Presented by

Claude LelaieSVP Flight Operations

A380 Flight testing

From 27th April 2005 to 28th June 2006

Aircraft flying : MSN 1, 4, 2, 7, 3473 flights1549 flight hoursMore than 120 pilots, including some 70 airline pilots

General evaluation & flight envelope opening

Test objectivesCheck of the aircraft behaviour

– Direct and normal flight control law– Effect of speed, Mach number, altitude, aircraft weight and centre of gravity position– All flight phases, from take-off to landing.

Check of the adequate functioning of the various aircraft systems during the various flight phases.

Main resultsExcellent aircraft behaviourControl laws, and auto flight already very mature

–Aircraft behaviour close to simulator–Successful autoland on flight 17, 35 days only after first flight

Major systems working as intended during normal operations.Early safety checks carried out flawlessly

–Landing gear gravity extension–Ram air turbine extension and functioning–Engine relight

PerformanceAerodynamic configuration freeze

Test objectivesPreliminary identification of the low speed performanceEvaluation of several slat / flap configurations to support freezing of final settingsData gathered for all potential slat and flap settings

– Take-off performance– Climb performance with one engine out– Stalls– VMU (Minimum Unstick Speed)

Results

Tufting campaign

Test objectives :Optimise low speed capability

Tufting campaign – strakes effect

Tufting campaign - In flight

VMU: July 13th and 14th, 2005

TEST OBJECTIVESMeasure VMU in configurations (slat/flap) 23/26 and 23/29Flap settings (26° and 29°) were candidates for CONF 3VMU’s were required to identify the optimum flap deflectionMeasure VMU’s in the already selected take-off configurations

TEST CONDITIONSIstres Air BaseMasse = 540 tTailskid replacement every 1 to 3 runsGeometry limitation demonstrated in all configurations

VMU: July 13th and 14th, 2005

VMU: July 13th and 14th, 2005

VMU: 25th and 26th March 2006

TEST OBJECTIVESComplementary VMU measurements for certification

TEST RESULTSGeometry limitation confirmed in all configurations

Slats / Flaps configurations

Optimised slats/flaps configurations :

23/32Full

23/263

20/172

20/081+F

20/001

Slats(°) / Flaps(°)Conf

Aerodynamic configuration : results

Lift coefficient better than expected

Approach speed lower than expected by ~4 kt : 138 kt at MLW

Take-off performance on target

A380 Wake vortex: current standards

Current Rules for Separation minima based on aircraft Max Take Off Weight categories

Landing behind an “Heavy” : 4, 5 or 6 NM depending on follower (Heavy, Medium or Light)Departure : 1, 2 minutesLateral : 5 NMVertical : 1000 ft

International A380 Steering Group set up in 2003 (FAA, Eurocontrol, JAA-Ops, ICAO, Airbus) to assess A380 Wake Vortex and provide recommendations for A380 separation distances prior to EIS to ICAO States (Target Summer 2006)

A380 Wake vortex

ICAO Interim policy for separation as a precautionary measure dated November 10th

Landing : 10 NM Departure : 3 minutesAll other Flight Phases : 15 NMVertical : Special caution requested

Separations in approach following ICAO letter

4 NM

6 NM

10 NM

Current separations

Separations as per ICAO letter (interim policy)

Separations in cruise following ICAO letter

5 NM

15 NM

Current separations

Separations as per ICAO letter (interim policy)

Wake vortex measurements

Test objectives : measure wake characteristics

Measurement toolsWake : Pulsed LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)Atmospheric : SODAR-RASS and ultrasonic anemometerEncounters with A318

Wake measurement at landing Toulouse-Blagnac

Pulsed LIDAR and SODAR-RASSIstres

Wake vortex measurementsBack-to-back LIDAR measurements in approach and take-off have been performed in December at Istres :

Boeing 777 vs A380Boeing 747 vs A380A340-600 vs A380

Real encounter of an A318 in theA380, B747 and A340-600 wake in cruisehas been performed

Back-to-back measures in cruise with A380, B747 and A340 on parallel tracks using LIDAR on board a Falcon 20.

Evaluation of various alternative aerodynamic configurations

A380 Wake Vortex

Facts :ICAO interim policy is based on a type of computation which had not been validated by flight test measurements.Today data shows that the model used for computation is not correct. Flight test data show that, on average, in approach, the A380 wake is slightly stronger than that of the B747.In cruise, A380 and B747 comparative tests have just been performed last Sunday. Results have been transmitted to the ICAO working group and cannot be transmitted outside, but we are very optimistic!No demonstration that 747 is the limit for the heavy category.

Wake Vortex : Today’s status

Airbus disagrees with the ICAO interim recommendation

Airbus is contributing on wake vortex understanding at a level never done before e.g. studies including testing before and after the A380 launch, LIDAR measurements in Toulouse, Istres, Frankfurt and in flight, Comparative wake encounters with other aircraft, Airbus and Boeing. All data has been transmitted to the ICAO working group.About 150 flight hours have been performed for these tests and it is not finished!

After the last Working Group meeting, a complementary programme has been launched with participation of Members of this working group. It includes:

Complementary comparative measurements of wake vortex of 747-400, A340 and A380 in sequence, the same day with the same weather conditions, at low altitude.Characterisation and comparison of an A318 behaviour when encountering a B747 and an A380 wake vortex at various distances at high altitude (done).

Approach Wake Vortex: Today’s status

In the working group, there is a target for approach to keep a standard separation of 4NM between 2 A380 (same as between 2 Heavy), and to add to today values +2 NM for a heavy behind an A380, which means 6 NM, +2 NM for a medium behind an A380, which means 7NM and +3 NM for a light, which means 9NM. These values would still be conservative and interim target for A380 EIS. Then, after EIS, we will study whether we can reduce these values. In the same spirit, if a new category is created, we will review whether we can reduce or not the separation for an A380 behind another aircraft.

Cruise Wake Vortex: Today’s status

June 23nd-25th two flights involving each time 4 aircraft:

A380

B747-400 or A340reference aircraft

A318 encounteringboth vortices

Research Falcon (vortices laser scanning)

Cruise Wake Vortex: Today’s status

June 25th with B747-400 and A380

Wake Vortex : a violation of ICAO recommendation !

Water trough tests

Water trough

Water trough tests

1 acceleration + 1 deceleration at ~70 kt

MSN4 First Flight18 October 05

MSN4 flight test activity

Aircraft dedicated to performance measurementsand engines development, with standard representative enginesCruise performance main evaluation completed on 9th november

Complementary evaluations in November/December

Low speed performance extensive evaluation done in November/December.

Noise preliminary measurements in Moron 17th – 21st October 05

Noise preliminary measurements in Moron 17th – 21st October 05

TEST OBJECTIVES :Check that the external noise objectives can be fulfilled with the current aircraft configuration

TESTS DONE :Over 100 flyovers to measure approach and take-off noise.

MAIN RESULTS :Noise figures on target.

MSN2 first flight – 3rd November 05

MSN2 ferry to Hamburg – 8th November 05

Find the rabbit !

MSN2 ferry to Hamburg – 8th November 05

Airport compatibility checks : Frankfurt + Far East Tour

First visits at international airports29th October 05 : Frankfurt10th – 24th November : Singapore, Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Kuala Lumpur, Dubai

Airport compatibility checks :Positioning of airport bridgesUpper deck catering vehiclesPositioning of cargo loadersGround services (toilets servicing, fueling, electricity…)

Frankfurt Airport compatibility checks – 29th October 05

Far East Tour – 10th - 18th November 2005

LESSONS LEARNT

Airport compatibility checks :Very good preparation status of all visited airports

First long haul campaign for the A380Very few problems and equipments to replace

Hot & high campaign in Medellin (Colombia)

Hot & high campaign in Medellin (Colombia)

TESTS PERFORMED:Tests in Medellin at 7000ft, temperature ISA+15°C.Assess engines and APU behaviour in critical conditions (hot+high).

MAIN RESULTSEngines and APU behaved satisfactorily, without any failure.

Cold weather campaign in Iqaluit (Canada)

Cold weather campaign in Iqaluit (Canada)

TEST OBJECTIVES :Collect data for structural justificationCheck system readiness for full cold-weather campaign (on MSN2)

TESTS DONE :4 days (2 taxis and 2 flights)

– Overnight cold soak– After overnight cold soak, sequenced power-up (Flight test

installation, then aircraft, APU and engines)– Run aircraft for various tests, record temperatures, and other data

MAIN RESULTS :Temperatures down to –29°C.Engines satisfactorily starting. One oil pump broken.All systems behaved satisfactorily.All thermal data measured.

MSN7 first flight 19 Feb 06 & ferry to Hamburg 22 Feb 06

Singapore Airshow + preliminary hot weather 17-28 February

Preliminary hot weather trials

Temperatures : 30°C = ISA + 15°CSystems (hydraulics, electrics) behaviour in hot environmentAir conditioning functioning and performance on ground in hot & humid conditions

Cabin evacuation test – 26th March 06

MSN 7 fitted with a high density cabin853 passengers + 20 crew members

A 380 Evacuation

Cabin evacuation test – 26th March 06

Cabin evacuation test – 26th March 06Certification requirement : Evacuation must be fulfilled in lessthan 90 seconds using half the number of doors

Result : 873 people evacuated in ~80 seconds

MSN3 First flight

First production aircraftFirst flight on 7th May 2006Ferry to Hamburg on the same day

Cabin Virtual First Flight – 10th May 2006

TEST OBJECTIVES :Test all cabin functions on ground with a representativepassenger and crew loading during 5 hours on MSN 2.474 passengers22 crew members

TEST RESULTS :Overall good results, only minor points identified

VentilationI.F.E.Toilets

Natural Icing trials – May 2006

TEST OBJECTIVES :Check aircraft behaviour with natural iceAssess Wing Anti-Ice behaviour

TESTS DONE :5 flights (in thunderstorms…)Some complementary tests done with Wing Anti-Ice inactive

MAIN RESULTS :Natural ice accreted looks far less critical than artificial ice shapesNo Handling Qualities issue identified, even with Wing Anti-Ice inactiveIce detection system not satisfactory, to be worked onSide result : more than 100 lightning strikes. No problem.

Natural Icing trials – May 2006

Negative g tests – May / June 2006

TEST OBJECTIVES :Assess aircraft behaviour during negative g manoeuvres (which might be found in extreme turbulence)Assess systems behaviour

TESTS DONE :3 flights: one for handling qualities / loads clearance, two for systems check

RESULTS :Good behaviour of the aircraft of the systems.

Ongoing and future

Finalise systems developmentFocus on certification

– Artificial ice shapes– Electrics– Hydraulics– Communication system– Navigation system– Fuel system

CabinDevelopment and Certification

– Air distribution, temperature regulation– Oxygen system– CIDS– Electrical loads– Water and waste– Cabin lighting– Cabin noise– IFE

Early Long FlightRoute Proving

Cabin development

Early Long Flights (ELF)

4 long flights beginning September with Airbus passengers to assess and validate the full cabin (474 passengers)About 300 passengers chosen via lottery, the other ones being guestsFlight duration 7 to 15 hoursEvaluation of comfort, temperature, in-flight entertainment…

Route Proving

Regulatory requirement : aircraft at Type Certificate standard has to prove its maturity.

About 300 flight hours operations have to be demonstrated in an airline environment.

It will be performed in about 4 weeks with Singapore Airlines and Lufthansa before the end of the year.

An excellent aircraft, already well appreciated by pilots and which will be very

soon appreciated by passengers