Amazing aircraft, now the next few years is crutial for airbus, just as it was for Boeing with the 787! I can't wait to see the aircraft in full revenue service!
Congratulations? It might be a little early for that. Airbus fanboys always get all excited about new Airbus planes and immediately start the "better than Boeing" because they think Airbus doing something for the sixth time now (introducing a new plane) actually compares to Boeing doing it several dozen times over 100 years now. But unfortunately for Airbus fanboys, the last few Airbus "masterpieces" that were going to show Boeing and Lockheed what's up by "killing" the 747 and C130, have actually ended up looking more like a bad paint-by-number painting. After all, the A380 didn't even pass the ultimate wing load test, which is why Airbus will never be able to sell one in the U.S., even though they claimed they'd "fixed" the problem by adding 100 pounds or so of material in the wings and said they were "confident" it would pass. I don't recall ever seeing or hearing that they'd even retested. Much less passed. And given the Airbus propaganda avalanche every time they pass another "milestone" by simply meeting basic expectations and requirements of performance, I'm sure if they HAD passed the second test, it would have been everywhere. Instead, all I've read or heard about A380 wings is how badly damaged one was by an exploding RR Trent and how during the investigation and inspection after the rotor disc failure, they found cracks in the wing rib feet. Of course, cracked parts in a wing were "no threat to safety" for Airbus, but since they did end up allegedly "fixing" them, I have to think SOMEONE thought it was a big enough deal to force them to do it. After all, we know they wouldn't have done it otherwise. Just like they didn't feel compelled to use the appropriate material for the wing rib feet in the first place. That kind of makes me wonder if the reason they didn't test another wing is because they only used the specified material in the first one and knew the second test would crack feet and scatter them everywhere. And now they've got cracks in the A400M somewhere. Once again, supposedly "not a threat to safety", but once again they're allegedly fixing them, so it must be important to someone. And this time they're saying 7 months per aircraft to repair the problem. Now I'm not an aircraft builder, but I am a mechanic and I have a good idea how planes are built. And I know it doesn't take 7 months to build an A400M, or at least it SHOULDN'T. So I have to think that if their repair will take 7 months, they're pretty having to disassemble the entire aircraft and start over. That makes me think it's either a fuselage issue or a wing issue. But since on nearly-new planes that have barely flown and haven't even been formally accepted by the military that bought them yet, a crack this soon would say "wing" to me, since they're the only parts of the plane that have been heavily loaded. And I could certainly see it taking several months to remove the engines, remove the wing, disassemble the wing, replace the flawed parts, reassembled the wing, etc etc etc. The only question is if its even worth it to go to all that work or if the wing and/or fuselage should just be replaced with new. One other thing about that whole cracking thing that has me thinking is those engines. The fact is that Airbus basically put a swept wing for a JET aircraft on the plane, and then mounted those big-ass and very heavy turboprops on it. Now why they put turboprops on a swept wing when the Russians already proved it's a shitty idea is anyone's guess. But if they intended to build a jet and then at some point too far along to turn back had to abandon the jet engine idea and go turboprop, then it would be understandable if the jet wing wasn't liking the turboprops. I'm not an aircraft designer, so I really have no idea, but I do think that when only about one or two other multi-engine transport planes have ever been built with a swept wing and turboprops, there are probably several good reasons for it. And if I were Airbus and building my FIRST turboprop 4-engine military transport, I think I'd seek out the best experts and engineers with experience in that area I could find. Overall, I think Airbus will be doing "good" to make it another 5 years before their inability to deliver on promises combined with their inability to stop making promises finally put them in a hole so deep that even all the taxpayer money in the EU can't save the company. Because after all, it is very hard to stay in the airplane building and selling business if no one wants your airplanes, or can't/won't buy them even if they DO want them because whoever is controlling the cash flow looks at the history of the company and decides they can't possibly buy planes today they won't get for ten years after production starts, if they ever get them at all. Just out of curiosity, exactly what about this twin-engine widebody commercial passenger aircraft makes it so much "better looking" than the other twin-engine widebody commercial passenger aircraft you mentioned? And more importantly, could you even tell them apart if they were painted the same and sitting side by side?
Chad Meyer why can't we all just get a long. As an aviation enthusiast, I like both. Personally I think the a350 is better than the 787, but the a350s winglets don't look nice :/. I think the 747 is better than the a380, and so on. Airlines buy both, so why not appreciate both?
i dont know how other airlines' doing, but cathays' 350 fleet keep having trouble. no big one, but its pain in the ass. maintenance guys dont like to work on it. for me, the 350 and 787 have the same father the 767, gave birth by different mother, and i dont like to work on 767, 787 and 350 as a maintenance guy. i like 777 and 330, especially 777. well designed. and one thing, who the hell design the latching mechanism of those trent xwbs' c-duct? airbus guys or RR guys? anyway its such a stupid ass design.
Your grammar is soo comical. Don't judge the livery by the looks, judge on how it performs. The purpose of the A350 is compete against the 787. The looks almost look the 787, but styled differently. So don't jump to conclusions until the correct facts are provided. The plane hasn't life off the ground yet. Gezz.
![FendiDa Rappa - Clock Dat ft. Shamar Marco [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3NBU8KHdxYY/mqdefault.jpg)
So, what I like the best is the black mask on the front.....good job Airbus!
I like when the plane painted!
I think it was awesome!
and I really salute to all employees!
They are very neat in repainting aircraft!
I can't wait to see his first flight on friday :D
That curved wingtip is probably one of the most beautiful things Airbus has ever done.
Airbus always use the most beautiful music in their videos. It's amazing!
Amazing! When they smile you know it is the best plane.
Booth companies have great liveries, for example, the sunrise livery of the 747-8 was magnificent, but airbus has beautiful ones too!
CAN'T WAIT TO SEE IT FLYING
dayum love the black paint of the cockpit frames :D
Such a beautiful plane. Amazing job Airbus :)
Man What a beauty!
It's pure beauty...
Beautiful video and beautiful plane!
One of the most bueatyful aircraft i have ever seen. Airbus inovators or aviation bueaty. Airbus and ATR best airliners in the world.
Great idea A350 XWB to paint at the belly fairing
i loved that
that was so nice
really nice congratulations!
The new A350 nice plane:)
Lindo! So Beautiful!
The livery is designed to be simple and lightweight, white paint weighs far less than other colours so Airbus go for efficiency from the very start.
great video airbus!
Can't wait...:)
Woow Awesome plane !! i hope to see it at EHAM :)
MAGNIFIQUE !
Cada vez fico mais apaixonado pela tecnologia na aviação
They are just like me, except that plane i paint is 144 times smaller :I
Tomorrow morning (Friday 14th June) and a live feed should be available on the Airbus website and here on RUclips.
Merci Bruno pour cette information!
Yes, This 900 version is bigger that the 200ER and the 1000 version is a bit bigger than the 300ER. The 800 version competes with the 787-8 and 9.
Will they put the first flight live on youtube?
Amazing aircraft, now the next few years is crutial for airbus, just as it was for Boeing with the 787! I can't wait to see the aircraft in full revenue service!
nice paint job
Beauriful aircraft..! =´)
So much better looking than the 787. Congratulations to Airbus.
Congratulations? It might be a little early for that. Airbus fanboys always get all excited about new Airbus planes and immediately start the "better than Boeing" because they think Airbus doing something for the sixth time now (introducing a new plane) actually compares to Boeing doing it several dozen times over 100 years now.
But unfortunately for Airbus fanboys, the last few Airbus "masterpieces" that were going to show Boeing and Lockheed what's up by "killing" the 747 and C130, have actually ended up looking more like a bad paint-by-number painting. After all, the A380 didn't even pass the ultimate wing load test, which is why Airbus will never be able to sell one in the U.S., even though they claimed they'd "fixed" the problem by adding 100 pounds or so of material in the wings and said they were "confident" it would pass.
I don't recall ever seeing or hearing that they'd even retested. Much less passed. And given the Airbus propaganda avalanche every time they pass another "milestone" by simply meeting basic expectations and requirements of performance, I'm sure if they HAD passed the second test, it would have been everywhere. Instead, all I've read or heard about A380 wings is how badly damaged one was by an exploding RR Trent and how during the investigation and inspection after the rotor disc failure, they found cracks in the wing rib feet.
Of course, cracked parts in a wing were "no threat to safety" for Airbus, but since they did end up allegedly "fixing" them, I have to think SOMEONE thought it was a big enough deal to force them to do it. After all, we know they wouldn't have done it otherwise. Just like they didn't feel compelled to use the appropriate material for the wing rib feet in the first place. That kind of makes me wonder if the reason they didn't test another wing is because they only used the specified material in the first one and knew the second test would crack feet and scatter them everywhere.
And now they've got cracks in the A400M somewhere. Once again, supposedly "not a threat to safety", but once again they're allegedly fixing them, so it must be important to someone. And this time they're saying 7 months per aircraft to repair the problem. Now I'm not an aircraft builder, but I am a mechanic and I have a good idea how planes are built.
And I know it doesn't take 7 months to build an A400M, or at least it SHOULDN'T. So I have to think that if their repair will take 7 months, they're pretty having to disassemble the entire aircraft and start over. That makes me think it's either a fuselage issue or a wing issue. But since on nearly-new planes that have barely flown and haven't even been formally accepted by the military that bought them yet, a crack this soon would say "wing" to me, since they're the only parts of the plane that have been heavily loaded.
And I could certainly see it taking several months to remove the engines, remove the wing, disassemble the wing, replace the flawed parts, reassembled the wing, etc etc etc. The only question is if its even worth it to go to all that work or if the wing and/or fuselage should just be replaced with new.
One other thing about that whole cracking thing that has me thinking is those engines. The fact is that Airbus basically put a swept wing for a JET aircraft on the plane, and then mounted those big-ass and very heavy turboprops on it. Now why they put turboprops on a swept wing when the Russians already proved it's a shitty idea is anyone's guess. But if they intended to build a jet and then at some point too far along to turn back had to abandon the jet engine idea and go turboprop, then it would be understandable if the jet wing wasn't liking the turboprops.
I'm not an aircraft designer, so I really have no idea, but I do think that when only about one or two other multi-engine transport planes have ever been built with a swept wing and turboprops, there are probably several good reasons for it. And if I were Airbus and building my FIRST turboprop 4-engine military transport, I think I'd seek out the best experts and engineers with experience in that area I could find.
Overall, I think Airbus will be doing "good" to make it another 5 years before their inability to deliver on promises combined with their inability to stop making promises finally put them in a hole so deep that even all the taxpayer money in the EU can't save the company.
Because after all, it is very hard to stay in the airplane building and selling business if no one wants your airplanes, or can't/won't buy them even if they DO want them because whoever is controlling the cash flow looks at the history of the company and decides they can't possibly buy planes today they won't get for ten years after production starts, if they ever get them at all.
Just out of curiosity, exactly what about this twin-engine widebody commercial passenger aircraft makes it so much "better looking" than the other twin-engine widebody commercial passenger aircraft you mentioned? And more importantly, could you even tell them apart if they were painted the same and sitting side by side?
Chad Meyer why can't we all just get a long. As an aviation enthusiast, I like both. Personally I think the a350 is better than the 787, but the a350s winglets don't look nice :/. I think the 747 is better than the a380, and so on. Airlines buy both, so why not appreciate both?
i dont know how other airlines' doing, but cathays' 350 fleet keep having trouble. no big one, but its pain in the ass. maintenance guys dont like to work on it. for me, the 350 and 787 have the same father the 767, gave birth by different mother, and i dont like to work on 767, 787 and 350 as a maintenance guy. i like 777 and 330, especially 777. well designed. and one thing, who the hell design the latching mechanism of those trent xwbs' c-duct? airbus guys or RR guys? anyway its such a stupid ass design.
@@chadmeyer9500 Longest command/reply i'd ever seen
@@chadmeyer9500 Shut Up btw
I loved it..
Cada vez fico mais apaixonado pela tecnologia na aviação
Wow!
Lol.. Are these for Qatar airways?
Before videos you saying you painting plane without engines but here with engines.So which is right step?
excuse me? Have you been reading the news lately about the 787?
Boeing so far has more problems, mechanically, than Airbus.
Awesome painting to it and also what is the song name?
Connaît on la marque de peinture utilisée sur l'avion? PPG? AKZO?
I am the painter has before left of the vidéo 1.27min painting radome
787 likes
the rival has come.
Gamer217
When start the flight tomorrow?
Friday 10AM !!!! :D :D
Cool
First flight this Friday June 14th!!!!!
Agreed! Boeing is not doing well with the 787
Airbus - Sponsors fo Flying for Freedom #Worldscoldestflight
Hi think it was ment to compete with the 787
Bruh Frog the 800 version is to compete with the 787-8 and -9
Please if anyone knows what the name of the music used in this video because it took a long time looking. From already thank you
this music was made Only for Airbus!! there is no name for the music!!
Could you please upload a video of painting MSN2?
bonito avion es un diseño diferente A350
is the new Airbus A350 comparable with an B-777?
B787
красивый пепелац. мордой похож на SSJ
Quiero pedirles un favor si alguien sabe cual es el nombre de la musica utilizada en este video ya que llevo mucho tiempo buscandola. Desde ya gracias
💚💙💚👍🖤👍🖤👍💚
what time? (local in Toulouse)
lifted*
So between the outer paint and the body there is a thin piece of paper?
Airbus
EU TENHO O SONHO DE VIAJAR NO A380.
je préfère les ingé qui on conçu l'avion avec les différents matériaux!
AKZONOBEL AVIOX AEROBASE MAT ET VERNIS POUR FINIR
Love the Boeing
Why did yall go Airbus go Boeing then
bonjour
WANT
757 likes
hvđ
how fucking irritatiing is the same repetitive song..
Airbus you livery sucks comparded to boeings but I love the co !
Your grammar is soo comical.
Don't judge the livery by the looks, judge on how it performs.
The purpose of the A350 is compete against the 787. The looks almost look the 787, but styled differently.
So don't jump to conclusions until the correct facts are provided. The plane hasn't life off the ground yet. Gezz.
Yes agree nice but they never seem to be sexy as boeing planes
boieng 787 the best airbus no way
…
go boeing channel then