versus the typical five-mile mandatory buffer behind today's largest aircraft. For aircraft flying the same route directly behind an A380 at cruising altitude, the recommended minimum spacing is tripled to 15 nautical miles. The interim rules are "very conservative" and will remain effective "until conclusive guidance is issued mid-next year," said Paul Wilson, a senior European air-traffic control official who is helping lead the study. Initial plans called for the effort to be completed around January, but now "there's a feeling more work needs to be done," Mr. Wilson said yesterday in an interview. "What we want to do is get it right" and rely on hard data, he added, because "we are leading the way for all future aircraft" operating criteria. The ICAO is a global aviation regulator whose standards and rules are almost always accepted by individual governments. Airbus, which touts the 555-seat A380 as "the economical solution for heavily traveled routes," has sold it as a way to carry more traffic without adding aircraft. The twin-deck jetliner can carry at least 35% more passengers than Boeing Co.'s largest model, the 747-400. In some configurations, the plane can handle more than 850 passengers. The preliminary rules are already grabbing notice from Airbus customers. A spokesman for Germany's Lufthansa, which has ordered 15 A380s, said "it is crucial for us that the separation is the same as for a 747" because "we operate at congested airports." The two-page ICAO advisory not only deals with the safety aspects of air turbulence at low altitudes near airports but even raises questions about potential hazards for nearby aircraft in midflight. The guidance says the so-called wake vortices produced by the A380 -- twin cones of turbulent air fanning out from its wingtips -- "will descend further and be significantly stronger" than those from other large jets, potentially even affecting jets traveling in the opposite direction some 2,000 feet below. "Because it has not yet been possible to establish the level of hazard" from such turbulence, the guidance recommends "offset tracks or additional vertical spacing" for added protection. When an airborne aircraft runs into such turbulence, the impact can jostle the trailing plane. In extreme circumstances, the result can even be loss of control, though there haven't been any recent crashes of jetliners attributed primarily to such encounters. Many years ago the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration had to lengthen spacing requirements for planes flying behind Boeing 757 jetliners, following a fatal crash of a business jet that ran into a 757's wake. Airbus has said the four-engine plane, with a maximum takeoff weight in excess of a million pounds, is designed to fit seamlessly into air-traffic systems world-wide without requiring greater spacing than existing models or needing any other special handling by controllers. An Airbus A380 marketing brochure in 2003, for example, said: "there is no need to introduce any changes in separation standards" for the A380 because the aircraft's wake "is similar to that of the 747-400." A spokesman for Airbus, which is owned 80% by European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. and 20% by Britain's BAE Systems PLC, declined to comment, citing the ongoing studies. Despite the success Airbus has had using computers to precisely predict handling and other characteristics of the new plane, "we are still in the Stone Age for modeling" wake turbulence, said Robert Lafontan, the A380's chief engineer, in an interview several weeks ago. The interim guidelines also recommend an additional wait of one minute -- on top of today's typical two-minute spacing -- for smaller jetliners taking off directly behind the giant A380. Once the A380 reaches cruising altitude, the guidance suggests that on "rare occasions" its wake may be strong enough to shake planes flying nearly half a mile below it and end up creating a "comfort issue" for passengers in those jets. With less than 160 orders and commitments for the A380, Airbus needs about 90 more to break even. But the market is becoming more competitive with Boeing's announcement that it is offering a larger 747 version. The FAA, while particularly sensitive about any perception that it is discriminating against the European planemaker, has been quietly pushing for additional testing and more restrictive rules, industry officials say. At the beginning of the year, an internal FAA report projected that the A380's wake may result in fewer arrivals at some airports; that the plane may require extra time or distance to execute a missed approach to a runway; and it "may have an adverse impact" on general airport operations. Air-traffic control officials, the report concluded, are "uncomfortable" with the A380 and need answers quickly. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Jay Honeck wrote:
Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. snip Airbus should include color smoke generators off each wingtip to colorize the vortices and give VFR aircraft something visually to avoid. -- Peter |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Jay Honeck wrote:
Yee-hah! Don't get too close to this whale... Change in Rules Needed for Wake Of Big New Jet By ANDY PASZTOR and DANIEL MICHAELS Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL November 22, 2005; Page B1 Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. The standards released to the industry by the International Civil Aviation Organization earlier this month are tentative and almost certainly more cautious than the formal rules expected next year. But if the final air-traffic procedures end up close to ICAO's initial proposal, they could undermine one of Airbus' top selling points for the largest passenger plane ever built: greater efficiency at congested hub airports. Interim air-traffic control guidance from ICAO says the mammoth plane, scheduled to go into service next year, produces "significantly stronger" air turbulence than the largest jetliners now in use. Because flight tests and data analyses "have raised concerns" about potential safety issues, according to the guidance, it calls for minimum separations of 10 nautical miles for all aircraft following a landing A380, versus the typical five-mile mandatory buffer behind today's largest aircraft. And this is a surprise? Did they think an airplane that size would have the wake turbulence of a 737? Matt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Matt Whiting wrote:
And this is a surprise? Did they think an airplane that size would have the wake turbulence of a 737? Not a 737, but Airbus was claiming it would be comparable to a 747, which is a "heavy" aircraft. If you read the article, you might have noted that "An Airbus A380 marketing brochure in 2003, for example, said: "there is no need to introduce any changes in separation standards" for the A380 because the aircraft's wake "is similar to that of the 747-400."" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
"Peter R." wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote: Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. snip Airbus should include color smoke generators off each wingtip to colorize the vortices and give VFR aircraft something visually to avoid. And other IFR aircraft, including jets, for that matter. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Jay Honeck wrote: Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. snip Airbus should include color smoke generators off each wingtip to colorize the vortices and give VFR aircraft something visually to avoid. Different color smoke from each wingtip would be very pretty. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Jonathan wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote: And this is a surprise? Did they think an airplane that size would have the wake turbulence of a 737? Not a 737, but Airbus was claiming it would be comparable to a 747, which is a "heavy" aircraft. If you read the article, you might have noted that "An Airbus A380 marketing brochure in 2003, for example, said: "there is no need to introduce any changes in separation standards" for the A380 because the aircraft's wake "is similar to that of the 747-400."" I missed that part. Shame on Airbus then. Either they really believed this and are thus stupid, or they were outright being deceptive. I can't believe that their customers actually believed that though. That is pretty amazing as well. Matt |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
Matt,
I missed that part. Shame on Airbus then. Either they really believed this and are thus stupid, or they were outright being deceptive. BS! I strongly suggest you read that report again. Nowhere does it say the wake turbulence measurements have been completed and/or published. These are "tentative" and "over-cautious" preliminary/interim standards issued by ICAO as a suggestion. No one knows what wake turbulunce is causes - and we will know before final ruling. The problem is: The A380 is flying around as we speak, so ATC has to have some guidance right now. That's what this does. It says NOTHING about the actual wake turbulence caused. But, anything for some cheap shots at Airbus, right? -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
by "Matt Barrow" Nov 22, 2005 at 11:30 PM
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Jay Honeck wrote: Airliners may have to fly twice the normal distance behind the new Airbus A380 superjumbo jet to avoid potential hazards from its unusually powerful wake, according to preliminary safety guidelines. snip Airbus should include color smoke generators off each wingtip to colorize the vortices and give VFR aircraft something visually to avoid. Different color smoke from each wingtip would be very pretty. That would be cool, just like the stunt pilots' planes. Those jets would look very cool doing hammerheads and loops to entertain the passengers and crowds below. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Wake Turbulence behind an A-380
But, anything for some cheap shots at Airbus, right? Here here! The fact is that when Boeing launched the 747, the separation had to be changed. No one seemed to mind to much that that happened at the time - probably because of increased passenger volume. With that in mind, what makes you think that airlines are going to mind too much if the separation behind a 380 has to be increased? If the airbus carries twice as many passengers, that effectively means less Boeings in the sky and if there is less requirement for Boeings that means less a/c pollution, more efficient ATC, and safer flying! I shouldn't be cheering just yet if I were you... G |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Turbulence | Marco Rispoli | Piloting | 19 | October 17th 04 06:53 AM |
Wake Turbulence Question | HankPilot2002 | Piloting | 11 | July 14th 04 04:49 AM |
caution - wake turbulence | John Harlow | Piloting | 1 | June 4th 04 04:40 PM |
Wake turbulence avoidance and ATC | Peter R. | Piloting | 24 | December 20th 03 11:40 AM |
How much turbulence is too much? | Marty Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 21st 03 05:30 PM |