Amicus and Newvisitor
Hats off to both of you. Your rational exchange is what PPrune used to be. Your experience and knowledge, articulately stated, brings the conversation back to an intelligent exchange of ideas and allows the rest of us, without your specific skill set, to listen and learn.
You may recall I quizzed amicus early on about the clear knowledge of the 787 and materials
That has led to rather a lot of reading over the weekend of websites / articles, some of which I suspect are authored by amicus. They are not whacky theories, but asking Boeing/FAA probing questions and seemingly not getting the answers.
The articles seem to pre-date the A350 final design, which has now also gone down the composite route, at times apparently against some at Airbus' judgement who might have preferred the A380 "hybrid" route?
As such, I feel better informed and will follow the ET follow up with interest - and maybe cross referred to the 777 SFO accident.
What I am still unclear about is how "different" the A350 is to the 787? 1 difference is "panel" fuselage construction (A350) v Barrel (787) - the panel being simpler and easier to repair i.e. in the ET case, it might require the whole aft fuselage "barrel" replaced if it cannot be patched.
The burn / insulation differences between the 787 Toray 3900-2 and A350 Hexcal M21E materials / construction would also be of interest if anybody can help...
PS if anybody is interest please see
Lonely Scientist and the '
Impossible Dream' chapters...