Anyone use Emirates First Class?

[TotallyOz]

The new A380 First Class looks amazing.

http://www.emirates.com/english/flying/our_fleet/emirates_a380/first_class/first_class.aspx

[TampaYankee]

The new A380 First Class looks amazing.

http://www.emirates.com/english/flying/our_fleet/emirates_a380/first_class/first_class.aspx

Some of those A38ty... whatevers have been falling out of the air. If I were you I inquire about carry-on fees for a parachute.

[JKane]

Some of those A38ty... whatevers have been falling out of the air. If I were you I inquire about carry-on fees for a parachute.

What? I'd remember hearing of serious A380 incidents...

This doesn't count!

All I've found in a quick google is a couple ground incidents, a hard landing that burst some tires, and maybe a single engine failure. (All non-events reported because of the novelty and rarity of the plane--though the ground events were in part due to it's size.)

Pretty sure Emirates' first class entitles you to a 5 minute in-flight shower. But for the price of a ticket you could have a Gulfstream V to yourself or hot escort like Kristian for at least a month!

[RA1]

I picked SYD-DXB just to get a price. (Sydney, Australia - Dubai) The fare was about 14,000 USD R-T on the A-380. You would barely get out of sight in a G V (now G550) for that price. Without getting a quote but knowing the ball park figures I think you would be doing well to do this trip in a Gulfstream 550 for under 100,000 USD.

Best regards,

RA1

The G550 is about the only bizjet flying today that would be able to make this trip non-stop.

[TotallyOz]

They do have introductory specials. They have started to do Bangkok to Hong Kong and and the rate for Business Class is around 300. For that, I'm willing to give it a test run.

[Guest Daddy]

The new A380 First Class looks amazing.

http://www.emirates....irst_class.aspx

Benjamin Nicholas flew this cabin class last year I believe either from a blog entry or twit.

Since he posted here recently, perhaps he'll drop by and share his experience.

It's all very lavish and I hope the airline is doing better than the country's real estate, which like the Titantic - was boasted once as un-sinkable and un-stoppable.

[RA1]

Emirates does have some cheap business fares between BKK and HKG but it is not on the A 380 which I thought was the original question.

BN can speak for himself but the 380 does not serve the US at the present time, so he would have had to go elsewhere for any 380 leg.

Best regards,

RA1

[TotallyOz]

Emirates does have some cheap business fares between BKK and HKG but it is not on the A 380 which I thought was the original question.

From October 1st, Emirates will introduce the new double-deck Airbus A380 on its daily Bangkok/Hong Kong service. On the internet, economy return prices are quite high at Bt. 7,635, but business class return is about the cheapest for that route at Bt. 14,900.

[Guest Daddy]

BN can speak for himself but the 380 does not serve the US at the present time, so he would have had to go elsewhere for any 380 leg.

Best regards,

RA1

KMEM, I think that's exactly what he did do, IIRC.

[RA1]

Interesting that Emirates would put the 380 on such a short flight. 2.5 hours, more or less.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest FourAces]

Yes, its obviously a huge step up from traditional first class but it looks ugly. Just keeping it real

[Guest zipperzone]

The new A380 First Class looks amazing.

http://www.emirates.com/english/flying/our_fleet/emirates_a380/first_class/first_class.aspx

I bet it's not near as luxo as AirForce One.

[RA1]

At 300,000+ per hour, what could be?

Best regards,

RA1

[TampaYankee]

Qantas jumbo makes emergency landing in Singapore

By JULIA ZAPPEI

SINGAPORE – Qantas grounded its Airbus A380 fleet after one of the superjumbo jets blew out an engine Thursday, shooting flames and raining large metal chunks before making a safe emergency landing in Singapore with 459 people aboard.

It was most serious midair incident involving the double-decker A380, the world's largest and latest airliner, since it debuted in October 2007 with Singapore Airlines flying it to Sydney — the same route that Qantas flight QF34 was flying when it was stricken.

Qantas said there had been no explosion, but witnesses aboard the plane and on the ground reported blasts. Officials in Indonesia said the engine trouble could not have been related to recent volcanic eruptions of Mount Merapi, some 800 miles (1,300 kilometers) to the east.

After the plane touched down in Singapore, the engine closest to the fuselage on the left wing had visible burn marks and was missing a plate section that would have been painted with the red kangaroo logo of the airline. The upper part of the left wing also appeared damaged, indicating that one or more pieces from the engine gouged a hole in the wing.

Passenger amateur video from inside the plane showed white vapor coming out of the wing as the A380 landed.

One passenger, Rosemary Hegardy, 60, of Sydney, told The Associated Press that she heard two bangs and saw yellow flames from her window shortly after takeoff.

"There was flames — yellow flames came out, and debris came off. ... You could see black things shooting through the smoke, like bits of debris," she said.

Although it was nearly 90 minutes from the time of the explosion to the plane landing, there was no panic inside the aircraft, she said.

The captain addressed the passengers immediately by saying "'I'm sure you realize there's a problem. We have to find out what the problem is,'" she said. Shortly after that, the captain explained that an engine had failed and needed to dump fuel before landing.

"The crew were fantastic, really — I am so amazed that everyone stayed calm," she said. "We were all sort of really shaken up, but what could you do?"

In another seat, Tyler Wooster watched as part of the skin of the wing peeled off, exposing foam and broken wires.

"My whole body just went to jelly and I didn't know what was going to happen as we were going down, if we were going to be OK," Wooster told Australia's Nine Network news.

Residents on the western Indonesian island of Batam, near Singapore, helped authorities pick up more than 100 pieces of debris scattered in 15 locations in Batam. The pieces, mostly small, torn metal but some the size of doors, were brought to police headquarters for the investigation.

The trouble with one of the plane's four engines happened 15 minutes after takeoff from Singapore at 9:56 a.m. The plane landed after one hour and 50 minutes.

"The shutdown of the Qantas engine had no connection with Mount Merapi," said Bambang Ervan, a spokesman for Indonesia's Transportation Ministry. "It was too far from the volcano — the sky over Singapore and Sumatra island is free of dust."

The flight is a regular service that flies between Sydney, Singapore and London. Qantas' A380s can carry up to 525 people, but flight QF34 was carrying 433 passengers and 26 crew, all of whom were evacuated by a stepladder in an operation that lasted two hours.

Qantas spokeswoman Emma Kearns in Sydney said there were no injuries or an explosion on board. The airline described the problem as an "engine issue" without elaborating.

"We will suspend those A380 services until we are completely confident that Qantas safety requirements have been met," Qantas CEO Alan Joyce told a news conference.

Joyce appeared to blame the engine, made by Rolls-Royce.

"This issue, an engine failure, has been one that we haven't seen before. So we are obviously taking it very seriously, because it is a significant engine failure," he said.

Singapore Airlines later said in a statement it would be "delaying all flights operating our A380 aircraft" after Rolls-Royce and Airbus advised it to conduct precautionary technical checks.

Germany's Lufthansa, which operates three A380s, said that it would keep its A380 that was scheduled to depart Frankfurt for Johannesburg on Thursday grounded to carry out checks on its motor, as recommended by Rolls-Royce. But spokesman Boris Ogursky said Lufthansa plans to fly as scheduled with its A380 from Frankfurt to Tokyo on Friday.

Experts said the problem appeared to be an "uncontained engine failure," which occurs when turbine debris punctures the engine casing and the light cowling that covers the unit.

Aviation expert Tom Ballantyne told the AP that Thursday's troubles were "certainly the most serious incident that the A380 has experienced since it entered operations."

But "it's not like the aircraft is going to drop out of the sky," Ballantyne, Sydney-based chief correspondent at Orient Aviation Magazine, said by telephone from Brunei.

He said the engine shutdown couldn't have caused a crash. The planes are designed to fly on just two engines, and the pilots are trained to handle engine failures, he said.

Rolls-Royce said it was aware of the situation, noting that the investigation was still at an early stage. Its shares fell 5 percent on the London Stock Exchange.

Airbus said in a statement that it was providing all necessary technical assistance to the investigation and a team of specialists from Airbus was being dispatched to Singapore.

Martin Fendt, a spokesman for the consortium, declined to comment on Qantas' grounding of all its A380s, but he said no airworthiness directives have been issued mandating a halt to flights by the superjumbo.

Still, the incident is likely to raise safety questions about one of the most modern aircraft, which has suffered a series of minor incidents.

In September 2009, a Singapore Airlines A380 was forced to turn around in mid-flight and head back to Paris after an engine malfunction. On March 31, a Qantas A380 with 244 people on board burst two tires on landing in Sydney after a flight from Singapore.

Last August, a Lufthansa crew shut down one of the engines as a precaution before landing at Frankfurt on a flight from Japan, after receiving confusing information on a cockpit indicator.

The other issues with the A380s have all been relatively minor, such as electrical problems, Ballantyne said.

Qantas' safety record is enviable among major airlines, with no fatal crashes since it introduced jet-powered planes in the late 1950s.

But there have been a run of scares in recent years across a range of plane types. The most serious — when a faulty oxygen tank caused an explosion that blew a 5-foot hole in the fuselage of a Boeing 747-400 over the Philippines — prompted aviation officials to order Qantas to upgrade maintenance procedures.

Airbus has delivered a total of 37 A380s so far. Thirteen are in service with Emirates, 11 with Singapore Airlines, six with Qantas, four with Air France and three with Lufthansa.

Emirates airlines, which has 13 A380s in operation, said all of them are flying as scheduled. It noted that its planes are powered by Engine Alliance GP7200 engines.

Thursday's incident appeared unrelated to mail bombs sent recently on cargo planes, allegedly from Yemeni militants.

___

Associated Press writers Kristen Gelineau and Rohan D. Sullivan in Sydney, Robin McDowell in Jakarta, Angela Doland in Paris and AP Aviation Writer Slobodan Lekic in Brussels contributed to this report.

See original article at:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_singapore_qantas_emergency;_ylt=Ahe5iIX7SEgqvVl0FJKU61Bv24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTM1ZmkzY2FuBGFzc2V0Ay9zL2FwL2FzX3NpbmdhcG9yZV9xYW50YXNfZW1lcmdlbmN5BGNjb2RlA2dtcGUEY3BvcwMzBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDcWFudGFzanVtYm9t

[RA1]

So far, what we know is an engine had a catastrophic failure which resulted in no injuries and little damage to the aircraft. The crew followed SOP, standard operating procedures, by dumping fuel to get down to landing weight and returning to the nearest suitable airport, which, in this case was the one of departure, Singapore.

These kinds of things will happen with immature fleets. It is only prudent that the airline, the airframe manufacturer and the engine manufacturer as well as various air agencies should temporarily ground the aircraft for further investigation. You will no doubt note that an airline which has different engines installed has elected to continue operations as per usual. No doubt all the other airlines will resume operations shortly as soon as RR and various others are satisfied that it is completely safe to do so.

This news article was much less inflamatory than some others that I have read. There was no mention of miraculous landings and no one injured in this one. That is how it should be. A routine landing after a failure of an important component, namely one of the 4 engines. No harm, no foul.

Best regards,

RA1

[Lucky]

Those other airlines may get the planes back in the air, but will they get the customers to go with them? I wouldn't fly on one.

[Lucky]

As I was saying:

Rolls-Royce of London, which is a separate company from the carmaker owned by BMW, is also developing an engine for Boeing’s latest aircraft, the 787 Dreamliner. Problems with that engine have contributed to the program’s delays.

“This is extremely worrying for Rolls-Royce,” said Phil Abbott, editor of Aircraft Engines, a London-based industry newsletter. “There is no such thing as a shoddy engine maker. But the moment engines fly to bits, no one wants to fly them anymore.” NYT

[TampaYankee]

I treat new car models and new plane models the same way. I wait for a track record to be establish before buying in. I leave it to others to beta test those items. I never have been one that needed to own or try the newest item available.

[JKane]

Uncontained engine failure is a very serious thing.

This could really hurt Airbus if what I read about them having more than 500 orders for a *single engine* passenger aircraft based of a RR engine are true (I can't imagine why the FAA would ever approve such a design!). You'd have to be as nutty as the CEO of RyanAir to even talk about that now.

[RA1]

Some of the "other" airlines do not have RR engines and they should be in the air, no doubt, already.

Not taking advantage of the latest and greatest is, of course, a personal decision. However, you are not emulating Lucky Lindberg, are you?

The FAA has already approved single engine aircraft for "public transport" aka on demand charter. Change will slowly happen. It took a long time for twin engine aircraft to be approved for operation when not near "suitable" airports. Now, some of them can go 210 minutes away from such. That is a long time to be flying around on one engine. Ditto to get 2 person crews approved. Now you never see more than that unless the flight is so long that the crew must be "augmented" with relief members.

Aviation is pretty conservative but not unwilling to move forward.

Best regards,

RA1

[TampaYankee]

A380 engines may have manufacturing fault

By ROHAN SULLIVAN, Associated Press

SYDNEY – Australian officials investigating the mid-air disintegration of an engine on a Qantas superjumbo said Thursday they identified a potential manufacturing defect in Rolls-Royce engines used in 20 A380s worldwide that could cause engine failure.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said it recommended a new round of safety checks for planes fitted with the engines, and that Rolls-Royce, affected airlines and other safety regulators were taking action to ensure the A380s involved were safe to fly.

The ATSB has been leading the investigation into the disintegration of a Trent 900 on a Qantas A380 shortly it took off from Singapore on Nov. 4. Shrapnel speared through the wing, caused structural and other damage that set off a cascade of problems for the pilots before they made a safe emergency landing in Singapore.

Three airlines using Trent 900 engines have conducted extensive checks and modified some parts since European regulators issued a safety directive following the Nov. 4 blowout — the most serious problem for the world's largest and newest jetliner.

But ATSB safety bureau chief commissioner Martin Dolan said Thursday's safety recommendation was based on a conclusion reached only a day earlier, in conjunction with Rolls-Royce, as investigators prepared to release their preliminary report into the Qantas incident.

"We considered it was a sufficiently significant safety issue that we should immediately release it to parties who were operating with these engines," Dolan told The Associated Press on Thursday.

In a statement, the ATSB said there is "a potential manufacturing defect" with an oil tube connection in the Trent 900 engine.

"The problem relates to the potential for misaligned oil pipe counter-boring, which could lead to fatigue cracking, oil leakage and potential engine failure from an oil fire," the statement said.

It recommended close inspection of engines "and the removal from service of any engine which displays the counter-boring problem."

The European Aviation Safety Authority issued an emergency order on Nov. 11 requiring airlines to re-examine their Trent 900s and ground any planes with suspicious oil leaks. It said a preliminary probe showed an oil fire broke out in the section housing the turbines — shafts that power the engine when they are spun at great speeds by combusting jet fuel. An oil pump and network of tubes lubricate and cool the turbines.

EASA said the blaze may have caused the breakup of the intermediate pressure turbine disc, a heavy metal plate that holds the blades of the middle of three turbines.

Turbine engines are known to generate vibrations that can cause parts to wear prematurely. The EASA order indicated that oil tubes may have fractured as a result of such vibrations and spewed oil in an extremely hot section of the engine, causing a fire. The resulting heat could have caused the rotor to which the turbine blades are attached to expand, bringing the turbine blades into contact with the casing that encloses the engine.

The ATSB statement refers to the same part of the engine as the European directive, and goes further than the EASA's directive by attributing the problem to a likely manufacturing defect.

Qantas grounded its fleet of six superjumbos immediately after the Nov. 4 incident while it conducted exhaustive checks and modifications, including replacing 16 Trent 900 engines. The Australian airline returned two A380s to service last weekend.

The airline said Thursday it would conduct detailed one-off inspections as a result of the ATSB recommendation.

But Qantas spokesman Simon Rushton said the airline was not pulling its A380s from service and the latest checks were not expected to interrupt services.

Two other airlines use Trent 900 engines on their A380s — Singapore Airlines, which has 11 of the superjumbos, and Germany's Lufthansa, which has three.

___

Associated Press writer Rod McGuirk in Canberra, Australia, contributed to this report.

See original article at:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101202/ap_on_bi_ge/superjumbo_woes

[Guest zipperzone]

You still won't catch me on one, anytime soon!

[JKane]

More alarming is the cascade of unexplained failures that flight experienced. I think I'd avoid A380s of either engine type until that's been thoroughly investigated.

Though on the other hand, even in the last 20 years aircraft safety has improved tremendously. There were 2 or 3 A320s lost when they were introduced in the 90s. Every new military aircraft used to routinely lose several prototypes/test models. Now people are more afraid then ever with less reason then ever.

[RA1]

Interesting article. Did you read it for the sensational bits or did you notice the, "A near disaster? Not quite....."? A good bit of the problems were "software issues" and some of the others need to be evaluated and addressed. An uncontained engine failure is something that definitely needs to be fixed. The Sioux City UA DC-10 comes to mind as well as the Concorde which threw a piece of debris into the wing/engine with catastropic results.

I am not defending the Airbus. I am a Boeing fan. And, they are not and never will be perfect. However, when extremely unusual events transpire then unusual results are common. Fix the engines, do some homework on the other issues and get back in the game, so to speak.

As you summarize, flying is very safe and safer than it was "before".

Best regards,

RA1

[JKane]

Interesting article. Did you read it for the sensational bits or did you notice the, "A near disaster? Not quite....."? A good bit of the problems were "software issues"...

I really tire of your tone. You manage to be dismissive and 'superior' quite often despite no evidence of anything special or novel, intelligence-wise.

You throw your contrary 2-cents in at every opportunity, but when people make the effort to refute any counter-points you... make is too strong a word--insinuate is usually more apt, you just move on to shit on the next thread.

Sensational? Those of us who read Patrick Smith regularly know he's anything but; if YOU had read the article with any comprehension you'd have realized it actually started as an apology for having been dismissive of the incident at first glance.

"Software Issues" huh? In a plane with no mechanical linkage between the cockpit and the control surfaces you don't think issues with the computer which sits between the two is the least bit worrisome? Especially when a new Airbus has crashed before, seemingly because it's computer failed to respond to unexpected inputs?

I am not saying the A380 is a flying deathtrap, I'm saying that there were several serious failures on that flight which could've easily combined to cause disaster and that until there's been a little more time to work them out *I'd* chose other equipment to travel on, where possible.

And I had already referenced the uncontained failure aboard United Airlines Flight 232 via link earlier in the thread. But thanks again for your contrarian two cents before you agree with half of what I said anyway!