OT - Airbus A380 flyby over Bristol

I suppose that's the future of commercial aviation, cram as many people as possible into a vast lumbering jet like an airbourne cattle truck, and get them from A to B as cheaply as possible. So much for the romance of travel :-) Bring back Concorde.......

Regards

Philip T-E

I'm afraid the closet greeny in me recoils at the thought of something which will burn ????????? tons of fuel over its lifetime and put ?????????? tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, all so people can get sunburnt on the costa del fish-n-chips for a couple of weeks a year.

Nice pics but nothing top scale it with... What is the other plane in picture A380 8?

Nice pics but nothing top scale it with... What is the other plane in picture A380 8?

I was at the other end of the runway from where I believe Kim was standing and as you said Dave it is difficult to get an idea of scale. The other plane can be best described as a 'chase' aircraft (early Concorde flights used a Canberra). I have a couple of shots with a SWB Landrover in them that can give you some sense of scale. I will try put them on Webshots tonight.

I think Kim will agree with me that it is an impressive aircraft.

Regards

JohnR

Video clip can be seen at the attached link, including being pushed back. Should give some idea of scale inside and out.

OK, it's very big but I don't think I can ever forgive Airbus and BA for scrapping Concorde. This thing is just an air bus. It's the same as all the other buses but bigger.

As promised you can find some pictures at:

Regards

JohnR

Nick,

Probably not going to happen like that, most likely these amazing aircraft will be winging their way on long hauls, eg bringin us Kiwis and Aussies up your way, hopefully with more comfort. I doubt many of us will be heading for your "nice" beaches in Spain!

Can't understand how anyone can complain about these aircraft.

BTW, saw the A-380 fly past on BBC television here last night just before hitting the sack.

Nick:

You really need to get out more! :-))

The scale costs savings mean that more people per gallon of fuel can be carried, so instead of two B747 flights you can do it with one 380. Compare this aircraft with the B707 or DC-8 if you want, that will show you where developments have gone.

We are just under the flightpath for Luton airport at the factory, and where we used to watch noisy and smoky stuff taking off, now we get relatively quiet, smoke-free and much larger aircraft going up with lesser frequency.

Don't forget also that most of these aircraft are going to the far east where flight usage is starting to take off (no pun intended!) The West still has growth in airline use but it is starting to plateau now.

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

A friend of mine works at Ansty, and R-R have just tooled up for the Trent 1000. He said that the the fan housing/OGV was a titanium forging weighing in a 3 tons before machining. they've just installed some monster Canagi vertical borers, costing over a million pounds each, with high presuure coolant to machine the things on.

Regards

Philip T-E

You can already buy the freebie handout on eBay.

Not an unusual situation with those who call themselves green, the clearest example ever has to be that of the Severn estuary tidal power scheme which would provide 16% of the UK's electricity indefinitely with zero emissions and at very low cost long term. The green's view?, total opposition on the grounds than some birds will notice the change to the tidal patterns and be upset!, it beggars belief and severely damages their credibility. Greg

If you take that much energy out it will have a major impact on the ecology of the area. This has been demonstrated by other such schemes which have proved to be a very mixed blessing. Simple factors of conservation of energy. The present tidal energy is necessary for the environment there....take it out and the environment will change. If you want a silted up algae ridden estuary then fine, but I don't really see that it would be much of a gain.

And btw....I don't consider myself "green". My local council don't even bother to leave me a recycling bin as they do all my neighbours, and I haven't bothered to complain.

Alan

"Peter A Forbes" wrote (snip):-

Just because something is the least bad to date doesn't make it good! However, as you probably guessed Peter, I am really playing devil's advocate here - anybody whose hobby involves spending his weekends in a field watching gallons of fuel being consumed to no end other than entertainment can hardly claim to be an out and out greeny ;-) I just have that nagging feeling it can't go on indefinitely, and that particularly applies to the continuing growth in largely pointless air travel.

Re, the proposed Severn barrage, my first concern when I heard about it was not for some tweeters with wet feet but would it stop the Bore - anyone know?

No, but if you argue against something that is an improvement you won't get any improvements, this is a typical green attitude, "we don't want it because it's not a perfect solution" which only serves to maintain the status quo which, as you rightly say, is unsustainable. If the greens stopped arguing against improvement they may get some results.

entertainment

The vast majority of us burn methanol which is a hell of a lot better for the environment than petrol and very likely to be a major fuel in the future, but again greens can't see improvements they can only see complete bans, if they had their way we would all go back to before the industrial revolution.

You're right, the use of fossil fuels can't go on forever because A. they will run out and B. they are far too polluting, so why the heck do you think it's clever to argue against a project that will at a stroke give us a renewable source of 16% of the UK's electricity needs?.

It will still be tidal, the tide will just lag behind the sea, I'm not saying there won't be issues of course there will, but the benefits far outweigh the problems. And while you may not be arguing on the basis of wildlife disruption that is most definitely the approach being taken by the greens on national TV, they just make themselves a laughing stock when a reporter asks them if the saving of billions of tons of carbon emissions isn't worth it and all they can do is repeat that some birds will have to move!.

Greg

If the Greens and others like them really got their act together, they could be a very good force for improvement, as many people support their general viewpoint. But I'm afraid you are right, their attitude is totally wrong and it gets people's backs up when they refuse to accept general common sense over issues like this.

Wind farms are another issue where common sense prevents their use. I couldn't give a toss where they are sited as long as they do their job and don't create a hazard.

If we don't get these systems up and running soon, we will be into Nuclear energy with no Plan B.

Peter

-- Peter & Rita Forbes Email: snipped-for-privacy@easynet.co.uk Web:

"Greg" wrote (snip):-

Sorry Greg, I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, I was referring to myself there - I am an engine enthusiast, hence ref to devil's advocate. Oh and running vintage SEs on methanol is a new one on me - I wouldn't fancy having to re jet all my engines to suit!

I'm not, I think it is a wonderful project, just curious about possible effect on the Bore which is something of a local attraction.

Sorry if I've annoyed anyone, after a number of years on this group I guess it is too easy to fall into the trap of imagining that one is among people who know where you are coming from.

While I am interested in sustainability issues, and particularly the technology involved, I think Greg has me down as a card carrying, tree squatting eco warrior - Swampy eat your heart out!

A couple of questions coming your way off list.