Talk:Airbus A380

Reason for only 2 thrust reversers - need better sources

The Engines section of this article says, "Sufficient braking capacity allowed for thrust reversers to be installed on only the inboard engines." The two sources provided are useless. The first is a sales brochure from the manufacturer of the brakes (Honeywell), bragging about how great their brakes are. The second source (which I've removed) says nothing about braking, only that Airbus was seeking new bids from contractors to design and manufacture engine nacelles with thrust reversers on the inboard engines and none on the outboards, so it's outdated and does not say anything about the statement. The idea that the brakes are so good that the A380 only needs 2 reversers seems to have come from the brake manufacturer. When I found another source that supported that claim, it gave a link to the Honeywell brochure as its source.

I've found 3 reliable, secondary sources that say the reason for only 2 reversers is to prevent the outboard engines from kicking up debris off the edge of the runway, which could then be ingested into the engines. One of those 3 articles provides much more detail. They point out the massive spooilers, which allow the wheel brakes to be more efficient as well as providing drag of their own, and the massive flaps, which allow the aircraft to land at much slower speeds than other heavy aircraft, about 20 kts slower than the 747, so less braking is needed. (I don't have a source at hand, but bigger flaps also slow aircraft down on the runway, more efficiently at the higher speeds when thrust reversers are also used. I see someone already reverted my edit, so I'll just add in those three sources I found. Dcs002 (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Done. I reverted that revert, which makes me VERY nervous. (I don't want a struggle or bad juju or any of that. If that editor would like to discuss this section and what's best, I'd like that.) I only added one of the 3 sources. The best of the three was already in the article, so I used it a couple times, and the third article I decided to leave out. It was from USA Today, but it was one of those "Ask a Pilot" articles (appeal to authority). I thought the other two sources were quite solid, and there was no need to add another source that was a little weaker than what the article already has. I removed the self-serving bit where Honeywell was taking the credit for this decision because of their awesome brakes. They're good brakes, and I left that in the article because it was mentioned in at least one of the sources, but none of the neutral (non-sales) sources I found gave them credit for reducing the number of thrusters in the design from 4 to 2. Dcs002 (talk) 06:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• Well done and thanks! Don't worry much about multiple citation in places, especially if none of them support all the details in the text. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Add Global Airlines to list of operators?

Can global airlines be an operator despite not commencing operations yet? 174.225.75.4 (talk) 16:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

No. You answered it yourself there. They're not operating it right now therefore they cannot be an operator. Canterbury Tail talk 17:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Should it at least be shown as an airline that owns it but hasn’t commenced yet? 2600:1006:B32D:A8E2:4D57:54F3:D22F:4DB8 (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

We can cover it should they ever actually operate. Canterbury Tail talk 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

consumption l/h

I would like to see absolute values for the fuel consumption, not “the Airbus A380 consumes 2.4 liters of kerosene per 100 passenger kilometers”. Nice try. But the world is bigger than that. 2001:41D0:FE50:F000:9EB7:DFF:FEB7:76EB (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

But that is an absolute value? Q ^{T C} 17:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

New Image

Hello, this Emirates (airline) image is too whitish. Replace it with ANA livery! BuddyHeigh (talk) 20:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Please suggest an image to replace it with. However ANA only has 3 A380s, it's not a major user so shouldn't be represented by an image in the infobox, that would be Wp:UNDUE. Canterbury Tail talk 20:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Canterbury Tail is right, ANA only has 3 Airbus A380s. Therefore, they are not a major operator of the aircraft type. TG-article (talk to me) (contributions) 20:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I would like to propose to replace the image with this one. It's an Emirates A380 in the new livery, and is also in flight in the clean configuration.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Epilot787 (talk • contribs)

That image looks like an obvious copyright violation, which is of course not allowed. --McSly (talk) 00:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you McSly. Can I ask why it is a copyright violation? I took the photo myself. Epilot787 (talk) 01:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I found another copy of this elsewhere on the Internet (I won't say where to avoid outing), and in that context it appears genuine. However Epilot, I strongly recommend uploading a version with all of the metadata (except any personal information you might have embedded), which addresses concerns about scraping, which will always arise when metadata is scrubbed. Acroterion (talk) 01:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply Acroterion! I've uploaded a new copy of the image with all of the metadata. Epilot787 (talk) 02:54, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, that tallies with what I saw elsewhere. Nice shot! I recommend a little cleanup with a third-party add-in to clean up some ghosting/blur, but it's nice as is, especially if you shot through a window. I gather you were on a parallel-ish course and shooting sideways? Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! I've already cleaned it up quite a bit since it was shot through a window. I think at this point you can find imperfections only when zooming in. Yes, it was shot on a parallel course and shooting sideways. Epilot787 (talk) 03:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

New A380LC variant

New A380 Variant targeting low-cost carriers has been launched and it is called the A380LC. Then we should add '2025-' beside '2005-2021' at the end of the 'Produced' parameter. BuddyHeigh (talk) 12:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

What is your source? Are you sure it isn't an April Fool? (similar to [1])? Rosbif73 (talk) 12:42, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

• At this point an April Fools thing is more likely than a real design imo. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:44, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

  No, I got it a source from a trusted news agency(not mentioning to prevent outing), and not a random social media reel you guys were expecting. Surely that one's not gonna do April fooling. Check it out yourselves. BuddyHeigh (talk) 15:15, 2 April 2025 (UTC)