Thomson 787 returns to MAN
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: on land
Age: 60
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In terms of comfort I'm primarily interested in the cabin (pressure) altitude change. And I think that because so much is riding on this for one of only two majors on the entire planet, it must be sorted out one way or other.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the engineers or test pilots’ perspective when anything goes wrong in the early service of any new aircraft and nobody is hurt every such incident represents invaluable knowledge which will allow them to refine the design or procedures associated with it.
Such incidents are therefore to be welcomed not wailed about on the internet.
It may be hard on the commercial and PR folk but it leads in the long term to a really well sorted aircraft.
Such incidents are therefore to be welcomed not wailed about on the internet.
It may be hard on the commercial and PR folk but it leads in the long term to a really well sorted aircraft.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@cockney steve: Thanks for replying, though my post seems to have been removed [I'm still trying to work out what attracts the mods' delete key!] "... yet they had a vast team of highly qualified engineers , working day and night on.........A tin box with a vent-pipe" [sorry, still can't work out how to quote properly on here]. Yes, I've been following the developments on one of the other threads. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Like many others, I want to see the 787 work, but I just feel it is almost a the point of no return. I know there will be the folk who say "this is entirely normal for a new type - it is just the reporting that has increased" (and I really don't know whether that is true or not). However, the point is that the 787 is developing the sort of reputation that gets into the group mind, and so every incident gets reported. Eventually, unless Boeing have truly excellent PR (which doesn't seem to be the case) the whole thing will end up being so toxic that it will have to be binned, along with a lot of the potentially good developments.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SEA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bathrooms are certainly of interest. They are not gravity flow, and do rely on the electrical system to flush.
Also of interest in the Heathrow fire which started at the back at the bathroom location.
It appears they are looking at the airconditioning unit, but, they stated at ALL power had been shut down for 8 hours.
Also of interest in the Heathrow fire which started at the back at the bathroom location.
It appears they are looking at the airconditioning unit, but, they stated at ALL power had been shut down for 8 hours.
El Bunto:
You're worrying about .6 of an inch in width, seriously?
The economy pax will have 34 inch seat pitch which is better than pretty much anyone, the space is very noticeable and I've sat in those economy seats.
Cabin crew permit it constantly, only disabling the system when safety dictates. That's standard for this aircraft.
Well other than for economy pax going from a 17.8"-wide 767 seat to 17.2" in the 787.
The economy pax will have 34 inch seat pitch which is better than pretty much anyone, the space is very noticeable and I've sat in those economy seats.
Though perhaps this will be offset by the view from the windows when the FAs permit exterior viewing?
Last edited by Laarbruch72; 13th Jul 2013 at 21:30.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reports on SSN last night that a hundred or so Thomson customers had contacted the company querying whether their planned future flight was to be on a 787.
Thomson declined to comment, but the inference was pretty obvious in the news report.
Thomson declined to comment, but the inference was pretty obvious in the news report.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if the passengers were aware of the Heathrow 787 fire. If I had been on board I certainly would have been worried even though I like flying.
Any definitive news about whether or not the Thomson 787 galleys were also affected by the technical problem?
Any definitive news about whether or not the Thomson 787 galleys were also affected by the technical problem?
G-TUIC has just returned from Cancun, tracking the east coast of USA, was due to land in Manchester, circled a few times and then diverted to Gatwick where it's just landed. Are there any problems in Manchester this morning or is this a case of needing to get the aircraft back to base?
Last edited by MarcJF; 15th Jul 2013 at 12:11.
So has it been established as fact that the crew lost the ability to dump fuel and had reduced braking?
If so then what if they had a birdstrike when flying back over Ireland? Or the battery caught fire like it has previously and the crew needed to land immediately and couldn't make it to a nice long runway like Shannon or Manchester? Landing heavy with reduced braking on possibly a short runway? Lovely
If so then what if they had a birdstrike when flying back over Ireland? Or the battery caught fire like it has previously and the crew needed to land immediately and couldn't make it to a nice long runway like Shannon or Manchester? Landing heavy with reduced braking on possibly a short runway? Lovely
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spoke to some passengers on this mornings 787 from Cancun when it landed at Manchester early afternoon.. They were told the diversion to Gatwick was due to fog at Manchester. I know of at least one other aircraft which diverted to Liverpool for the same reason.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone here find it interesting that the "technical" issue has not been disclosed after all this time?