Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

The inaugural flight came as a surprise to the passengers...

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

The inaugural flight came as a surprise to the passengers...

Old 22nd Jun 2013, 00:25
  #1 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,999
The inaugural flight came as a surprise to the passengers...

Boeing 787 Dreamliner flies first UK passengers to Menorca | Business | The Guardian
The inaugural flight came as a surprise to the passengers...
  1. Let's say I was one of the Thomson pax booked from LGW to Mahon on Friday 21st June.
  2. At check in I am told (doubtless with a smile) that we will be travelling on a 787, introduced on SH for crew familiarisation blah publicity blah.
  3. I say, (politely) "No thank you. I choose my carriers and aircraft very carefully. I will not travel on that aircraft for at least two years. Please rebook me at no cost to myself."
  4. You can guess the responses!
PAXboy is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 00:29
  #2 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,499
So, the Bad Dreamliner! What a nightmare that's been so far.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 03:18
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,263
3. I say, (politely) "No thank you. I choose my carriers and aircraft very carefully. I will not travel on that aircraft for at least two years. Please rebook me at no cost to myself."
If that was written into the contract you entered into with the airline, you should be fine. If not........
4. You can guess the responses
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 06:53
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK, sometimes USA
Posts: 400
It's an interesting point. While I'm happy to fly the 787 short-haul within Europe, I'm also more than happy to let other pax do some flight testing for me on long-haul over-water trips. I just don't have enough confidence in the 787 yet. I'm sure it will eventually be a fine aircraft but that's not now for me.

I'd be requesting a flight transfer if a 787 was swapped onto my existing non-787 long-haul flight at the moment.
airsmiles is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 10:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Valencia
Posts: 67
You'll find that in Thomson's terms and conditions, along with most if not all other package holiday companies, there is a clause which gives them the right to change airline and/or aircraft without notice. You have agreed to these terms and conditions when booking and would have no leg to stand on and therefore forfeit your holiday.
joniveson is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 12:14
  #6 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,999
joniveson I have no doubt of that, hence my original post!

Thus far, as I understand it, some of the problems are related to how the a/c is handled on the ground as it requires different procedures by the technicians to all other a/c that have gone before.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 15:30
  #7 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,499
It must be very comforting as a passenger to possess as such superior knowledge of an airliner's safety that you are gifted with superior judgement to that of the airline operating it.
It's probably even more comforting for passengers to make a choice and fly with who they like.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 16:16
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 6,084
Nice one for all involved.
racedo is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 20:25
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK, sometimes USA
Posts: 400
It must be very comforting as a passenger to possess as such superior knowledge of an airliner's safety that you are gifted with superior judgement to that of the airline operating it.
Two points on that:-

1) It helps if you work in the aerospace industry and have had close links with Boeing and one of the primary suppliers of the relevant troublesome technology.

2) Regardless of the above, anyone who places their faith in a service provider has a right to hold an opinion and act accordingly. I don't necessarily have better knowledge than the manufacturer or the relevant regulators, but my perception is that neither have done enough to reassure me.
airsmiles is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 20:41
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: BHX LXR ASW
Posts: 2,156
I guess a carrier could subcharter a knacked old 737 from some Eastern European carrier running hours late try to play catch up all with broken seats and drop down tables. Wait a minute didn't that happen at BHX last year with Monarch?

I know what I would prefer to fly.....

Speed blamed after plane careers off Birmingham Airport runway Express & Star

Last edited by crewmeal; 23rd Jun 2013 at 07:12. Reason: Addition
crewmeal is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2013, 22:49
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: U.K.
Age: 64
Posts: 375
B787 OUTSIDE air not BLEED air

The single unique aspect of the B787 Dreamliner which no one has mentioned, but all pilots and Boeing have been waiting for is that this aircraft returns to using compressed OUTSIDE air - not BLEED air, which has been used by all jet aircraft since around 1962.

In this photo you will note 2 nostril type air inlets either side in the wing root - this is where the OUTSIDE air is taken in before being electrically compressed.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...F%3B1600%3B899

Whereas BLEED air travels in the front of the jet engine - is compressed and is then piped unfiltered into the cabin.

Airbus catching up.....slowly.

http://www.cleansky.eu/sites/default...int-062013.pdf

The Best Kept Secret in Aviation.
Dream Buster is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 02:04
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 51
Posts: 185
PaxBoy triggered my curiosity
Apart from the Titanic, which inaugural trip went (horribly) wrong?
ulxima is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 09:42
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,878
Apart from the Titanic, which inaugural trip went (horribly) wrong?
The Tu-144 had a problem or few!
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 11:19
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,042
Safety is relative! Some of us will take risks that others would never contemplate.

When 767s first started crossing the Atlantic non stop I was invited to Kansas City by TWA. The proposed route was via St Louis on the 767. I asked nicely if we could please go via Chicago on the 747 and they kindly said yes; at that point the whole idea of twins over water was far to new for me to accept. Stupid? Possibly. The reason was that, at the time, the whole issue was still being discussed in magazines like Flight International and I wasn't comfortable.

These days I have what I think is a more rounded(?) approach. There are airlines that I will avoid if possible. I will take a non stop over a stop/change if possible (why expose myself to the riskiest parts of a flight more than I have to?). I will fly airlines that I would otherwise avoid if I'm "in country" and the alternative is a bus or car journey where the accident rate is high. I will fly on twins over water. At the moment I would try and avoid booking a 787 because I'm not comfortable that simply containing the batteries is a solution.

(But here is an interesting conundrum I'm currently thinking about going to Madagascar. The tour I've looked at uses Air France to get there. They will sell me the ground arrangements and allow me to book my own flights so Air Madagascar enters the options. Probably not, thank you, even though the tour includes one of their flights internally and I will use that on the basis that it is probably safer than a bus trip. Air France? Not the best safety record in recent years. The other alternative seems to be Kenya Airways and that's probably where I'll go if I decide to take the tour).

So what would I do if presented with a 787 at the gate when I thought I was going to be on something else? I'd like to think that with things like on-line checkin I would actually find out before I go to the airport, at least then I would have time to think about it. But, in the end I think I would board despite my reservations.

Like I said we all have our own ideas of safety and they aren't always rational.
Hartington is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 12:11
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 64
Posts: 2,846
Canadian Pacific's delivery flight of their Comet I went horribly wrong*. Not an inaugural, they had to cancel that.

*1st fatalities on a commercial jet aircraft.
ExXB is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 12:14
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
I'd like to think that I'm relatively rational about safety, yet to be honest I'm not ready to fly an oceanic sector on an B787 just yet. And, although I do so regularly, I'm still not entirely comfortable flying oceanic on any twin for that matter.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 15:39
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,420
If I found myself boarding a B787 unexpectedly, I would be reassured by the fact that before it was allowed back into service a great many people who understood such things will have made damn sure that the batteries are now safe.

I would be even more reassured by the fact that it is the first large mass-production passenger aircraft (OK, first equal with A350) to have a fully-effective fuel tank inerting system built into it as part of the original design.
Capot is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 19:50
  #18 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,999
One of my key concerns is not the time in the air but the time on the ground. I can be sure that flight crew have a whole lot more info than they had six months ago - but the ground crew?

Are ground crew at small outstations (not normally expecting to ever see the 787) ready? OK, the a/c is not going to be towed long distances, or at all, on such SH ops. Also the fire crews, in Boston they had been given no information about the nature of the battery they were dealing with! These items are all in the cheese. There are other reasons why I prefer to sit this one out for a while.

I agree with Hartington about early big twins and ETOPS. In fact, I can guess that I will never feel comfortable about it - eventhough I will increasinly have little choice. But that is my generation.

I am well aware that all carriers can substitute the equipment at any time and if I refuse to board that will be my financial risk. In the early days, one might hope that Thomson and other carriers would prefer to let me quietly board another flight and not have a public row about it. They have, of course, to get back to where Boeing promised them they would be, before Boeing made such a Horlicks of the production process, leave alone the battery.

Another example. When the A340 started, I waited a bit and was not happy about the A346 until they had sorted the balancing act. The last time I was on one, it still had a small - but obvious - roll for the duration of the cruise.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 20:36
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,263
In the early days, one might hope that Thomson and other carriers would prefer to let me quietly board another flight and not have a public row about it.
They won't have a public row about it. You are free to elect not to travel. They have fulfilled their end of the contract, and you have chosen to abandon it. They will be happy to sell you another contract but it will be on exactly the same terms in this respect.

This airliner is certified for public transport operations. If that doesn't allay your fears or concerns, or you wont travel in months without an "R" in them, or your horoscope doesn't mesh with your interpretation, that is all Ok. The A320 you get on instead, might decompress at 35,000ft. The B757 may have a smoke event. The B737 might need to divert with a sick passenger. Who knows?
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2013, 20:48
  #20 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 63
Posts: 8,999
Eactly Bealzebub. Which is what I indicated in my OP (the was meant to indicate that I knew the answer!) and am under no illusions. I have no doubt of the outcome whatsoever, I just thought it an interesting topic.
PAXboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.