Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Korean A380 Engine Pod Strike in Tokyo

  1. #1
    Senior Member Cary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,984

    Korean A380 Engine Pod Strike in Tokyo

    Well, I guess they got that first scratch out of the way on their new toy:



    Story: http://www.avherald.com/h?article=4400bee5&opt=0
    AeroPX Aviation Photography - Website | Facebook
    AVP Talk (Aviation Photography Talk) - http://avptalk.com
    1/400 Diecast Aircraft Models - http://diecastwings.com

  2. #2
    Senior Member Zee71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    4,348
    Wow.........great catch by the individual of the engine pod contacting the runway. Looks like these pilots may need some more flight simulator time on the A380.
    Mark
    Queens, NY

    My website: http://mbsphotography.smugmug.com
    My photos at: JetPhotos and ANet

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,241
    Here's a vid.


  4. #4
    Might have had a bit to do wit the low passenger load 150 - certainly that amount of load compared to the 400-600 it was designed for is going to have a pretty big effect on crosswind handling.

  5. #5
    Moderator USAF Pilot 07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,669
    Quote Originally Posted by Lrusso View Post
    Might have had a bit to do wit the low passenger load 150 - certainly that amount of load compared to the 400-600 it was designed for is going to have a pretty big effect on crosswind handling.
    Most likely not the case...

  6. #6
    Senior Member moose135's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    8,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Lrusso View Post
    Might have had a bit to do wit the low passenger load 150 - certainly that amount of load compared to the 400-600 it was designed for is going to have a pretty big effect on crosswind handling.
    If you consider 300 additional pax, at 250lbs each (higher than the standard weight used in calculations) that's 75,000 pounds, less than 10% of the max landing weight of the A380. It wouldn't have much of a difference on crosswind handling.

    And I do know (and flew with...but not at the time) someone who did that in a KC-135...

  7. #7
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    My car actually handles better when it is empty! :-)
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  8. #8
    Moderator USAF Pilot 07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    1,669
    Quote Originally Posted by moose135 View Post
    And I do know (and flew with...but not at the time) someone who did that in a KC-135...
    With the -R model upgraded engines (which sit lower than the original engines), it's a lot more common. I think there's only something like 15 inches of clearance between the bottom of the engine and the ground. That probably explains why the max allowable crosswind is a lot lower than a lot of other airframe (I think it's something like 25 knots on a dry-runway).

  9. #9
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Fred, help me here...

    Korean Air's newly RE-designed A380 due to the recent incident. This should make it easier...

    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  10. #10
    Member shoturtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NYC and Frankfurt AM
    Posts
    44
    The A380 is not have a good year, end last year badly with the engine fire in singapore. The fender bender at jfk with the delta plane, then the run in with the airport in france, now the engine tap in japan.

  11. #11
    Senior Member cancidas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    traffic two o'clock two miles southbound flight of four C-130s
    Posts
    6,088
    Quote Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
    The A380 is not have a good year, end last year badly with the engine fire in singapore. The fender bender at jfk with the delta plane, then the run in with the airport in france, now the engine tap in japan.
    that's because that airplane is too damn big!
    it is mathematically impossible for either hummingbirds, or helicopters to fly. fortunately, neither are aware of this.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Derf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Miller Place N.Y.
    Posts
    4,534

    PHOTOSHOPPED!!!!
    The three most common expressions in aviation are, "Why is it doing that?", "Where are we?" and "Oh Crap".

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Derf View Post

    PHOTOSHOPPED!!!!
    Nice Fred! That is terrific!
    Steve Furst

    View my work @

    Furst Edition Photography
    JetPhotos.net

  14. #14
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Quote Originally Posted by cancidas View Post
    that's because that airplane is too damn big!
    The 747-8i is the longest commercial aircraft in the world. Longer than the A380-800... and the C-5 Galaxy and Antonov AN-225 are larger than both and have managed fairly normal lives... so what's your point?

    You realize someone will attempt to make even bigger ones... Boeing's X plane is going to be much larger still... and Airbus' view of the future video shows a really big plane with transparent walls...
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  15. #15
    Member shoturtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    NYC and Frankfurt AM
    Posts
    44
    It is a nice plane, comfy but slow. But jfk is not really 100% A380 capable so the size might have been a bit of an issue there. If KAL was looking at their A380 fleet, this would be a bad omen.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •