How about this thought it was interesting
By: Bmused55 - 8th January 2006 at 17:02
It’s only a matter of time until Airbus need to sell something involving a lot of composite technology and then they’ll have to eat their words. A bit of a poor show really. Dissappointed.
You know, that’s precisely my point of view too.
By: Grey Area - 8th January 2006 at 16:41
If hope this doesn’t turn into a Fanboy Handbag-Fest……… 😡
By: wysiwyg - 8th January 2006 at 16:39
It’s only a matter of time until Airbus need to sell something involving a lot of composite technology and then they’ll have to eat their words. A bit of a poor show really. Dissappointed.
By: Bmused55 - 8th January 2006 at 16:21
No ofcourse not – Boeing would never do anything like that would they? If you were a little older you would have remembered the smear campaign against Airbus FBW. Guess who was behind that one…
Interesting spin.
Boeing questioned Airbus’ FBW philosophy, namely flight envelope protection. Boeing was developing an FBW aircraft at the exact same time Airbus was developing the A320, and previous Boeing aircraft had partial digital controls.
This isn’t a fair comparison.
By: Cliff Barnes - 8th January 2006 at 15:43
But Boeing has never questioned the safety of Airbus’ products.
No ofcourse not – Boeing would never do anything like that would they? If you were a little older you would have remembered the smear campaign against Airbus FBW. Guess who was behind that one…
By: cloud_9 - 8th January 2006 at 12:46
If Airbus are accusing Boeing of using composites to make a fuselauge due to safety reasons, then why are they making the wings of the A350 out of em? Surley if they feel so strongly that it is a mistake for Boeing to use them, they would consider using an alternative method…
Having said this, this debate between the two manufactuers could be interesting to watch over, as it may lead to some airlines reconsidering and thus declining their orders?
By: nordjet415 - 8th January 2006 at 12:27
The one thing I find hard to comprehend with reinforced plastic fuslages is the pressurisation process, aircraft fuslages on traditional aluminiam skins expands during presurisation, so how will this constant flexing of composite materials affect the life of the fuslage. also, what would happen to this material if for example the fuselage was hit by a baggage truck, catering wagon or air bridge, a dent would appear on a metal fuselage which would be easily spotted, how could damage be spotted on composite materials, or how would they know ( if no surface damage is visible ) that there is no structural damage.
Damaged panals or fatigued parts on metal airliners can easilybe replaced or repaired, but how can a composite fuselage be repaired, its not as if you can cut out the bad part and replace it with a new piece.
No doubt Boeing know what they are doing, but from us of less an engineering background, it seems a grey area.
By: Bmused55 - 7th January 2006 at 18:34
I think its bad form for one manufacturer to publicly it’s rivals project by questioning its safety.
I mean don’t get me wrong, both companies take pot shots at each other. But Boeing has never questioned the safety of Airbus’ products.
By: Spence_CWL - 7th January 2006 at 18:06
To be honest, I don’t think it makes much difference. I mean, if the fuselage shatters, then you’d probably die, they’ve got that right. But equally if the wings shattered, then the plane would go down and you’d probably die as well. No difference really. Either way I think the chances of that happening a zilch.
Sign In
January 7, 2006 at 1:09 am