Airbus 350 - Huh?!

[flying dog]

Ok, here's the thing:

 

I watch Air Crash Investigation. ALL of them!

 

Don't know when, but NOT recently there was an episode and it was an Airbus plane in the story.

 

There was a cockpit view and HANG ON!!!! There is a YOKE! Can't be an Airbus! They have side sticks.

 

I think I know enough about the differences between Boeing and Airbus!

 

And the people who make "ACI" aren't that cheap to use incorrect cockpits!

 

Later it was said it was an Airbus 350.

 

I know the Airbus 310, 320, 330, 40 and 80. But hadn't heard of the 350, so accepted it.

 

Now Airbus are saying it is their new kid on the block.

 

Huh?

 

 

[SDQDI]

A quick google brings up a lot of hits with news of the a350 and it's first landing in Sydney yesterday. Greener, quieter, wider than the Dreamliner

 

Edit it was the a350 XWB not sure of any of the other a350's but there seems to be a few variants

 

 

[flying dog]

But the shots of inside the cockpit showed it IS side stick controlled.

 

So the question remains about the Air Crash Investigation episode which showed an (aledged) A350 cockpit with a yoke control.

 

And it was a LONG TIME AGO too!

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

A300/310 had conventional pedestal mounted yokes.

 

There are no A350's in service.

 

 

[SDQDI]

http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a350xwbfamily/

 

All looks pretty cool but I think ill stick with the hornet:happy:

 

 

[flying dog]

Well, maybe. I have been wrong before - I think. ;)

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

What accident were they investigating? Do a quick Google and I'm sure you will find the type.

 

DHL out of Iraq? Air India? There are quite a few to choose from with A300/310 series...

 

 

[flying dog]

I'm (kinda) at work.

 

As much as I am allowed a few indulgences, I can't spend the day doing searches on shows.

 

I'll try to remember. I am close to "OVERLOAD" with other tasks just now.

 

 

[red750]

The wikipedia page for the Airbus A300 has the following cockpit photo which shows not only yoke control, but no glass cockpit.

 

 

 

[GAFA]

Semi class (similar to the B767/757) was fitted to the A300-600 ( what Compass Airlines Mk1 operated) and in the A310. The early A300's that TAA/Australian/Qantas operated were steam driven like the photo above.

 

Side sticks and all glass appeared with the Introduction of the A320.

 

 

[Guest Darrell Lush]

The Airbus A350 landed for the first time in Johannesburg South Africa on Saturday 02 August. It was undergoing high altitude testing here in sunny South Africa but has since departed elsewhere...not quite sure where. As somebody mentioned its not yet in service.

 

 

[JUSTNUZZA]

Here is the cockpit of the A350.

 

 

 

[kgwilson]

The Airbus A350 landed for the first time in Johannesburg South Africa on Saturday 02 August. It was undergoing high altitude testing here in sunny South Africa but has since departed elsewhere...not quite sure where. As somebody mentioned its not yet in service.

It arrived in Sydney on Tuesday morning & was due to fly out to Auckland later in the day. It is one of 5 test versions & is on a final series of trials before the first commercial delivery to Qatar Airways later in the year. Certification is expected by the end of September.

 

 

[dutchroll]

The sidestick was introduced by Airbus on the A320 onwards, driven by the move to a fly-by-wire design and other associated features (flight envelope protection, etc) which they didn't have on their earlier models.

 

Airbus were a lot quicker to embrace fly-by-wire on their commercial jets than Boeing. Some of my less informed colleagues swore they'd never transfer from Boeing to Airbus because they'd never trust a fbw aircraft. But then they said they'd love to fly the B777. Go figure - the B777 was Boeing's first fly-by-wire commercial jet, except they retained the conventional yokes (and the Boeing FBW flight controls on Capt and F/O sides are mechanically linked together, whereas the Airbus ones are not).

 

However Boeing decided to not completely let go of mechanical linkages and a solitary spoiler panel on each wing is mechanically linked to the B777 flight controls.

 

As for the Air Crash Investigations episode? They simply got the details wrong. While the actual accident facts in ACI episodes are usually pretty right, they do sometimes screwup the film set, and occasionally there are technical mistakes in the narrative too. Quite some time back I swore I'd scream if any more ACI episodes came on with the pilots speaking to ATC through a handheld mike (and although there's a cabin interphone handset in the cockpit, even cabin PAs are usually done over headset/intercom). But eventually I lost my voice.

 

 

[DrZoos]

In reality all we care about when in the back seat is being SAFE, on time, taking enough luggage or sports equipment and having a nice seat we can sleep in...other then that i couldnt care less what it was called. All the food is marginal so if i dont get a disease thats ok too.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Oh the other thing they havent worked out yet is that 99% of us cant afford a flatbed, but we would gladly prefer some sleep...so get rid of 10% of the seats, charge us 10% more and we will all be happy.

 

 

[johnm]

sleep ......... sleeping on the airlines !

 

- seat belt / cabin warning buzzer every 30 minutes - if there is no warning required - press it anyway

 

- overhead lockers that have latches - they don't need to be slammed - slam it anyway

 

- cabin speakers turned up too loud that your ears ring - turn it up loud anyway

 

- patronising messages stating that you can't smoke in the plane, toilet or terminal (why say it ?) - say in anyway - turn it up loud anyway

 

 

[dutchroll]

sleep ......... sleeping on the airlines !- patronising messages stating that you can't smoke in the plane, toilet or terminal (why say it ?) - say in anyway - turn it up loud anyway

I sympathise, but unfortunately there are a great number of passengers who are mind-numbingly stupid - the stories I can tell! The "telling you to suck eggs" announcements are legal cover so that if they are disregarded, we can have the mind-numbingly stupid passengers arrested, banned, etc.

 

 

[johnm]

stupid stories ........................... it'd make a good thread dutchroll - we'd all like to hear some ? - I can see the sensitivity of your position though !

 

its pretty obvious that the majority of airline messages are legal cover / disclaimer. I myself would not mind one announcement that encapsulates it all

 

'welcome aboard this flight to XXXXX, be warned that if you are concussed, injured, burnt, broken, scalded, poisoned, infected, assaulted, insulted, annoyed, aggravated (etc), during or while arriving within and / or departing any airport terminal, this aircraft or any transport system involved in your travel - then this airline will not enter into any further discussion - you are on your own dearest passenger - assuming that you will enjoy your flight as best you can ........................ if you arrive at your destination safely '

 

 

[pmccarthy]

A friend travelled Malaysia last week. He was concerned to check the flight path - that function didn't work throughout the trip.