Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Karnak on January 15, 2013, 11:20:40 PM
-
What is going on with the 787?
(http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/130115-787-602p.photoblog600.jpg)
Ripsnort?
-
After all these problems with the 787 I've decided that "If it's Boeing, I might not be going."
-
After all these problems with the 787 I've decided that "If it's Boeing, I might not be going."
The 777 is great. The problems are specific to the 787.
-
The 777 is great. The problems are specific to the 787.
no the problem is with the media trying to make nothing into something. now granted, this incident is not a nothing, but in the last week, there has been something reported every day that have been nothings.
the 787 is just going through a little bit of teething ATM. it just so happens that its all happening this month...
-
The 777 is great. The problems are specific to the 787.
Horrible aircraft. Never experienced one with all of the internal systems working or the capacity to deliver food or liquid refreshment. 11 hour flight with no toilets, not food, no drink and no in-flight entertainment system as well as minimal internal lighting was the worst.
-
Its all the UK's fault :old:
And so is global warning :old:
-
I remember asking the boss of the company I worked for at the time, why we were waiting so long to get the 777, his reply was to the effect that it takes a year or two to work out the bugs.
No matter how well designed the aeorplane, real life springs surprises that noone on the design team could have imagined. As long as it doesn't kill someone.
-
no the problem is with the media trying to make nothing into something. now granted, this incident is not a nothing, but in the last week, there has been something reported every day that have been nothings.
the 787 is just going through a little bit of teething ATM. it just so happens that its all happening this month...
This wasn't the only incident. There have been three or four incidents this week. Two Japanese airlines have grounded them now. You don't do that to your best money making aircraft without a real reason.
The 777 never had these kinds of problems.
-
Sounds like a design flaw. Somebody got complacent and didn't do their homework.
-
Just slap some duct tape on the problem areas and everything will be ok.
-
This wasn't the only incident. There have been three or four incidents this week. Two Japanese airlines have grounded them now. You don't do that to your best money making aircraft without a real reason.
The 777 never had these kinds of problems.
Im aware of all the other problems they've had with the 787, my company has 20 on order so we're fairly well informed. Also I believe that todays wired world is why everything is instantly flashed around the world.
Remember the 777 was introduced sometime in the mid nineties I dont think we had that connectivity to advertise every incident. Also the 777 was pretty much done, at least to a degree, the old fashioned way, so why they actually did have their problems they were not as dramatic or as well advertised as things are with the 787.
Thats not to say that Boeing can just sit there, its pretty obvious there are some serious flaws with the manufacture that need to be sorted asap.
-
They should move production of said plane to China :old:
It will be cheaper as well :old:
-
I worked for Delta when we launched the 777. All the aircraft we accepted all did substantial time flying short haul stuff with high cycles per day to ensure that the "kinks" were worked out. There were several problems that occurred during that time frame, but as opposed today, there was not a camera phone or digital camera at every corner, and most of it went unreported.
-
Did you ground the entire fleet of 777s at any time?
-
FIRE! a FIRE is not a big problem? why is the plane catching fire? why do two separate planes catch fire in the same spot in two weeks? I think i'd ground the plane too. :uhoh
-
Did you ground the entire fleet of 777s at any time?
We took several out of service at the same time which amounted to the aircraft we had on hand and communicated with Boeing who in turn had their engineers examine problems. Again, the difference is that the media did not latch onto this stuff as it does today. Of all the things to happen too date, the battery issue is the biggest issue. As mentioned by a former 767 captain and what I feel is a great assessment of the issue, if there is an overcharge problem and they can not stop it, than that is a serious issue as those lead to thermal overloads and those fires are almost impossible to extinguish in flight.
Either way, they will find the problem and fix the issue. The windscreen crack and the fuel issues could be several different things that are not indicative of the entirety of production.
-
The Screamliner
-
My recommendation is to sell any Boeing stock you have. All of it. By the COB today. The sooner the better (Because I'm getting rich from buying low, selling at ceilings over the past 5 years. :devil )
Boeing's 787 Issues: Big Problem, Or Just Growing Pains?
Boeing With the constant media swirl around Boeing’s (BA) new 787 Dreamliner, it’s no wonder a series of recent hiccups including a fire and fuel leak prompted an uproar and garnered worldwide attention -- but perhaps it’s all been a bit overblown.
In just five days, there was a fire in a grounded Dreamliner’s auxiliary battery pack, several fuel leaks and a crack in a cockpit window, all mounting on a two-year production delay following lofty delivery promises by Boeing and a series of setbacks that have plagued the 787 since its commercial introduction in 2011.
Yet, it appears more a PR black-eye than anything. While critics say the issues are serious and must be immediately addressed, supporters are trying to suffocate what they believe is a massive overreaction.
“What we’re seeing are issues of bringing any new technologically-advanced product into service," said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta.
The Dreamliner undergoes some 150 flights daily and has flown more than one million passengers since 2011. During the FAA approval process, it logged more than 200,000 flight hours. At the same time, last Monday’s fire has been traced to lithium-ion batteries that only operate when the jet is shut down.
The flying public nevertheless has become stuck in the middle of what seems like a nasty divorce between the media and Dreamliner. The media, at times idolizing the jumbo jet’s fuel efficiency and modern design, has fueled a firestorm against Boeing in the wake of the fire.
The Federal Aviation Administration launched a “comprehensive” probe on Friday into the 787’s critical systems, but still seemed broadly supportive of the world’s first carbon-composite aircraft.
Stifel Nicolaus analysts said they believed the FAA decision was “driven by the media focus,” to reassure fliers, and Oppenheimer earlier in the week said it was “growing convinced” that the issues were just teething problems, possibly even “pedestrian operational hitches,” that were “merely being magnified by the 787’s media glow.”
The A380's "Scary" First Few Months
All new jets suffer early in-service issues and the 787 is no different. Just take a look at the Airbus A380, the world’s largest passenger jet.
The super jumbo jet, which made its first flight in 2005 and began commercial service to much fanfare in October 2007 with Singapore Airlines, faced a slew of serious, at times scary, hiccups in its first few years.
The jet, designed to challenge Boeing’s hold on the market, quickly became one of the most impressive commercial aircraft of all time after its first few test runs ran perfectly. However, problems began shortly after with production delays.
In 2010, an A380 operated by Qantas experienced an uncontained engine failure when its Rolls-Royce engine exploded, forcing the Australian carrier to make an emergency landing in Singapore.
On inspection, cracks were discovered in fittings within the wings, which led the European Aviation Safety Agency in January 2012 to issue an airworthiness directive affecting 20 A380s that together accumulated more than 1,300 flights.
In November 2012, another A380, this one operated by Emirates Airline, made an emergency landing in Sydney after suffering an engine fault shortly after takeoff.
“Scary things happened in first seven months,” Bob Herbst of AirlineFinancials.com said of the A380.
In fact, major adverse events occur every day in the airline industry, most people are just usually unaware due in part to today's highly-trained pilots and meticulous back-up systems.
The Dreamliner just so happens to be the aviation sector’s version of a celebrity, which makes its every move – good or bad – newsworthy.
The Media Glow's Impact
That’s not to say wide reporting of the 787’s missteps is not warranted. When a jet catches fire the way it did last Monday, passengers want and should know about it, hiccup or not.
A report by BB&T Capital markets on Tuesday raised some of the flying public's obvious concerns: If a fire can spark on the ground, what’s stopping the same thing from happening in the air? If an engine can leak 40 gallons of fuel on its away to take off, how is one to know that won’t occur mid-flight?
"Anything that causes a fire, no matter how small, is an issue,” Stifel Nicolaus analysts said in a note.
However, the aerospace sector seems to think the recent mishaps wouldn't have served as a major danger to passengers. They also believe there is a potentially easy, near-term fix.
“In our opinion, the [FAA's] focus is appropriate as other issues reported in the news are minor and occur regularly on many aircraft types in the global fleet,” said Stifel Nicolaus, which reiterated its “buy” rating on Boeing on Friday.
Boeing’s shares, which have only fallen about 3% over the last five trading days despite all the negative publicity, closed up 1.85% to $76.55 on Monday.
Herbst said the negative publicity was “over blown” but blamed much of the bad press on Boeing for making false promises about the Dreamliner’s delivery timetable. He expressed optimism that the jet's many amenities will “far outweigh any of the negative.”
“The 787 is a fantastic airliner and will create a measurable positive to the airline industry,” Herbst said. "I’d hate to see too much [negative] media destroy that anticipation and excitement people should have.”
It's worth mentioning that while the 787 problems have raised broader flight safety concerns, aircraft safety continues to improve and there hasn’t been a commercial airline fatality in the U.S. since 2009.
It's unclear whether the recent problems will give pause to carriers. United Airlines (UAL) said it's "continuing to work closely with Boeing." Attempts to reach Delta (DAL
DELTA AIR LINES INC.
) were unsuccessful.
Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2013/01/14/dont-fret-over-boeing-787-snafu/#ixzz2IA1I3yOI
-
If I remember correctly, didnt the Airbus A380 have a lot of issues in its first several months of operations as well? Isnt it common for new planes to have issues in their early careers?
-
If I remember correctly, didnt the Airbus A380 have a lot of issues in its first several months of operations as well? Isnt it common for new planes to have issues in their early careers?
You mean the skytanic?
Yeah it had some issues, but the 787s are comparable if not worse.
-
Sounds like a design flaw. Somebody got complacent and didn't do their homework.
I blame Rip.
ack-ack
-
I blame Rip.
ack-ack
yup, obviously short cuts have been used in exchange for AH2 game time :D
Air New Zealands dreamliners might turn out to be big fat lemons: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8168580/Dreamliner-NZ-US-flights-questioned
-
Sell that Boeing stock(not that you ever owned any, could you even afford to?). Love to buy it cheap.
JGroth
-
If I remember correctly, didnt the Airbus A380 have a lot of issues in its first several months of operations as well? Isnt it common for new planes to have issues in their early careers?
Not really. I'm surprised at how little teething problems the A380 has had. There was one major issue with the L-brackets in the wings, but that turned out to be an assembly issue. One engine blew up in flight, but neither Airbus or Boeing makes the engines that power their aircraft.
The only issue I find worrying with the 787 is the electrical fire hazard. That's bad on a long haul flight over the Pacific...
-
This wasn't the only incident. There have been three or four incidents this week. Two Japanese airlines have grounded them now. You don't do that to your best money making aircraft without a real reason.
The 777 never had these kinds of problems.
There have been three major issues, but there have been multiple reports of things that were in reality normal.
And Yes the 777 did. However, that was 20 years ago when social media and instant news reports didn't exist. And you also didn't have some average Joe being able to report something in his blog and be considered a reliable source or an expert in the field by other news reporting organisations like you have today.
-
Remember those pictures of people burned by cellphones that caught fire? Imagine a cellphone the size of an airliner catching fire :bolt:
Seriously, battery fires are really bad and wrapping battery fires with carbon fiber which turns really really nasty when it burns is pretty scary. I've had a little training from the AF safety school on what happens when a modern aircraft made with composites burns, and I don't want to be anywhere near that. And I don't want to be downwind from the wreckage either, even if it doesn't burn.
-
The dreamliners were just grounded in the whole Europe.
-
http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020149011_787batterydamagexml.html
-
The only issue I find worrying with the 787 is the electrical fire hazard. That's bad on a long haul flight over the Pacific...
Why do you say that?
(http://www.indyprops.com/pp-wilson1.jpg)
-
I'm sorry, but I don't get the reference.
-
"wilson" was tom hanks only friend on the deserted island after a fed ex plane crash in the move "cast away".
-
(http://static.iltalehti.fi/ulkomaat/akkujuttu31801epaJOB_503_ul.jpg)
Toasty.
-
"wilson" was tom hanks only friend on the deserted island after a fed ex plane crash in the move "cast away".
Thanks :)
-
(http://static.iltalehti.fi/ulkomaat/akkujuttu31801epaJOB_503_ul.jpg)
Toasty.
Hey man, quit with the media hype.
-
The battery getting cooked is just a symptom of a deeper/hidden problem with the electrics.
-
The battery getting cooked is just a symptom of a deeper/hidden problem with the electrics.
I could only see the problem being the battery itself (didn't some laptop batteries catch fire spontaneously some time back?) or the Transformer Regulating Units (AC<>DC).
-
I could only see the problem being the battery itself (didn't some laptop batteries catch fire spontaneously some time back?) or the Transformer Regulating Units (AC<>DC).
Definitely appears some issue with thermal runaway. Talk to any RC guy who's running LiPo batteries on how sensitive they are two any amount of overcharging. I'm really surprised they went with lithium ion and not nickel hydride or a different chemistry atleast until they work the bugs out of the electrical system
-
Straight from the horses mouth, Just remember the Airbus 380 flew great right out of the barn :lol
SERVICE REQUEST ID: 1-2394399263
ACCOUNT: Boeing Correspondence (MOM)
PRODUCT TYPE: Airplane
PRODUCT LINE: 787
PRODUCT: 787-8
ATA: 0240-00
SUBJECT: 787-8 JA804A Diversion Event to Takamatsu, Japan - 16 January 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 16th, a 787 operating scheduled serviced experienced what appears to be a main battery failure that resulted in a diversion. The airplane was on a domestic flight from Yamaguchi (UBJ) to Haneda (HND). The operator reported that the flight crew noticed several EICAS messages and noted an odor in the flight deck during cruise and subsequently diverted to Takamatsu (TAK). The airplane landed safely and passengers and crew evacuated via the escape slides. Initial reports indicate that there was one minor injury during the evacuation. Weather was reported to have been clear at the time of the event.
This event is being investigated by the Japan Transport Safety Board (JTSB). The NTSB has appointed a U.S. accredited representative to the investigation, and the FAA and Boeing will serve as technical advisers to the U.S. accredited representative. The U.S. team has dispatched to the scene today to assist the JTSB with their investigation. Per the provisions of ICAO Annex 13, all investigation related information will be released by the JTSB in this case. Boeing understands operator's need for information following events such as this. As such, we will strive to keep operators informed within the confines of Annex 13.
After landing, the main battery was found to have signs of damage as noted through visual inspection of the battery area. Visual inspection of the Forward EE bay and the subject Main Battery, along with review of EICAS and Maintenance Messages suggest a failure originating within the Main Battery. Initial photos and reports appear to indicate minimal damage to surrounding structure or systems. The airplane which experienced this event was delivered in January 2012.
As a result of this event, the affected 787 operator, and one other 787 operator, removed their 787 aircraft from service pending root cause identification and/or implementation of actions to minimize future occurrences. Boeing is working with the appropriate authorities to determine root cause and if any effective actions can be implemented to identify batteries that may be susceptible to premature failure. Boeing will share the results of these activities with all 787 Operators as they become available in accordance with the directives provided in Annex 13.
If you have further questions please contact your Boeing Field Service Representative, the appropriate Airline Support Manager or call the BCA Operations Center at (206) 544-7500. Attachments (when referenced) may be accessed by logging into MyBoeingFleet Service Requests or by contacting your Boeing Field Service Representative.
Chief Engineer - Air Safety Investigation
The Boeing Company
-
Straight from the horses mouth, Just remember the Airbus 380 flew great right out of the barn :lol
You know, there is a reason I chose to compare it to the 777 and not the A380. :p
-
Couple of thoughts:
1) Airplane 787-8 JA804A had been in service for over a year
2) The battery housing appeared to contain the overheat very nicely.
You can rest assured the cause will be determined and a fix implemented quickly.
-
Quote
" When it outsourced design and risk and reward to a wide range of offshore suppliers, it actually murdered the Boeing that had made the 777, the 747 and, back at the beginning of the commercial jet age, the 707s and 727s."
end quote,
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2013/01/19/dreamliner-787-battery-fires-burn-faa-and-media-too/
-
Think the fumes given off by an overhreating lithium battery aren't too good for you .
-
If I remember correctly, didnt the Airbus A380 have a lot of issues in its first several months of operations as well? Isnt it common for new planes to have issues in their early careers?
Issues yes, having the entire fleet grounded because of the severity of the issue, no.
Kat..
-
My recommendation is to sell any Boeing stock you have. All of it. By the COB today. The sooner the better (Because I'm getting rich from buying low, selling at ceilings over the past 5 years. :devil
Just short the stock, however it's been range bound for about three years. I'm looking forward to placing a short on Blackberry soon, once it's released and a few days later it's realised to be average at best like the iPhone5
<S>...-Gixer
-
Issues yes, having the entire fleet grounded because of the severity of the issue, no.
Kat..
Airbus 380 fleet was grounded by EASA early on for wing cracks.........
:salute
-
Airbus 380 fleet was grounded by EASA early on for wing cracks.........
:salute
Ah, correct was just reading ESAS statements. Thought they had only ordered extra inspections.
<S>...-Gixer
-
Ah, correct was just reading ESAS statements. Thought they had only ordered extra inspections.
If I recall correctly it was simply inspections, until they discovered a whole ton of wings with improperly placed fasteners that were cracking or causing cracks. Then none of them could fly until after they were inspected and fixed.
-
If I recall correctly it was simply inspections, until they discovered a whole ton of wings with improperly placed fasteners that were cracking or causing cracks. Then none of them could fly until after they were inspected and fixed.
Im pretty sure thats what happened, every aeroplane was dragged in for inspection asap, but it didn't stop them from operating.
-
Airbus 380 fleet was grounded by EASA early on for wing cracks.........
:salute
I can still remember the choruses of "ding-dong, the witch is dead" from the Boeing crowd at the time - "couldn't happen here."
-
Like this one? :lol ;)
The 777 was cutting edge when it was designed, and Boeing managed that program on time and on weight. All those young engineers on the 777 are now senior engineers on then 787. The 787 will meet its schedule, and the first customer bird will be on weight. The 787 is the most successfull launch airplane in commercial aviation history. Im developing the opinion that the A380 and the A350 wont best that. Not by a long shot. Boeing played this one spot on. And the success of the 747-8 is just frosting on the cake.