Author Topic: Boeing… Boeing… Gone? (Read 1372 times)

Ripsnort · « **Reply #30 on:** July 17, 2004, 02:58:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
I know it's Dassault I was yanking yer chain
The funny thing is that one day Dassault will make more money with the software

I don't know what software they use at Airbus.

I know you were.

Airbus started using CATIA V5 for the development of the A380, however I'm not sure what they used before that. It was not CATIA V4 though.

Creamo · « **Reply #31 on:** July 17, 2004, 04:13:09 PM »

I’m pretty sure Boeing will do well, and after working on their jets night after night, I feel I might have an inside or better take on this issue. And yes, I worked on Airbus stuff before. Boeing is good stuff, so is Airbus.

Still, to have Droopsnore be the resident professional because he made some tooling to make ‘who knows what’ part of it and spends most his day yanking on the AH BBS at work, kinda pisses me off .

Please STFU Droppy. You couldn’t find the CDU if your pop can was in the cockpit sitting on it, and asked to find the APU Oil level.

Your stock goes up by people that actually do something, not you.

FACT.

Chairboy · « **Reply #32 on:** July 17, 2004, 04:41:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKWeav
Many people had had reservations about this since that airshow disaster with the A320 many years ago.

As I understand it, the crash wasn't the result of fbw, but the onboard computer insisting that the plane was landing, over riding the pilot insisting that it was not.

Another Boeing feature popular with many piolts is control feedback. They like laying their hands on the yoke while autopilot is engaged, and feeling what the airplane is doing.

If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going.

Popular misconception.

Later investigation showed that the pilot disabled the safety system and contributed to the crash because of a poorly documented situation that the plane was vulnerable to.

When he was making his descent to do a 100 foot pass over the runway for the airshow, he disengaged the program that would maintain a safe performance envelope, throttled his engines back to idle, and manually guided the plane in with full landing flaps. He realized that he was running out of e and firewalled the engines, but since they were at idle instead of at a point in their powerband where they could produce active thrust, there was a lag (turbo owners know this as turbo lag) as the turbines throttled up to thrust producing levels, and the plane impacted the trees before he could climb away.

The crash wasn't entirely pilot error, Airbus later documented a different landing procedure after another plane was lost in similar circumstances that would help pilots stay out of trouble.

Creamo · « **Reply #33 on:** July 17, 2004, 05:48:59 PM »

You seem well versed in Aerospace and aviation Chairboy. Cool.

Just wondering what your career in aerospace or aviation is.

I’m going to say you are in aerospace engineering, or commercial jet development?

What company, and what do you think about future aircraft designs?

beet1e · « **Reply #34 on:** July 17, 2004, 06:08:16 PM »

The pinnacle of my BBS achievement has been to elicit a thought out response from Rip which went beyond cutting and pasting!

American Airlines cites the MD80 as the centrepiece of its fleet - is this FBW or conventional?

Our friend Steve could have been an Airbus pilot - he likes easymode planes!

;) Go ahead - wring my neck!

LePaul · « **Reply #35 on:** July 17, 2004, 06:09:25 PM »

I thought the Lunar Landers had the first fly-by-wire systems...which formed the basis of the first ones for aircraft (Vought F-8)

Creamo · « **Reply #36 on:** July 17, 2004, 06:17:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e

American Airlines cites the MD80 as the centrepiece of its fleet - is this FBW or conventional?

LOL. Beetard, you know better.

Err, you do, right?

Sparks · « **Reply #37 on:** July 17, 2004, 06:36:58 PM »

I think it will be an interesting few years ahead. Yes the A380 will get some headlines when it first flies and yes it has a good order book but can Airbus survive on A380 alone ???

The A320 series is actually getting a bit old now and in the A321 is probably as stretched as it will get. Likewise the A330 and 340 are up at their limits of improvements. Boeing however have a clean sheet design which is getting good responses from the airlines - 7E7 I think will re-ignite the fight between Boeing and Airbus in the commercial sector.

As far as FBW goes - well it's nothing new - but ask anyone who's done avionics or FADEC about software .................. it's not just on your PC where strange things happen.

Chairboy · « **Reply #38 on:** July 17, 2004, 06:37:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Creamo
You seem well versed in Aerospace and aviation Chairboy. Cool.

Just wondering what your career in aerospace or aviation is.

I’m going to say you are in aerospace engineering, or commercial jet development?

What company, and what do you think about future aircraft designs?

Thanks Creamo! But I'm just a hobbyist who reads a lot. I'm actually in software engineering.

My parents and grandparents (Boeing going back two generations) would probably have liked it if I had done the same path, but...

For the specific information on this Airbus crash, a great quick summary is in a book called Set Phasers on Stun: And Other True Tales of Design, Technology, and Human Error by Steven Casey. It's a bunch of engineering mistakes or usabillity/human factors errors that ended badly.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0963617885/qid=1090107384/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-9159212-4034515?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Oh, and in regards to the company I have my money on, still Boeing. The 7E7 might be a less sexy then the aborted Sonic Cruiser, but it's a lot of important technology that'll change jet travel. The question is, will it change it the way the Dash-80 changed it? Or will it do it the way the DeHavilland Comet changed it?

Sparks · « **Reply #39 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:02:37 PM »

Quote

The question is, will it change it the way the Dash-80 changed it? Or will it do it the way the DeHavilland Comet changed it?

Interesting point Chairboy but one thing is for sure - the headlines when the first A380 makes a hole in a field killing 600 folks are going to be bigger than those for a 200 seat 7E7. How long it is before the first 380 accident may well be the key to its sucess or failure.

Out of interest anyone know how long it was from the first 747 going into service to the first one ploughing in??

Chairboy · « **Reply #40 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:10:34 PM »

The reason I mention the Comet and the 7E7 is that both have a lot of new technology in them. The Comet was doomed after the problem with the windows brought down planes.

I think that composite technology is mature, but for a structure as large as a wing, there's always room for more learning. It's not practical to prevent the 7E7 from rolling out because of this concern, but I hope that Boeing will be actively involved in examining the first generation of planes for any possible 'fatigue' or stress related problems.

The technology isn't the problem, it's making sure that the organization is committed to fulfilling their part of investigating in-field deployment to validate their simulations.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #41 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:11:59 PM »

Hehe creamo, see? Just can't stay away from stalking...

Hey, hows that United Airlines stock holding up?

Ripsnort · « **Reply #42 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:16:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
I think that composite technology is mature, but for a structure as large as a wing, there's always room for more learning. It's not practical to prevent the 7E7 from rolling out because of this concern, but I hope that Boeing will be actively involved in examining the first generation of planes for any possible 'fatigue' or stress related problems.

Wish I could say more, unfortunately anything I might add at this point could be proprietary information.

Yeager · « **Reply #43 on:** July 17, 2004, 07:47:01 PM »

but I hope that Boeing will be actively involved in examining the first generation of planes for any possible 'fatigue' or stress related problems.
====
Ive heard things you wouldnt even imagine possible. Like rip I cant say anything specific but suffice it to say Boeing has broken the mold that airbus stole from us twenty years ago and is starting a whole new game and making the rules. You will not be disappointed. The 7E7 and its variants are the future of commercial air travel. the a380, although very much a boeing inspired airplane, is really just old news in a new package.

Chairboy · « **Reply #44 on:** July 17, 2004, 08:05:43 PM »

Great stuff to hear! When the 7E7 was announced, I was interested, but not excited. As I learn more about the technology in it, the more interested I get. My hope is that the 7E7 will be an integral part of lowering the cost of air travel or increase the profit margins for airlines, either of which will result in a stronger industry that can then start looking forward to things like a next generation SST. I think the sonic boom problem will be solved in our lifetime, so fast cross country travel is still a possibility.