I didn't know that! It's actually amazing that reverse thrust on only 2 engines is required for this huge beast. Another amazing fact: The A380 was the first large commercial aircraft with an electronic secondary electric power distribution system replacing the old technology electro-mechanical system. It was a huge leap in technology.
@@rayanaltowayan9558 Old technology electro-mechanical circuit breakers that need to be manually reset when tripped are replaced by MOSFET-based digital switches mounted on power module cards installed in remotely located cabinets. The benefits of this new technology include software driven remote resettability via a cockpit controller by the pilots or via a laptop by maintenance personnel as well as significant weight savings and reduced power losses due to reduced lengths and numbers of heavy power cables running throughout the aircraft.
@@richardmueller2661 or may be they implemented motors with drives at location they want to make mechanical movement and all cable harness routing replaced with power and control signals with one or two alternatives/auxillary supplies, there is one incident that shows structural failure caused this harness breakdown and multiple hardware went inoperative
its a shame fliers of the a380 are storing or getting rid of them so quickly. they're engineering masterpieces with great pilot and passenger feedback.
Don’t forget noise footprint as well. They wanted the A380 to be much quieter than the 747 on landing. Having only two engines on high-power reverse thrust really helps with that goal. A380 is 3-4 times quieter than the Jumbo as a result.
I flew on an A380 in 2019 and the breaking power was exceptional . Then I flew on an A350 and the breaking was so much more , but still smooth . Great Planes these Airbuses.
I always wondered that too Lance, thinking it might make the plane better looking aesthetically (whilst realising that aesthetics isn't what plane design's about. of course).
Thanks for the info simple flying Also 1- the a380 reduced reverse thrust system is to minimise the noise during landing ( noise abatement procedure ) 2- to avoid FOD during landing roll Thanks
let me give it a try 1. 747 will remain as the largest passenger aircraft forever(considering the situation, no one will make a huge aircraft) 2. An engineering marvel will be never made 3. Airbus will save lots and lots of money 4. Airbus will be saved from humiliations from some people 5. New aircrafts will be made by Airbus from the money saved 6. Emirates would do the following a. Order a lot of 747's considering their hub to hub travel b. Have a mixed fleet of aircrafts like the A350 Dreamliner(s) 7. Would have not broken my heart though
@@donaldstanfield8862 +1. And spoke and hub route systems are outdated. People would rather fly direct on a smaller aircraft that don’t take as long to load and unload.
I didn't know that at all! And it's crazy how such a big plane doesn't stall at slow speeds. But It is possible to stall with no flaps on landing... That's pretty cool!
Oh it will stall, but all its stall speeds relative to airspeed, temperature, altitude etc will be very well worked out. It must though, create enough lift even at slighter slower speeds courtesy of those huge wings. Physics aside, the sheer size of the thing gives the impression of moving slowly when its actually not.
It's important to know that, unlike a car coming to a stop, the braking system on large airliners doesn't apply a set force to brake. It tries to target a certain deceleration rate. As such, assuming the wheels do not start locking up (airliners do actually have ABS), reverse thrust or spoilers don't make a plane come to a stop faster. They just take strain off of the wheel brakes. This does matter if the runway is wet or icy and the main wheels don't have enough grip.
They are not called "reverse thrusters." That would mean things which make thrust in the direction opposite to normal. In fact, they're called "thrust reversers" because that means they take the jet thrust WHICH ALREADY EXISTS and divert it so that it blows partly sideways and partly forwards, having the effect of reversing the thrust which already exists. I know this because I used to work for Rolls-Royce, who design and manufacture jet engines, including the Trent 900, which is the engine designed for the Airbus A380.
I’ve seen it in many landing videos. I always thought 2 reverse thrusters were for regular circumstances and 4 for more extreme circumstances and need for more brake power.
Something related that wasn't mentioned is the number of wheel brakes the A380 has. Of the 20 MLG wheel assemblies, only 16 of them have brakes assemblies. It was able to meet all the required stopping distance criteria without them, yet a certain regulatory agency still wanted reverse thrust.
I never knew this. However their reverse thrust even at 2 engines is very loud and powerful. I flew on this plane on a total of two flights and it was a powerful reserve thrust landing.
Same here, I've been on them enough times to know the outer engines overhang most runways so I certainly wouldn't want reverse thrust throwing all the off-runway debris up into the engines.
I knew the a380 only had reverse thrust on its inboard engines but didn't know why. This video clarified it👍. Now I can only dream to get an opportunity to fly on one, anywhere, from the US and return.
Well, I have seen landings of the A380 many times before, and only seen 2 thrust reversers. I didn't know if that was the pilot's decision to deploy only 2 engines, or if there were only 2 thrust reversers. Well, you cleared up some confusion, thanks!
Having thrust reversers on the outboard engines is also bad for controllability in the event that one does not deploy. You then have a lot of reverse thrust out near one wingtip and forward thrust out near the other and it will be really hard to steer in a straight line and stay on the runway. Safer to use thrust reversers on only the inboard engines if you can get away with it. And then saving weight is just another plus.
I knew that the A380 only has reversers on its inner engines, but I'm surprised to learn the first reason for that is because the plane was designed to stop with brakes only! Considering its weight, that's really outstanding! It makes me sad to see a plane like this being retired so early...
Surely, a bigger wing with less wing load means a lower take off and landing speed. The MD-11 was the opposite, it had a high landing speed because it used the DC-10 wings with a extended fuselage and MTOW
It has two different engine options, so if you see an A380 all engines it has are of the same type. The inner engines are equipped with reversers, other than that it’s the same engine
All jets are certified to meet landing performance requirements with brakes alone on uncontaminated runways. Thrust reversers are credited with extra stopping performance, but are not required. Moreover, the Airbus autobraking system operates in a manner such that the auto brakes will release pressure commiserate to the amount of deceleration created by reverse thrust so that the deceleration rate is the same whether the plane lands on brakes alone or using thrust reversing.
Really interesting. Love all these facts about such beautiful planes. Safety is the priority so it is nice to know that this decreases risk of runway debris whilst keeping down weight and cost within the parameters of what is actually needed. Lovely aircraft! Liz ✈️
I had noticed, while watching another video, of large aircraft landing on a wet runway at Amsterdam, that the A380 included in that video only used reverse thrust on its inboard engines. I wondered if it might offer the pilots the option pf using only part of the thrust reversers. Now I know.
No I didn't know that.. I thought it was optional and that the pilot used reverse thrust on inside engines at smaller airports.. on larger airports all reverse thrust on all engines are used ... for the reason of outer engines being over the edge of runway it isn't used at smaller airports...
I knew they only had reverse thrusters on only two engines, but wondered why! Thanks for the video! Also, don't the A340 and 747 also have only two reverse thrusters? Seems to me I recall seeing it on them as well!
@@SmaranSastry5521 Thanks. I guess I was imagining things! I was sure I had seen another type of four engine aircraft with only two reverse thrusters!!
Very interesting story. No, I did not know this. I saw the A380 Air France land in Montreal (YUL) and didn't notice this ! Wasn't looking for it to be honest. It looked like it was coming in slow but I did not know how slow before this video.
I was today years old when I found out that the A380 only has inboard thrust reversers. I also did not know that approach and landing speed was significantly lower than the 747's.
The A380 has computer controlled BTV, the first plane to do so. This reduces break wear, maintenance times and ultimately, costs. This also features on the A350.
Well, having two types of engines at the same aircraft also increases maintenance and purchase costs. Specially if those engines can't be used by other aircraft...
Those engines hang way out there too and can make a huge mess. Also, big risk of injecting fod and damaging an engine, especially on the ones near the rwy edge. When I worked on airfield management I hated when a c5 came in. We had to shut down the rwy everytime for an hour to get the rocks cleaned up,and that was with a 200 ft wide rwy not 150 like most.
I would suspect they also placed the two reverse thrusters because they had a hard time convincing pilots that they could stop a A380 on brakes and spoilers alone. After flying so many other aircraft this sort of change might have felt risky. Airbus agreed to do it to calm pilot concerns -- and I would not want to fly on a plane where the pilot has any doubts about something as important as stopping this behemoth aircraft!!
The explanation given is incomplete. The structural issues occurring with the outboard engines (#1 & #4) entering reverse, and the stresses imposed upon the wing spar box were the primary reason for this decision to limit reverse thrust to the inboard engines only. In all and if an observer is to be honest and realistic, the 380 was a failed design, probably due as much to inaccurate financial, fuel, and passenger forecasts, as it’s engineering compromises like failing to go ahead with a freighter version, and a strengthened wing spar that would have allowed all-engine reversing and shorter balanced field lengths.
Interesting dude. In the video it says that it comes in slower than most planes but still needs 10 miles of runway to come to a stop. I guess that’s why the 747 can land almost anywhere while the swollen A318 almost has no place to land.
@@thetruthspeaks8702 Most “large” airplanes (i.e., B737) maintain 140 knots on final segment, then decelerate to 125-130 on round-out. The Super-jumbos add about 15 - 20 knots to that You can check this out for yourself by going to sites like flightradar24. I say all this because an observer must recognize not just speed (velocity), but mass as well to calculate the inertia, which are basic laws of mechanics. “A body in motion tends to remain in motion.”
@@flitetym you know a lot about the physics of it. I just thought that it was odd that a plane with over a million MTOW would not need all the help that it can get. The outer engines are not much farther out than the 747 outer engines either. So if the 747 can fly for over 50 years with thrust reverser on the outer engines the A380 should be able to do that too. I totally agree with you that it’s a design flaw. To me the plane is not proportioned well either.
@@thetruthspeaks8702 an airplane is - if anything - an assembly of compromises; financial compromises, to be exact. The Bristol Brabazon is a long-forgotten airplane which suffered the same accounting “maladies” as the 380. And Bristol was one of the companies amalgamated into today’s Airbus. Those darn Euros just aren’t reading their own Cliff’s notes. 🙄
Pls do a vid on why boieng made earlier 747-200s have 3 windows like the 100 and how to tell the diffrence between the 747-100 and 200 and why they had that pointed tip at the end
It's tied to weight and lift of the aircraft. The A380 might be heavy but has excellent low-speed lift characteristics. I am however in no position to elaborate on what factors directly influence it's performance
Aircraft weight, wind direction, air temperature, airport altitude, runway condition. Heavier the plane, hotter the temperature, higher the altitude, less headwind. All those things mean more runway needed and higher the landing speed. Light plane, strong headwind, dry runway, cold temparature and low altitude is the best for short landing.
@@tripleceven it has a high wing surface. Also the A380 fulfills many of the listed aspects of a landing speed which were listed in the other replies better (or however you want to rate it) than the 747, which of course doesn’t mean that the 747 can’t land slow. It really I the combination of all aspects
I knew that engines no.1 and 4 were without the thrust reverser for the "debris" reasons, but didn't know that a) thrust reversers would add weight , and b) the A380 was designed to stop just on brakes Anyways, the A380 might just become history if this pandemic drags on for longer. 😥
Can you do a segment on Caribbean Airlines. They now giving back three of their 737 planes and going to buy the Max 8. The airlines always asking the Trinidad 🇹🇹 government for subventions which is becoming a burden on tax payers
And the 747 doesn't have as wide wings so can more safely do without fear of engine ingestion on existing r in runways also with lower power engine outputs it can more be easier steered on and less prone to diversion/digression on landing especially on wet or narrower runways.
Did you know that the engines of the A380 were actually TOO powerful in the first place? The power has been decreased by design because of that - not talking about the usual adjustments for take-off via N1% / temperature setting.
Wow, I just realized the A380 land ar 140 knot. It just feels to slow considering the size. Personally, If I was flying it in a flight simulator, I wouldn't go lower than 150 for landing
hmmmm....the FAA basically told them that you cant sell a plane this size in the US without reversers, no matter how good the other stuff is. The compromise was 2 reversers. that is the simple reason why they did it that way. why? cuz brakes are known to fail....
I had voted in the polls to see this video and I’m so happy that they did it. Great info and explanation.
I didn't know that! It's actually amazing that reverse thrust on only 2 engines is required for this huge beast. Another amazing fact: The A380 was the first large commercial aircraft with an electronic secondary electric power distribution system replacing the old technology electro-mechanical system. It was a huge leap in technology.
Could you please explain how does this newer system work ?
@@rayanaltowayan9558 🤓
@@rayanaltowayan9558 Old technology electro-mechanical circuit breakers that need to be manually reset when tripped are replaced by MOSFET-based digital switches mounted on power module cards installed in remotely located cabinets. The benefits of this new technology include software driven remote resettability via a cockpit controller by the pilots or via a laptop by maintenance personnel as well as significant weight savings and reduced power losses due to reduced lengths and numbers of heavy power cables running throughout the aircraft.
@@richardmueller2661 ,thank you,sir,for your explanation
@@richardmueller2661 or may be they implemented motors with drives at location they want to make mechanical movement and all cable harness routing replaced with power and control signals with one or two alternatives/auxillary supplies, there is one incident that shows structural failure caused this harness breakdown and multiple hardware went inoperative
its a shame fliers of the a380 are storing or getting rid of them so quickly. they're engineering masterpieces with great pilot and passenger feedback.
Agree with you totally.
Its a massive shame, but the flying economy has changed dramatically over past couple of years, and 2020 has just accelerated that change.
@@ThexMJTSad but true. 👍
Also I agree fully with you because they are really marvellous pieces of engineering! It's sad....
It was a failure of a project to begin with
Don’t forget noise footprint as well. They wanted the A380 to be much quieter than the 747 on landing. Having only two engines on high-power reverse thrust really helps with that goal. A380 is 3-4 times quieter than the Jumbo as a result.
I flew on an A380 in 2019 and the breaking power was exceptional . Then I flew on an A350 and the breaking was so much more , but still smooth . Great Planes these Airbuses.
Hey men i wanna know the reason why the cockpit of the a380 doesn't seem to align with the upper and lower deck
Better fitting into the aerodynamics of the nose I’d say, the A380 shape we know doesn’t really allow a cockpit above or below where it’s located
I always wondered that too Lance, thinking it might make the plane better looking aesthetically (whilst realising that aesthetics isn't what plane design's about. of course).
Thanks for the info simple flying
Also
1- the a380 reduced reverse thrust system is to minimise the noise during landing ( noise abatement procedure )
2- to avoid FOD during landing roll
Thanks
By the way, we still want the other videos. We just wanted this one more! Excellent video, as always...
1:25 that footage of an a380 at Atlanta ♥️
How about doing a video on what the aviation industry would be like if airbus never built the a380!
let me give it a try
1. 747 will remain as the largest passenger aircraft forever(considering the situation, no one will make a huge aircraft)
2. An engineering marvel will be never made
3. Airbus will save lots and lots of money
4. Airbus will be saved from humiliations from some people
5. New aircrafts will be made by Airbus from the money saved
6. Emirates would do the following
a. Order a lot of 747's considering their hub to hub travel
b. Have a mixed fleet of aircrafts like the A350 Dreamliner(s)
7. Would have not broken my heart though
Same, twins rule as they're more economical.
@@donaldstanfield8862 +1. And spoke and hub route systems are outdated. People would rather fly direct on a smaller aircraft that don’t take as long to load and unload.
This is something I’ve always wondered but never got around to researching it. Thank you for answering it
I have always wanted to know this
Me too!!!
@@brad9529 then why you didnt just search it up?
Dude, sounds like you’re not alone here. I relate all these years even since I was like 5 years old. 🤣
Metoo
@@mapleleafaviation304 same lol
I didn't know that at all! And it's crazy how such a big plane doesn't stall at slow speeds. But It is possible to stall with no flaps on landing... That's pretty cool!
Oh it will stall, but all its stall speeds relative to airspeed, temperature, altitude etc will be very well worked out. It must though, create enough lift even at slighter slower speeds courtesy of those huge wings. Physics aside, the sheer size of the thing gives the impression of moving slowly when its actually not.
It's important to know that, unlike a car coming to a stop, the braking system on large airliners doesn't apply a set force to brake. It tries to target a certain deceleration rate. As such, assuming the wheels do not start locking up (airliners do actually have ABS), reverse thrust or spoilers don't make a plane come to a stop faster. They just take strain off of the wheel brakes. This does matter if the runway is wet or icy and the main wheels don't have enough grip.
I did know, that the A380 has only reverse thrust on its inside engines. But I didn’t know why. This video helps me to understand it more clearly.
They are not called "reverse thrusters." That would mean things which make thrust in the direction opposite to normal.
In fact, they're called "thrust reversers" because that means they take the jet thrust WHICH ALREADY EXISTS and divert it so that it blows partly sideways and partly forwards, having the effect of reversing the thrust which already exists.
I know this because I used to work for Rolls-Royce, who design and manufacture jet engines, including the Trent 900, which is the engine designed for the Airbus A380.
I’ve seen it in many landing videos. I always thought 2 reverse thrusters were for regular circumstances and 4 for more extreme circumstances and need for more brake power.
Another topic I always wanted to know and voted to watch, thank you!!!
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
This is really amazing to know about this interesting design for an A380
Something related that wasn't mentioned is the number of wheel brakes the A380 has. Of the 20 MLG wheel assemblies, only 16 of them have brakes assemblies. It was able to meet all the required stopping distance criteria without them, yet a certain regulatory agency still wanted reverse thrust.
If it's wet the brakes don't have the same stopping power, but reverse thrust always have the same power. So it's probably good to have both.
Wondering why since it was launched and you answered it, thank you!
I've noticed it in videos and have wondered why. Thanks.
I never knew this. However their reverse thrust even at 2 engines is very loud and powerful. I flew on this plane on a total of two flights and it was a powerful reserve thrust landing.
I did know that! Although I thought the main reason was the possible ingestion of debris into the engines. Thanks for clarifying!🙏
Same here, I've been on them enough times to know the outer engines overhang most runways so I certainly wouldn't want reverse thrust throwing all the off-runway debris up into the engines.
I knew the a380 only had reverse thrust on its inboard engines but didn't know why. This video clarified it👍. Now I can only dream to get an opportunity to fly on one, anywhere, from the US and return.
Well, I have seen landings of the A380 many times before, and only seen 2 thrust reversers. I didn't know if that was the pilot's decision to deploy only 2 engines, or if there were only 2 thrust reversers. Well, you cleared up some confusion, thanks!
First time learning on this type of aircraft
I always wondered why only on the inside so thank you for the answer
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
Yes l knew about the thrust reverses on the two inside engines. I wondered why, and you just addressed my question. Thank you for sharing.
I actually knew about this, but never understood why, until I watched this!
Great video!
Having thrust reversers on the outboard engines is also bad for controllability in the event that one does not deploy. You then have a lot of reverse thrust out near one wingtip and forward thrust out near the other and it will be really hard to steer in a straight line and stay on the runway. Safer to use thrust reversers on only the inboard engines if you can get away with it. And then saving weight is just another plus.
I also assume tho that the reverse thrust safes airlines maintenance on brake discs. With the reverse thrust the brakes are used less.
Landing will only use 0.001” of brake pad.
Amazing feature, great video
Oooh I love facts about aircraft. I’ve subscribed!!!
Thanks for the support! - TB
Very instructive!
What a interesting channel with amazing vidoes, I really like your content and I advice you to use international measuring units. ♥️
I have been wondering about this ... and thanks for this short video clip about it.
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
it is really a gentle giant, i also observe on plane spotting videos that, it is not noisy
I knew that the A380 only has reversers on its inner engines, but I'm surprised to learn the first reason for that is because the plane was designed to stop with brakes only! Considering its weight, that's really outstanding! It makes me sad to see a plane like this being retired so early...
Thank you for explaining how reverse thrust reverses the thrust...I never would have figured that out with it's name with my simpleton brain.
I'm guessing that it's low landing speed has to do with it's big wings, designed to support larger versions that were never built.
Surely, a bigger wing with less wing load means a lower take off and landing speed.
The MD-11 was the opposite, it had a high landing speed because it used the DC-10 wings with a extended fuselage and MTOW
Interesting topic
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
so does that mean the A380 has two different types of engines? or are the outboard ones just not fitted with reverse thrust?
It has two different engine options, so if you see an A380 all engines it has are of the same type. The inner engines are equipped with reversers, other than that it’s the same engine
All jets are certified to meet landing performance requirements with brakes alone on uncontaminated runways. Thrust reversers are credited with extra stopping performance, but are not required.
Moreover, the Airbus autobraking system operates in a manner such that the auto brakes will release pressure commiserate to the amount of deceleration created by reverse thrust so that the deceleration rate is the same whether the plane lands on brakes alone or using thrust reversing.
Really interesting. Love all these facts about such beautiful planes. Safety is the priority so it is nice to know that this decreases risk of runway debris whilst keeping down weight and cost within the parameters of what is actually needed. Lovely aircraft! Liz ✈️
Can you do one on the a380s Tri alierons
I knew it had reverse thrust on its 2 inside engines.. One of the questions I got right in the quiz lol
I had noticed, while watching another video, of large aircraft landing on a wet runway at Amsterdam, that the A380 included in that video only used reverse thrust on its inboard engines. I wondered if it might offer the pilots the option pf using only part of the thrust reversers. Now I know.
No I didn't know that.. I thought it was optional and that the pilot used reverse thrust on inside engines at smaller airports.. on larger airports all reverse thrust on all engines are used ... for the reason of outer engines being over the edge of runway it isn't used at smaller airports...
I knew they only had reverse thrusters on only two engines, but wondered why! Thanks for the video! Also, don't the A340 and 747 also have only two reverse thrusters? Seems to me I recall seeing it on them as well!
747 has 4 reverse thrusters while the A380 on the other hand has 2
A340 and 747 have reverse thrust on all four engines.
@@SmaranSastry5521 Thanks. I guess I was imagining things! I was sure I had seen another type of four engine aircraft with only two reverse thrusters!!
Very interesting story. No, I did not know this. I saw the A380 Air France land in Montreal (YUL) and didn't notice this ! Wasn't looking for it to be honest. It looked like it was coming in slow but I did not know how slow before this video.
I was today years old when I found out that the A380 only has inboard thrust reversers. I also did not know that approach and landing speed was significantly lower than the 747's.
The A380 has computer controlled BTV, the first plane to do so. This reduces break wear, maintenance times and ultimately, costs. This also features on the A350.
This question has been in my mind when i saw the a380 for the first time
Well, having two types of engines at the same aircraft also increases maintenance and purchase costs. Specially if those engines can't be used by other aircraft...
Yes I knew, but didn't knew the reason why, which u solved today, thank you
Thank you so much I have always wondered this question..
You are absolutely welcome :) Hope you've subscribed to our channel for more informative videos! - JS
@@SimpleFlyingNews Yep I subscribed a while back after realising this channel answered so many of my aviation questions!
Very interesting. Didn’t know that A380 had only two engines with reverse thrust
I would not know Thank You for good explanation
Thanks for the feedback! - TB
Airbus A380 is actually quiet nice. It has some ups and downs but I like it.
Those engines hang way out there too and can make a huge mess. Also, big risk of injecting fod and damaging an engine, especially on the ones near the rwy edge. When I worked on airfield management I hated when a c5 came in. We had to shut down the rwy everytime for an hour to get the rocks cleaned up,and that was with a 200 ft wide rwy not 150 like most.
Thanks i am finding this
Yes i knew it but i still like this video
3:27 Ed I actually did even if I don’t fly that much in the front of the A380 where I will get to see the A380s front engines, I still know it.
How about covering the braking system
Awesome 😎
If you go to 1:24 that’s ATL airport
The way you juggle between imperial and metric units is freakishly annoying
That explains alot
I first noticed this in the extreme landings game.
Thought it was a glitch initially 😅
I would suspect they also placed the two reverse thrusters because they had a hard time convincing pilots that they could stop a A380 on brakes and spoilers alone. After flying so many other aircraft this sort of change might have felt risky. Airbus agreed to do it to calm pilot concerns -- and I would not want to fly on a plane where the pilot has any doubts about something as important as stopping this behemoth aircraft!!
why Airbus a380's engines engine 2 and 3 can reverse thrust open engine not all engines?
The explanation given is incomplete. The structural issues occurring with the outboard engines (#1 & #4) entering reverse, and the stresses imposed upon the wing spar box were the primary reason for this decision to limit reverse thrust to the inboard engines only.
In all and if an observer is to be honest and realistic, the 380 was a failed design, probably due as much to inaccurate financial, fuel, and passenger forecasts, as it’s engineering compromises like failing to go ahead with a freighter version, and a strengthened wing spar that would have allowed all-engine reversing and shorter balanced field lengths.
Interesting dude. In the video it says that it comes in slower than most planes but still needs 10 miles of runway to come to a stop. I guess that’s why the 747 can land almost anywhere while the swollen A318 almost has no place to land.
@@thetruthspeaks8702 Most “large” airplanes (i.e., B737) maintain 140 knots on final segment, then decelerate to 125-130 on round-out. The Super-jumbos add about 15 - 20 knots to that You can check this out for yourself by going to sites like flightradar24. I say all this because an observer must recognize not just speed (velocity), but mass as well to calculate the inertia, which are basic laws of mechanics.
“A body in motion tends to remain in motion.”
@@flitetym you know a lot about the physics of it. I just thought that it was odd that a plane with over a million MTOW would not need all the help that it can get. The outer engines are not much farther out than the 747 outer engines either. So if the 747 can fly for over 50 years with thrust reverser on the outer engines the A380 should be able to do that too. I totally agree with you that it’s a design flaw. To me the plane is not proportioned well either.
@@thetruthspeaks8702 an airplane is - if anything - an assembly of compromises; financial compromises, to be exact. The Bristol Brabazon is a long-forgotten airplane which suffered the same accounting “maladies” as the 380. And Bristol was one of the companies amalgamated into today’s Airbus. Those darn Euros just aren’t reading their own Cliff’s notes. 🙄
According to the MEL the a380 can have both reversers inop and 8 brakes out
Pls do a vid on why boieng made earlier 747-200s have 3 windows like the 100 and how to tell the diffrence between the 747-100 and 200 and why they had that pointed tip at the end
Pointed tip where?
@@alexthegreat5009 he probably meant the winglets of the 400 and raked wingtips of the 8
@@spongebubatz oh yeah I guess he missed the bazillion videos talking about this topic
I love A380
I thought the only 2 reversors per A380 was as a fuel saving thing. Only needing to throttle up half as many engines on landing saves fuel.
The rear 2 wheels don’t contain brake units
What it does mean though is the A380 needs two different engine types & in the event of failure or replacement the correct type is needed.
I think the core engine is the same. I think the reverse thrust equipment is a part of the nacelles.
@@Rwalt61 the core will absolutely be the same but that doesn’t really come in to it as commercial aircraft are replaced as a complete unit.
I thought you meant you have to get one engine with thrust reverser and one without.
@@Rwalt61 essentially that is what i am saying, the core is the same but there has to be two engine types.
@@WhiskeyGulf71 The cowlings and all the moving doors and parts that deflect the engine thrust forward are all a part of the airframe not the engine.
So it could potentially preform it's own gate push back?
Just like any aircraft with reverse thrust, yes! But there are several reasons it isn’t done except with aircraft like the MD-80, but that’s also rare
I don't know, I'm sure QF32 would have liked a couple extra reversing engines!
They would’ve liked a couple more engines to begin with...
Didnt knew that!
What determines the speed an airplane can come in to land?
The speed it doesn’t fall out of the air
It's tied to weight and lift of the aircraft. The A380 might be heavy but has excellent low-speed lift characteristics. I am however in no position to elaborate on what factors directly influence it's performance
Aircraft weight, wind direction, air temperature, airport altitude, runway condition. Heavier the plane, hotter the temperature, higher the altitude, less headwind. All those things mean more runway needed and higher the landing speed. Light plane, strong headwind, dry runway, cold temparature and low altitude is the best for short landing.
Thanks guys but I'm asking specifically to the a380 having a slower landing speed compared to a 747 or lighter aircraft
@@tripleceven it has a high wing surface. Also the A380 fulfills many of the listed aspects of a landing speed which were listed in the other replies better (or however you want to rate it) than the 747, which of course doesn’t mean that the 747 can’t land slow. It really I the combination of all aspects
I knew that the a380 had reverse thrust on its 2 inside engines but i didn't know why
I originally thought it created too much moment since it’s so far from the centre
I knew that engines no.1 and 4 were without the thrust reverser for the "debris" reasons, but didn't know that a) thrust reversers would add weight , and b) the A380 was designed to stop just on brakes
Anyways, the A380 might just become history if this pandemic drags on for longer. 😥
Can you do a segment on Caribbean Airlines. They now giving back three of their 737 planes and going to buy the Max 8. The airlines always asking the Trinidad 🇹🇹 government for subventions which is becoming a burden on tax payers
Yes I want to know
My thought was that having reverse thrust on the outer engines would straight up rip the wings off.
Huh? So gross weight and cost over runs were not the reason?
Question if the A380 only needs two reverse on its engine why was the 747 have it on all four engine 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
747 engines generate less thrust
And 747 lands faster so it needs more help to stop.
And the 747 doesn't have as wide wings so can more safely do without fear of engine ingestion on existing r in runways also with lower power engine outputs it can more be easier steered on and less prone to diversion/digression on landing especially on wet or narrower runways.
Did you know that the engines of the A380 were actually TOO powerful in the first place? The power has been decreased by design because of that - not talking about the usual adjustments for take-off via N1% / temperature setting.
Wow, I just realized the A380 land ar 140 knot. It just feels to slow considering the size. Personally, If I was flying it in a flight simulator, I wouldn't go lower than 150 for landing
The question remains, does a 747 (any model) need all 4 thrust reversers?
They usually use all four, but at the airports they mostly fly into they probably don’t spool the engines up by a lot and just use it to stop smoothly
It would be safer to have it on all 4 because if it where to lose an engine that takes one thrust reverse the other could be used
hmmmm....the FAA basically told them that you cant sell a plane this size in the US without reversers, no matter how good the other stuff is. The compromise was 2 reversers. that is the simple reason why they did it that way. why? cuz brakes are known to fail....
Yes I did know and i was wondering
I did not know it was only 2, but I do now.
Yes, I knew the A380 only has reverse thrusters on the inside engines.