Singapore Expats Forum

Airbus 380 is unsafe

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

IOP
Regular
Regular
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat, 21 Aug 2010

Postby IOP » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:53 am

nutnut wrote:Thanks IOP, next time I have to fly with business on the A380, I will be terrified that it's not safe! Perfect, my choice is limited by my company using solely SIA and the fact they run A380's on some of the routes I need to take.

As if I didn't dislike flying enough already. :( :(


Probably, the life just tells you "high time to change your job" ;-)

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:00 pm

IOP wrote:Mi Amigo, your question seems to me quite strange. I just asked to discuss.

Well you were the one who created this thread with the title "Airbus 380 is unsafe." Sounds more like a statement than a question to me.

The statement "... is unsafe" - it is what pilot says (see the article), not me.

I think you need to read the article again. The pilot did NOT say that the A380 is unsafe. What he said was, "We think it hasn't been tested enough, and that it's simply not as safe." That's obviously his opinion, but you have distorted it into your interpretation. FWIW, my view is that it's a bit daft to say that it hasn't been tested enough. What does 'enough' mean, exactly? The plane has been in service for nearly five years now and there are currently around 80 aircraft in operation with eight airlines. Yes, there has been one serious incident, plus the wing spar issue that was detected after that. Unfortunately this is not uncommon in the early years of a new aircraft model's operational history. The good news is that the defects were found and corrected without any loss of life (sadly that's not always the case; an example being the DC-10). But if you were to use the amount of time in service as a measure of how 'safe' a plane is, then you would have to mark the Boeing 787 very low on that score. So would you fly in one of those? I would.

various bizzare statements about Scoot
I'm going to fly Scoot this year, and also I frequently fly with SIA. And yes, it is true, that I like Boeings compare to Airbuses, because lots of pilots says that new models are better than Airbuses.

Well I think we (the travelling public) are very lucky that the two major suppliers of commercial aircraft in the world both have extremely good safety records. Most accidents occur due to human error, be it that of the air crew or the maintenance teams. I'm happy to fly on any aircraft from either company, provided it is operated by a carrier with a good record and reputation.
Be careful what you wish for

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Postby Strong Eagle » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:11 pm

Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/
Last edited by Strong Eagle on Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:16 pm

nutnut wrote:Thanks IOP, next time I have to fly with business on the A380, I will be terrified that it's not safe! Perfect, my choice is limited by my company using solely SIA and the fact they run A380's on some of the routes I need to take.

As if I didn't dislike flying enough already. :( :(

Well I think you should take IOP's irrational scaremongering with a pinch of salt TBH. I just returned from Europe at the weekend on a 380 and it's far and away my favourite aircraft at present. The cabin noise level is half that of a 747, the cabin air pressure in flight is higher than on other planes, and the cabin is more spacious - all of which makes for a more comfortable experience. Personally I also like the fact that it has four engines, unlike the 777 (also a great aircraft IMO), but both are very safe planes.
Be careful what you wish for

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:22 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.
Be careful what you wish for

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Postby Strong Eagle » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:29 pm

Mi Amigo wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.


Fixed.

And yes, IOP's statements are unwarranted... flying is far safer than driving a car, riding a bus.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:31 pm

Here's some more scientific data on aircraft safety by model:

http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm

Nutnut, you've got to look at it statistically and not emotionally - flying is extremely safe. Crashing, on the other hand... :twisted:
Be careful what you wish for

IOP
Regular
Regular
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat, 21 Aug 2010

Postby IOP » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:34 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:
Mi Amigo wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.


Fixed.

And yes, IOP's statements are unwarranted... flying is far safer than driving a car, riding a bus.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.


It was elaborated, as I said I think that it is quite safe but not as safe as Boeing.

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Postby Strong Eagle » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:38 pm

Mi Amigo wrote:Here's some more scientific data on aircraft safety by model:

http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm

Nutnut, you've got to look at it statistically and not emotionally - flying is extremely safe. Crashing, on the other hand... :twisted:


That's a better table. Actually, the 747 has one of the higher rates. My favorite plane. Interesting. Better not go near one of those 747's nutnut.

IOP
Regular
Regular
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat, 21 Aug 2010

Postby IOP » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 1:49 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:
Mi Amigo wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.


Fixed.

And yes, IOP's statements are unwarranted... flying is far safer than driving a car, riding a bus.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.


Depends... some airlines always have many incidents, some just a few, like BA.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.

Depends... more engines means more probability that one of the engines will caught a fire, like with Qantas.

i.e. everything in this life depends. if professional pilot says that it is not as safe as you think - better to listen.

747 is quite safe. The last incidents dates in 2010s with two cargo planes killing ~4 people totally.

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10408
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Postby Strong Eagle » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 2:05 pm

IOP wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:
Mi Amigo wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.


Fixed.

And yes, IOP's statements are unwarranted... flying is far safer than driving a car, riding a bus.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.


Depends... some airlines always have many incidents, some just a few, like BA.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.

Depends... more engines means more probability that one of the engines will caught a fire, like with Qantas.

i.e. everything in this life depends. if professional pilot says that it is not as safe as you think - better to listen.

747 is quite safe. The last incidents dates in 2010s with two cargo planes killing ~4 people totally.


You have so many misconceptions it is hard to know where to start.

a) Boeing is not statistically safer than Airbus. The A320 has the best record. Many Boeing types have worse records than their Airbus counterparts. All are extremely safe, and it's bullsh*t to say that Boeing is safer.

b) One professional pilot doesn't mean squat... it's an opinion, nothing more, and not supported by the data. Go over to PPrune and give it a read... thousands of pilots post there... you won't find the nonsense that you posted in your first link... which, BTW, the pilots at PPrune happen to think is nonsense.

c) More engines obviously mean more opportunity for engine failure but you miss the point. More engines also mean reduced fatal events... why do you think that for so many years two engine airplanes were not permitted to cross oceans? Only the improvement in engine technology and adoption of dual or fail safe systems allowed this to happen.

c) Your comments about airlines are skewed. With the exception of India, Pakistan, and Indonesia, airline incident rates are low... particularly in the last ten years.

ALL airlines, even the worst, are still much safer than any other form of transportation.

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 2:07 pm

IOP wrote:It was elaborated, as I said I think that it is quite safe but not as safe as Boeing.

You think that Boeing planes are inherently safer that Airbus models, but do you have any hard data to back that up?

IOP wrote:i.e. everything in this life depends. if professional pilot says that it is not as safe as you think - better to listen.

Where did a pilot say "It is not as safe as you think"?
Be careful what you wish for

IOP
Regular
Regular
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat, 21 Aug 2010

Postby IOP » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 2:11 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:
IOP wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:
Mi Amigo wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Check here for aircraft accident stats. Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A330 have ever had an incident.

http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/

SE, I think perhaps you meant to say "Neither the Boeing 777 nor the Airbus A380 have ever had an incident [involving loss of life]." Sadly the A330 has had hull loss incidents (including the Air France accident mentioned above). Personally I still think the A330 is a safe plane to fly (there are now nearly 900 in service worldwide), although I prefer the A340 with the extra two engines - especially the 340-500 long range model.


Fixed.

And yes, IOP's statements are unwarranted... flying is far safer than driving a car, riding a bus.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.


Depends... some airlines always have many incidents, some just a few, like BA.

There's only one reason to run two engine planes, and that is economics.

Depends... more engines means more probability that one of the engines will caught a fire, like with Qantas.

i.e. everything in this life depends. if professional pilot says that it is not as safe as you think - better to listen.

747 is quite safe. The last incidents dates in 2010s with two cargo planes killing ~4 people totally.


You have so many misconceptions it is hard to know where to start.

a) Boeing is not statistically safer than Airbus. The A320 has the best record. Many Boeing types have worse records than their Airbus counterparts. All are extremely safe, and it's bullsh*t to say that Boeing is safer.

b) One professional pilot doesn't mean squat... it's an opinion, nothing more, and not supported by the data. Go over to PPrune and give it a read... thousands of pilots post there... you won't find the nonsense that you posted in your first link... which, BTW, the pilots at PPrune happen to think is nonsense.

c) More engines obviously mean more opportunity for engine failure but you miss the point. More engines also mean reduced fatal events... why do you think that for so many years two engine airplanes were not permitted to cross oceans? Only the improvement in engine technology and adoption of dual or fail safe systems allowed this to happen.

c) Your comments about airlines are skewed. With the exception of India, Pakistan, and Indonesia, airline incident rates are low... particularly in the last ten years.

ALL airlines, even the worst, are still much safer than any other form of transportation.


You are quite aggressive, mate. Take a breath.... I said that I think so, and it is based on what I have read on aviation forums from pilots.
No matter what you think, it will be good for you to respect other's opinion.
If I think that A380 is unsafe, I may think so. Also I have stayed corrected, but you ignored that, also you have skipped my phrase certain "types of Boeing/Airbuses...."

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 2:18 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:Actually, the 747 has one of the higher rates. My favorite plane. Interesting. Better not go near one of those 747's nutnut.

I love the 747 and its safety record is outstanding, when you consider the sheer number of planes in service and the longevity of the various 747 models. Most of the losses have been due to human error or things like terrorist bombs (e.g. Air India, Lockerbie) and dodgy maintenance / repair work (e.g JAL). I still think it's a magnificent workhorse and, according to a pilot friend of mine, it is apparently the fastest commercial aircraft still flying. Interestingly the fastest commercial planes used to be Concorde and the TU-144 (obviously) and the Vickers VC-10 (less obviously).
Be careful what you wish for

User avatar
Mi Amigo
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1767
Joined: Sat, 19 Jun 2004
Location: Kinto Pino

Postby Mi Amigo » Wed, 05 Sep 2012 2:25 pm

IOP wrote:You are quite aggressive, mate. Take a breath.... I said that I think so, and it is based on what I have read on aviation forums from pilots.
No matter what you think, it will be good for you to respect other's opinion.
If I think that A380 is unsafe, I may think so. Also I have stayed corrected, but you ignored that, also you have skipped my phrase certain "types of Boeing/Airbuses...."

IOP, you are entitled to your opinions, and you can think whatever you like. I see nothing aggressive in SE's posts and no-one is disrespecting you for having your opinions, but we are entitled to disagree with you and point out what we believe are irrational assumptions and interpretations that you are making. And I reiterate - you created this thread with the title of 'Airbus 380 is unsafe', which implies a statement of fact. That is misleading at best and disingenous at worst.
Be careful what you wish for


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests