A380 Unsicher?

Für alles, was nicht in andere Foren passt - (fast) alles ist erlaubt ...
Post Reply
N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

A380 Unsicher?

Post by N5528P » 2. Oct 2005, 17:16

Hier ein sehr interessanter Artikel der LA Times datiert mit 27.09.2005.

LG, Bernhard

LA Times wrote:A Skeptic Under PressureA U.S. engineer faces bankruptcy and arrest in Austria as he questions the safety of a component in the huge Airbus A380 jetliner.

By Peter Pae, Times Staff Writer

VIENNA — Ever since the Mangans gave up their comfortable house in Kansas City, Kan., and moved here a year ago, the family has been living in a kind of suspended animation.

It almost looks as if they just moved into their two-bedroom apartment near Austria's old Imperial Palace: Some boxes shipped from the U.S. have never been opened and the bedroom windows are still covered with sheets because the family ran short of money before they could buy curtains.

The three young Mangan children have stopped asking about their plight, although 9-year-old Timothy gets angry every once in a while. "I wish I can yell at them," he blurted out recently about his father's former employer.

Joseph Mangan, 41, is a whistle-blower. As a result he and his family find themselves in a foreign country with unfamiliar laws, fighting a legal battle that has left them almost penniless.

A year ago, Mangan told European aviation authorities that he believed there were problems with a computer chip on the Airbus A380, the biggest and costliest commercial airliner ever built. The A380 is a double-decked engineering marvel that will carry as many as 800 passengers — double the capacity of Boeing Co.'s 747. It is expected to enter airline service next year.

Mangan alleges that flaws in a microprocessor could cause the valves that maintain cabin pressure on the A380 to accidentally open during flight, allowing air to leak out so rapidly that everyone aboard could lose consciousness within seconds.

It's a lethal scenario similar to the 1999 crash that killed professional golfer Payne Stewart and five others when their Learjet lost cabin pressure and they blacked out. The plane flew on autopilot for hours before crashing in South Dakota.

Mangan was chief engineer for TTTech Computertechnik, a Viennese company that supplies the computer chips and software to control the cabin-pressurization system for the A380, which is being assembled at the Airbus plant in France.

In October, TTTech fired Mangan and filed civil and criminal charges against him for revealing company documents. The company said the information was proprietary and he had no right to disclose it to anyone.

Mangan countersued, saying he had been wrongly terminated for raising legitimate safety concerns.

Unlike U.S. laws that shield whistle-blowers from corporate retaliation, Austrian laws offer no such protection. Last year an Austrian judge imposed an unusual gag order on Mangan, seeking to stop him from talking about the case.

Mangan posted details about the case anyway in his own Internet blog. The Austrian court fined him $185,000 for violating the injunction.

And the Vienna police, who are conducting a criminal investigation into the matter, searched the family's apartment for four hours, downloading files from Mangan's computer as his children watched.

Boxes of documents detailing his allegations clutter the living room, but Mangan can't show the material or talk about the case — at least in Austria.

To discuss his case with The Times, Mangan took a five-hour train ride to Munich, Germany, where the gag order doesn't apply. "I don't want to destroy TTTech," he said. "But I still get nightmares of people dying. I just can't let that happen."

To help pay living expenses and legal fees, Mangan sold his house in Kansas. With only about $300 left in his bank account, Mangan missed a Sept. 8 deadline to pay his $185,000 fine and faces up to a year in jail. Next month he's likely to be called before a judge on his criminal case.

The family expected to be evicted this month from their apartment, but their church in Vienna took up a collection to pay their rent.

At the moment, Mangan is hiding out at a church member's home because he fears he could be arrested at any time.

Mangan's wife, Diana, has been reading a book, "Lord, Where Are You When Bad Things Happen?" to make sense of the family's ordeal. "He's trying to do the right thing. Why are we suffering for it?" she said.

On both sides of the Atlantic, Mangan's case has raised eyebrows in the close-knit aerospace community, which is fascinated by his allegations but unclear about how serious they are.

Hans Weber, a veteran aviation consultant in San Diego, can't say whether Mangan has a legitimate claim because he hasn't seen the evidence. But he is baffled by the extent to which Airbus and TTTech have "gone after" Mangan.

"There is something really unusual about this case in the sense that there is this hard standoff between Airbus and the individual," Weber said. "It doesn't make any sense to me."

One of Mangan's key allegations is that because of the A380's unusual design, any loss of cabin pressure would be extremely dangerous.

Most passenger jets have two cabin-pressure valves, with separate motors operating each. Because aircraft makers want redundancy on safety systems, the planes have three motors for each valve, with different chips controlling each motor. The Boeing 777, for example, has cabin-pressure chips made by Motorola Inc., Intel Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. Most jetliners also have a manual override so that the pilot can take control in an emergency.

Airbus has acknowledged that its designers faced challenges as they attempted to reduce the A380's weight. Early on, the company elected to go with four outflow valves on the A380, with only one motor on each valve, which is slightly larger than a cabin window. Each motor uses a TTTech controller chip, and there is no manual override system.

"Just there, I would not be happy," said Chris Lomax, a retired engineer who helped design the cabin-pressurization systems for Boeing's 737 and 747. "If all four valves [on the A380] were driven wide open, it would be nip and tuck for the crew to get their [oxygen] mask on and begin a descent."

Airbus says that the A380 has achieved redundancy by installing the extra cabin-pressure valves, which provide a safety cushion in case a valve fails. As for Mangan's allegations, they are "an unsubstantiated crusade," Airbus spokesman Clay McConnell said.

"Don't you think we would look into it, and if we found it was true we would do something about it?" McConnell asked.

The A380, which is undergoing flight testing, is a year behind schedule because of unspecified problems. But Airbus has told aviation authorities that there is ample time to fix any problems that are discovered during the certification process.

TTTech executives insist that their product is safe. They portray Mangan as a disgruntled ex-employee seeking retribution and eager to blackmail them. "He's trying to destroy the company," Chief Executive Stefan Poledna said.

TTTech supplies parts to Hamilton Sundstrand, a United Technologies Corp. unit that is building the A380's cabin-pressurization system. "The matters raised by Mr. Mangan have been thoroughly reviewed," a Hamilton Sundstrand spokeswoman said, "and safety of flight will be assured."

The European Aviation Safety Agency, which is handling the A380's flight worthiness certification, has reviewed Mangan's allegations. "We have done the research and acted accordingly," spokesman Daniel Holtgen said. "We can't comment on it because it is a matter for Airbus."

Mangan believes that the European aerospace establishment is whitewashing his claims because of enormous cost savings that will be realized if TTTech's chips are approved for the A380.

TTTech's chip originally was designed for use in autos, and the company is trying to get it certified as an existing, "commercial off-the-shelf" product that is acceptable for the A380, according to court records.

Mangan, however, alleges that the chip is being customized for aviation purposes, and thus must undergo stringent testing before being approved by regulators.

If regulators decide that TTTech's chip is a simple commercial device and can be used in the A380, it would then be available for other new aircraft without having to pass costly safety reviews.

That's why the industry is so adamant about squashing his claims, Mangan alleges. Airbus, owned by Dutch and British companies, surpassed Boeing in 2003 as the world's largest maker of airliners.

Mangan's attorney, Franz Karl Juraczka, advised him last spring to leave Austria before his legal problems snowballed. Mangan refused: "I wouldn't be able to live with myself if anything went wrong with that airplane."

Despite his ordeal, Mangan remains enthused about aerospace design. He can talk for hours about arcane subjects such as fluid dynamics with the same sense of excitement as a kid with a new toy.

Mangan was born in Ohio and grew up in San Jose, and he always had a fascination for science and technology, family members and friends said. When Apple introduced its first personal computer, the 12-year-old Mangan took apart the family's television set to try to build a PC for himself. He also made a satellite receiver out of coffee cans to try to get weather data from an orbiting satellite.

At 16, while still in high school, he got a part-time job at IBM in San Jose helping to design robotic manufacturing machines. He attended San Jose State University and the University of Massachusetts, but never received a college degree.

Later, while working for Honeywell on a military jet project, he came into contact with TTTech, a company founded by two professors in Vienna to market their computer chips.

They say the chips contain 20 times more memory than the processors currently used in aviation, while having half the electrical wiring required for data communication systems that oversee aircraft controls. The chips also can be used on the steering and braking systems of autos. Moreover, they would cut the cost of aviation chips to about $20 apiece, versus $500 for previous designs.

Mangan was drawn by the firm's potential. His future seemed bright in February 2004 when he was hired as chief engineer at a salary of $100,000, plus $25,000 in moving expenses. Diana Mangan packed up their three children — Shelley, now 12, Timothy and Jarrod, 6 — and they arrived in Vienna in the summer of 2004.

With its subsidized medical care and after-school-care programs, Austria looked like a great place to raise a family. And the family was pleased to discover that Vienna had a Baptist church.

Mangan began work on the chip for the A380's cabin-pressurization system.

Until the 1940s, commercial airplanes were not pressurized and could fly only at about 10,000 feet. Flying above the clouds, around 30,000 feet, would make flights smoother, but at that altitude a lack of oxygen and temperatures of 140 degrees below freezing would kill passengers within minutes.

Then Boeing launched its Stratoliner, the first passenger plane with a sealed cabin. Internal pressure was maintained by regulating the intake and outflow of air during flight. This breakthrough helped lead to the age of modern air travel.

Today, most airline passengers — besides experiencing mild popping in their ears — rarely notice that air inside the cabin is in constant flux as air is taken in through the engines and let out through the valves in the belly of the plane.

However, if the valves are stuck open the cabin can depressurize in seconds before anyone can don emergency oxygen masks. In most cases pilots have time to bring the plane down to a safe altitude, but several recent incidents have raised concerns.

Authorities suspect that cabin-pressure problems caused the August crash in Greece of Helios Airways' Boeing 737 in which all 121 aboard died. And investigators believe that an abrupt loss of cabin pressure may have led to the in-flight breakup of a China Airlines 747 in 2002, killing all 225 aboard.

Mangan said he found serious flaws early last year in TTTech's computer chips and the software for the A380's cabin-pressurization system, according to legal documents. The system was executing "unpredictable" commands when it received certain data, possibly causing the pressure valves to open accidentally.

Because all four motors in the A380's cabin-pressurization system use the same type of flawed TTTech chip, Mangan says, "if one fails, they all fail."

Yet his employer ignored his concerns, he alleges, because fixing the glitches would be costly, could take up to a year and would further delay the A380's launch. TTTech tried to cover up the defects and forged Mangan's signature on documents to suggest that the software passed internal tests and reviews, he alleges in court documents.

"Once they slip this onboard the A380, they can justify using it on all other aircraft," Mangan said.

Indeed, Boeing Co. has ordered TTTech's chips for the flight control system for its upcoming mid-size 787 Dreamliner. Boeing executives said they were unaware of any problems with TTTech's chips, but said further questions should be addressed by TTTech.

TTTech executives denied any wrongdoing. They said there had been a minor glitch but that it had been fixed.

Within days of firing Mangan last fall, TTTech sued him in civil court to try to force him to retract his statements to aviation authorities about the potential defect.

In contrast to the U.S. legal system, in Austria individuals can file criminal charges. A few weeks later TTTech also sued Mangan in criminal court.

Then, in December, a civil court issued an injunction barring Mangan from talking about his case.

By May, the family was short of cash, so Mangan returned to the U.S. to borrow money to help pay his legal bills, and while there he also set up an Internet blog to publicize his safety concerns about the new Airbus.

The Mangans developed a circle of Austrian friends at their church who were eager to help. When Mangan decided his first lawyer wasn't aggressive enough, the church referred him to attorney Juraczka, who agreed to represent him for free.

These days the family's living room looks like a legal library, holding Mangan's voluminous whistle-blower records. He wryly notes that the clutter prevented police from finding all of his documents during their search.

Throughout the family's ordeal, Mangan remained dogmatic about not being chased out of Austria and about standing up for what he believed in. Diana said that she wondered at times whether it might be better to move on, but that the family was "very supportive that it will all work out."

The Mangans live day to day, not sure what will come next. If they can't pay their rent, they hope to return to the U.S. to live with Diana's parents in Ohio, although they have maxed out their credit card and can't afford plane tickets.

Mangan is getting ready to file for personal bankruptcy.

TTTech has offered to drop its legal action against Mangan, court records show, and pay him three months of severance, if he retracts his statements. But Mangan has refused.

Mangan said he was looking for a new job. He has contacted dozens of aerospace firms in the U.S. and Europe, but none have returned his calls. "Nobody wants to touch me," he said.


Den Originalartiekl findet ihr hier: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-whistleblower27sep27,0,7486292.story?track=tottext
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 2. Oct 2005, 17:24

Dazu auch noch ein etwas älterer Artikel aus dem Wirtschaftsblatt, datiert mit 29.04.2005.

LG, Bernhard

Wirtschaftsblatt wrote:Airbus 380: Amerikaner sorgt beim Wiener Lieferanten TTTech für Zores
TTTech-Vorstände Stefan Poledna (li.) und Georg Kopetz sehen sich als Opfer einer Verleumdung


WirtschaftsBlatt. Das Wiener IT-Unternehmen TTTech Computertechnik erlebt derzeit sein Waterloo: Kaum absolvierte der Airbus A380 erfolgreich seinen Jungfernflug, steht der Zulieferer international am Pranger: Die Dokumentation für gelieferte Chips und Software sei nicht ausreichend, entspreche nicht den Anforderungen der zivilen Luftfahrt. Durch Software-Fehler könnten auch Passagiere gefährdet werden. Das Wall Street Journal Europe widmet diesem Thema ausreichend Platz.

Auslöser dieser "Geschichte" ist der Amerikaner Joseph Mangan: Der Informatiker arbeitete 2004 sechs Monate bei TTTech. Sein befristeter Vertrag wurde im Oktober nicht verlängert.

Die Begründung: Die Performance des Managers sei nicht entsprechend gewesen, vor allem bei den Management Skills habe es Defizite gegeben, sagt TTTech-Vorstand Stefan Poledna. Mangan habe sich um eine Vertragsverlängerung bemüht. "Von irgendwelchen Problemen mit unserer Technologie war bei unseren Gesprächen nie die Rede", sagt Poledna.

Kurze Zeit später informierte Mangan jedoch den Kunden, die United Technologies-Tochter Nord-Micro AG, sowie die europäische Luftfahrtbehörde EASA über mögliche Sicherheitsrisken der TTTech-Technologie.

Schadensbegrenzung
Die beiden TTTech-Vorstände Poledna und sein Kollege Georg Kopetz üben sich in Schadensbegrenzung: "Mangan sagte uns, dass er sowohl Kunden als auch Behörden kontaktiert hatte", sagt Poledna. Darauf hin wurde die Technologie intern sowie extern überprüft. Airbus und EASA bestätigten nach einer neuerlichen Überprüfung der TTTech-Technologie die Sicherheit. Mangan wurden inzwischen fristlos entlassen. Mittlerweile konnte das Unternehmen eine einstweilige Verfügung durchsetzen. Demnach müsse Mangan seine Vorwürfe belegen, zumindest die Fehlerquellen präzisieren oder "den Mund halten". Ein Zivilprozess ist anhängig.

Die TTTech-Vorstände verweisen auf einen beträchtlichen Image-Schaden, der ihnen durch die Massnahmen ihres Ex-Mitarbeiters entstanden ist. (mf)


Den Originalartikel findet ihr hier: http://www.wirtschaftsblatt.at/cgi-bin/page.pl?id=401128
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

z142
Flugingenieur
Flugingenieur
Posts: 860
Joined: 15. Feb 2005, 08:14
Location: Wien

Post by z142 » 2. Oct 2005, 17:28


N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 2. Oct 2005, 17:48

Ich bin so frei und stell ihn rein - danke für den Link!!!

Bernhard

Der SPiegel wrote:SUPERAIRBUS - Piloten warnen vor Risiko beim A380
Von Jörn Sucher

Die europäische Pilotenorganisation ECA warnt vor möglichen technischen Problemen beim Großraumflieger A380: Das Kabinendrucksystem des größten Passagierflugzeugs der Welt könnte ein Sicherheitsrisiko sein. Airbus weist die Vorwürfe zurück.

Hamburg - "Es gibt Hinweise, dass es beim Drucksystem ein Sicherheitsproblem gibt", sagte der technische Direktor der European Cockpit Association (ECA), Heinz Frühwirth, gegenüber SPIEGEL ONLINE. "Wir werden uns an Airbus und andere beteiligte Unternehmen wenden und Aufklärung fordern", kündigt Frühwirth an, der bei der Austrian Airlines selbst Airbus-Maschinen fliegt.

Hintergrund für den Vorwurf ist ein seit langem schwelender Streit zwischen dem österreichischen Airbus-Zulieferer TTTech und seinem früheren Mitarbeiter Joseph Mangan. TTTech baut Kommunikationschips für die Steuerung des A380-Kabinendrucksystems. Der US-Amerikaner Mangan war für die Firma 2004 tätig, das Arbeitsverhältnis wurde aber nach sechs Monaten gelöst. Nach Angabe von TTTech war man mit seiner Arbeit unzufrieden.

Mangan erklärt dagegen, dass er wegen seiner Kritik an dem von TTTech gelieferten System gefeuert wurde. Dieses entspreche nicht den Sicherheitsanforderungen der Luftfahrtindustrie. Demnach könnte es bei einer Fehlfunktion zu einem plötzlichen Druckverlust in der Kabine des A380 kommen. "Wenn ein Chip ausfällt, bricht das ganze System zusammen", warnt Mangan. Ein solcher Druckverlust hatte im August zum Absturz einer Boeing 737 der zyprischen Billigflug-Gesellschaft Helios geführt.

Airbus sieht keine Probleme
TTTech weist die Vorwürfe zurück. "Wir haben unser System von unabhängigen Gutachtern überprüfen lassen. Es gibt keine Probleme mit den Chips", erklärt TTTech-Vorstand Georg Kopetz. Airbus äußert sich ähnlich. "Sicherheit hat beim A380 oberste Priorität. Mangans Behauptungen sind nicht neu und durch interne und externe Prüfungen widerlegt", sagt Konzernsprecher David Voskuhl.

Kopetz sieht in Mangans Aktivitäten einen Rachefeldzug gegen seinen Ex-Arbeitgeber: "Joseph Mangan hat während seiner Zeit als TTTech-Mitarbeiter nie von Problemen gesprochen. Das ging erst los, nachdem klar war, dass er seinen Job verloren hat." Mangan weist Rachegedanken seinerseits zurück. Mittlerweile beschäftigt sein Fall die Justiz. TTTech hat ihn in Österreich wegen Verletzung von Geschäftsinteressen verklagt. 150.000 Euro soll Mangan zahlen. Weil der Computerexperte aber nahezu bankrott ist, droht ihm eine Haftstrafe. Parallel läuft ein arbeitsrechtliches Verfahren.

Ärgerliche Sicherheitsdebatte

Für Airbus ist der Streit bei seinem Zulieferer besonders ärgerlich, weil der Flugzeugbauer derzeit eine Sicherheitsdebatte um den A380 kaum brauchen kann. Schon jetzt hinkt der Hersteller mit seinem Prestigeprojekt sechs Monate hinter dem Zeitplan her. Erst vergangene Woche hatte Airbus erklärt, dass es keine weiteren Verzögerungen geben wird.

Am 29. Oktober wird der A380 erstmals in Frankfurt am Main landen. Wenige Wochen später macht eine Maschine auch in Hamburg-Finkenwerder Station, noch im November sollen dort die mit großer Spannung erwarteten Evakuierungstests durchgeführt werden. 873 Passagiere, Flugbegleiter und Piloten müssen bei zwei Tests innerhalb von 90 Sekunden bei völliger Dunkelheit das Flugzeug über Notrutschen verlassen. Dabei steht nur die Hälfte der Ausgänge zur Verfügung.

Wird diese Auflage nicht erfüllt, hat der A380 ein ganz anderes Problem. Dann hat das größte je gebaute Verkehrsflugzeug Probleme die Zulassung von den europäischen und amerikanischen Luftfahrtbehörden zu erhalten.
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 5. Oct 2005, 21:53

Es geht wieter, die ARD ist auch aufgesprungen - interessanterweise auch wieder mit einem gewissen Herrn,,,

Bernhard

Das Erste (Magazin PlusMinus wrote:Airbus 380

Warnung vor Sicherheitsrisiko
WDR, Dienstag, 4. Oktober 2005

Von C. Sonnet/T. v. Beveren
Im Flugzeug kann man auch in mehreren tausend Metern Höhe gut atmen. Allerdings nur deswegen, weil ein Kabinendrucksystem die Luft filtert, die Temperatur regelt und den Druck ausgleicht. Im Riesenflieger A380 soll ein völlig neu konstruiertes System diese Aufgabe übernehmen. Doch es gibt Probleme: Angeblich ist es nicht hundertprozentig sicher. Das behauptet zumindest der Ingenieur, der bei der österreichischen Firma TTTech für die Zulassung des Systems verantwortlich war.

Joseph Mangan ist Amerikaner und lebt mit seiner Frau und drei Kindern in Wien. Durch seine Vorwürfe bereitet er nicht nur seinem ehemaligen Arbeitgeber TTTech Kopfschmerzen, sondern auch dessen Auftraggeber, dem Frankfurter Hersteller von Kabinendruck-Systemen, Nord Micro sowie Airbus. Der Flugzeughersteller weist jedoch alle Vorwürfe Mangans zurück. In einer schriftlichen Stellungnahme aus der Airbus-Firmenzentrale in Toulouse heißt es: „Die Behauptungen von Joe Mangan sind nicht neu. Alle damit im Zusammenhang stehenden Sachverhalte sind von Airbus, den Zulieferern sowie den Zulassungsbehörden eingehend untersucht worden. Diese Beteiligten haben damit sichergestellt, dass das von Joe Mangan dargestellte Szenarium eines Sicherheitsdefizits nicht existiert und die angesprochene Komponente genauso wie die A380 insgesamt allen Zulassungsvorschriften entsprechen und damit die jüngsten und strengsten Sicherheitsvorschriften erfüllen wird. Daher gibt es keinen besonderen Grund, wegen des Kabinendruck-Systems der A380 Sicherheitsbedenken zu haben. Sicherheit genießt bei der A380, genauso wie bei allen anderen Verkehrsflugzeugen auch, oberste Priorität.“

Testergebnisse offenbaren Fehler
Nicht neu sind die Vorwürfe Mangans vor allem, weil der Luftfahrtingenieur Joseph Mangan bereits vor über einem Jahr auf Probleme hinwies, die seiner Meinung nach die Sicherheit der Passagiere gefährden können. Der Druck in der Flugzeugkabine wird über Auslassventile an der Unterseite des Flugzeugs geregelt. Sie sind immer nur so weit geöffnet, dass die Luft angenehm zum Atmen ist und es nicht zu kalt wird.

Mangan stieß bei Durchsicht der Zulassungsunterlagen auf Testergebnisse, die gravierende Fehler im System offenbaren. So können alle Auslassventile gleichzeitig vollständig aufgehen. Das führt zu einem rapiden Druckverlust. Wenn die Passagiere es nicht schaffen, ihre Sauerstoffmasken schnell genug aufzusetzen, hätte das schwerwiegende Folgen: Sie würden bewusstlos, es bestünde Lebensgefahr.

Die meisten anderen Flugzeuge haben ein zweites unabhängiges System oder manuelle Sicherungen, die ein vollständiges Öffnen der Ventile im Reiseflug verhindern - die neue A380 nicht. Auf diese Gefahr hat Joe Mangan die Firmen TTTech und Nord Micro hingewiesen. Aber statt sich bei ihm zu bedanken, hat TTTech ihn fristlos entlassen. Mit einer einstweiligen Verfügung wollten sie ihn sogar daran hindern, über seine Bedenken zu sprechen. Begründung: Es handele sich um „Betriebs- und Geschäftsgeheimnisse“.
Experten teilen Bedenken
[plusminus hat die Vorwürfe von unabhängigen Experten prüfen lassen. „Ich teile die Bedenken von Herrn Mangan bezüglich der Sicherheit des Systems“, sagt Professor Rüdiger Haas, Luftfahrtsachverständiger und Hochschulprofessor für Flugzeugbau. „Dieses System weicht wirklich von der bisherigen Ausführungsform im Flugzeugbau deutlich ab. Das übliche Konstruktionssystem ‚fail-safe’ ist hier nicht gegeben. ‚Fail safe’ bedeutet, dass bei Ausfall eines Systems ein anderes oder ein Ersatzsystem diese Funktion übernehmen muss.“ Professor Haas ist der Meinung, dass es nicht legitim ist, jemanden, der solche Bedenken hat, an seiner Aussage zu hindern: „Im Gegenteil: Im Endeffekt können davon Leben abhängen.“

Joseph Mangan hat sich nicht mundtot machen lassen. Aber in der Luftfahrtbranche stellt ihn keiner mehr ein, bis die Sache aus der Welt geschafft ist. Seit einem Jahr ist er arbeitslos. „Wir sind bankrott. Im Moment bezahlt unsere Kirche uns das, was wir zum Überleben brauchen“, sagt er [plusminus. Weil Mangan mehrfach gegen die einstweilige Verfügung des Landesgerichts Wien verstieß, könnte er jetzt in Österreich sogar verhaftet werden.
EASA prüft Vorwürfe
Airbus-Konkurrent Boeing hat das gleiche Kabinendrucksystem für seinen Dreamliner (Boeing 787) bestellt, allerdings nach bekannt werden der Vorwürfe eine erhebliche Änderung eingefordert: „Bei uns wird es eine mechanische Sicherung an den Auslassventilen geben, damit die Piloten im Notfall eine Fehlfunktion des Computers korrigieren können.“ Den Amerikanern ist das System, so wie Airbus es zu verwenden beabsichtigt, nicht sicher genug. Sollten weitere Modifikationen aufgrund von Mangans Vorwürfen notwendig werden, könnte sich die ohnehin verspätete Auslieferung des europäischen Riesenflugzeugs noch weiter verzögern. Airbus müsste den Erstkunden hohe Entschädigungen zahlen.

Wegen der gegen ihn erwirkten gerichtlichen Verfügung darf Joe Mangan noch nicht mal mit der Zertifizierungsbehörde EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) in Köln über seine Bedenken sprechen. Die europäische Flugsicherheitsagentur muss die A380 nächstes Jahr für den Passagierverkehr zulassen.

Aufgrund der Recherchen von [plusminus überprüft die EASA nun erneut die Vorwürfe des Amerikaners. Auch Europäische Parlamentarier wünschen eine lückenlose Aufklärung. Die Österreicherin Eva Lichtenberger (MEP) ist Mitglied im Verkehrsausschuss: „Gerade bei einem bedeutenden Projekt wie dem Airbus A380 ist es dringend geboten, jeglichem Verdacht einer Sicherheitslücke nachzugehen und alle Zweifel auszuräumen.“

Dieser Text gibt den Fernsehbeitrag vom 04.10.2005 wieder. Eventuelle spätere Veränderungen des Sachverhaltes sind nicht berücksichtigt.


Original zu finden unter: http://www.daserste.de/plusminus/beitrag_dyn~uid,yffm2ljlj58qmmvv~cm.asp
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 5. Oct 2005, 21:55

Wirklich interessant, falls sich wer zu diesem Thema einlesen will, ist die Homepage des Herrn Mangan: http://www.eaawatch.org/

Jede Menge Material, für einen Aussenstehenden ist es aber nach wie vor schwer sich ein Urteil zu bilden.

LG, Bernhard
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 26. Nov 2005, 09:09

Länger drehen sich ja schon diverse Briefe und Aussendungen um die Frage welche Wake Turbulences der A380 verursacht - oft wurde das als politische Einmischung abgetan (siehe auch "A380 ist für die Amis ein Terrorziel"), aber langsam wachen auch die Behörden auf.

Flight International wrote:ICAO warns on A380 wake vortices

Airbus is confirming details of an ICAO letter warning that wake-vortex separation rules for aircraft following A380s could be more stringent than for current widebodies – but insists that adequate flight-test data is not yet in.

Vortex-separation for the type is a tinderbox issue because increased separations on approach would undercut the business case for the aircraft which is partially dependent on increasing passenger throughput at airports.

Longer separations would reduce overall runway capacity – a critical issue at London Heathrow in particular. Airbus has always said the separation would be roughly the same as for the Boeing 747-400.

The manufacturer is at pains to point out that wake vortices are not a certification issue, and it emphasises that more is already known about the A380’s wake vortices than was known for any other new type at the same stage before its service entry, because the trials are uniquely extensive.

Airbus adds: “Once [the wake vortex characteristics] are fully understood by the authorities, it will become clear what the appropriate separation should be…remember that in the beginning the separation for the 747 was higher than it is today.”

An ICAO letter to member states is warning that early test results indicate that aircraft might require greater spacing than is required today for any other type.

Final trial results that will enable decisions to be taken on recommendations for spacing behind the A380 for following aircraft in different flight phases “will be made available in early 2006”, predicts ICAO.

At this stage the trials being carried out at Toulouse and Istres airports in France have indicated that there will be an initial need to separate following aircraft from the A380 by greater distances than for the Boeing 747.

The separations ICAO quotes are 10nm (18.5km) on approach and 15nm (27.8km) for all other phases of flight including en-route. And ICAO says it anticipates advising one additional minute to elapse before a smaller aircraft takes off behind an A380.

There are also implications for aircraft in the cruise. One of the characteristics of A380 wake vortices, reveals ICAO, is that that “they may descend 2,000ft (600m) and possibly pose a passenger comfort issue rather than a hazard [for the following aircraft].” Vertical spacing guidance, says ICAO, “will not be completed for several months”.

It adds: “There are indications, however, from the initial analysis of data that wake vortex from an A380 may be encountered by aircraft flying 1,000ft (300m) below at greater strengths than from current aircraft of the heavy wake turbulence category.” The organisation explains: “Because it has not yet been possible to establish the level of hazard associated with these wake vortices, offset tracks or additional vertical spacing is advised until the final vertical spacing guidance has been established.”
Originalartikel zu finden unter: http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2005/11/23/Navigation/186/203231/ICAO+warns+on+A380+wake+vortices.html
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

airbus389
Avioniker
Avioniker
Posts: 123
Joined: 23. Feb 2005, 18:33

Post by airbus389 » 26. Nov 2005, 20:40

Wirklich interresant die Seite von Mangan, man gewinnt auch den Eindruck das er Ahnung von diesem Gebiet hat. Er ist nicht der erste der gegen seine ehmalige Firma einen Rachefeldzug veranstaltet aber auch gleich eine Verschwörung von Airbus und EASA zu sehen ist wenigstens was neues. Späterstens wenn die A380 ihre FAA-Zulassung hat ist sie sicher auch Teil der Verschwörung.

Es stimmt die A380 hat 4 Outflowvalves die jeweils von einem Motor angetrieben aber jeder Motor wird von 3 Steuerungen mit Strom versorgt. Die jeweils für "Automatic" zuständige kommt von TTTech.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 4. Dec 2005, 22:18

ANN wrote:ICAO: Mammoth Jet Generates Massive Turbulence
A380 Makes Big Waves... In Its Wake


If "conservative" computer models generated by the International Civil Aviation Organization prove accurate, airplanes following the A380 will have to fly up to three times the normal distance behind the massive airliner in order to avoid its wake turbulence. Such requirements could put some airports' plans to handle the superjumbo in a tailspin.

According to the London Sunday Times, the ICAO models show the
double-decker aircraft will produce "significantly stronger" wake vortices off its wingtips than either the Boeing 747 -- the largest commercial airliner flying at the moment -- and even the Boeing 757, a notorious wake generator.

"To date, we've come up with some preliminary guidelines for the aircraft... in normal air traffic control operations," said ICAO spokesman Denis Chagnon to Aero-News. "The models reveal the horizontal vortex may have been larger than anticipated, than even the vertical one."

The required safety guidelines, issued earlier this month, recommend aircraft flying directly behind an A380 at cruising altitude should keep minimum spacing of 15 nautical miles, compared to the industry standard of five n.m. On final approach, a minimum 10 n.m. separation would be required -- far above the standard of 3-8 nautical miles currently in force, depending on the comparative sizes of the aircraft.

Combined with an additional minute added to departure regulations for aircraft taking off behind an A380, and the wake turbulence guidelines become a real issue -- and puts to question just how much the A380's added passenger capacity offsets such issues.

"If the wake vortex requires separation larger than the 747... it would require adjustments in air traffic control operations," said Chagnon.

Wake vortices are essentially "mini-tornados" formed by air rolling off the plane's wingtips (and, to a far lesser extent, the horizontal stabilizer) anytime those surfaces are generating lift. Aircraft encountering these vortices can be displaced, much like when they encounter regular turbulence.

In extreme cases, an aircraft that encounters a strong wake vortex can lose control completely.

Many in the industry believe the ICAO guidelines, which were based off flight tests of the A380 prototypes, are conservative... which is something Airbus is counting on.

"We don't want to jump to any conclusions," said an Airbus spokesman. "We are still expecting the (wake of the) aircraft to be similar to the 747."

The guidelines will not be finalized until summer of 2006.
Originalartikel zu finden unter: http://www.aero-news.net/news/commair.cfm?ContentBlockID=9e9ea9d4-786d-4edf-8629-334c46bdc648
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 25. May 2006, 19:04

Ben Webster von der Times wrote:May 19, 2006
Giant jumbo flies in to turbulence over safety
THE world’s biggest passenger aircraft arrived in Britain yesterday, amid concerns that its size could create danger for aircraft following in its wake.

Airbus, manufacturer of the 540-tonne A380, admitted that flight tests had shown that the double-decker created a greater “wake vortex” than its rival, the 360-tonne Boeing 747.

Air turbulence caused by large aircraft can prove catastrophic and was a factor in the loss of an Airbus A300 that crashed in New York in 2001, killing 265 people.

Under interim rules set down by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), the gap between an A380 and the following aircraft on approaching a runway must be 11 miles, double the distance for a 747.

Airbus is still hoping to persuade the ICAO that the A380 can safely operate with the same gap behind it as a 747. But the A380 that landed at Heathrow had to conform to the interim rules, which meant that it took up two landing slots, with an interval of more than four minutes between its arrival and the next landing.

The A380’s main selling point is meant to be its ability to relieve pressure at crowded airports such as Heathrow by delivering hundreds more passengers for each landing slot. Heathrow is already full during the day and BAA, the airport’s owner, had been relying on the A380 to increase annual passenger numbers from 70 million to 90 million after Terminal 5 opens in 2008.

Unless the interim rules are relaxed, an A380 carrying 550 passengers would use up the same runway capacity as two 747s carrying 800 people. Tony Douglas, managing director of Heathrow, said: “If the A380 takes two slots it would cause a problem and airlines might not want to use it.”

Fernando Alonso, head of flight testing at Airbus, said: “Our tests show a slightly more intense vortex but the way it disperses depends on the wind and it may end up being the same as for a 747.” He said that Airbus was discussing the results of the tests with the ICAO and was hoping for a revised ruling in the summer. Señor Alonso said that the ICAO might insist on a longer gap for the A380 for the start of passenger flights in December. But he added that a few months of safe flights should demonstrate that the extra distance was not needed.

Maurice Flanagan, president of Emirates, the Dubai-based airline that has bought 45 A380s, said that the ICAO’s ruling appeared to have been influenced by the US, which is keen to protect Boeing, its largest exporter.

Airbus has taken orders for 159 A380s from 16 airlines but has not announced a new customer for almost a year. No American or Japanese airline has bought the aircraft.
Originalartikel zu finden unter: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2187526.html
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

oida fliega

Post by oida fliega » 25. May 2006, 20:58

hmm...
war das vorher nicht bekannt ?
wirbelschleppen eines 540tonnen gerätes, sind nun mal etwas größer.

die frage stellt sich natürlich, wie die controller - ohne zeitverlust damit fertig werden können?

lg
hans

N5528P
Flottenchef e.h.
Flottenchef e.h.
Posts: 5104
Joined: 19. May 2005, 20:37
Location: Wien
Contact:

Post by N5528P » 25. May 2006, 21:00

Ich glaube das ist das erste Mal, das Airbus das nicht abstreitet...

Bernhard
For radar identification, throw your jumpseat rider out the window.

Post Reply