FAA Grounds 787s
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Paso Robles
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps but nobody knows.
Whether it is a battery or something else aviation has a very long history of problems creeping up after the aircraft was already certified. It is simply unavoidable. A part can be subjected to 50,000 hours of stress test and will pass certification only to fail at 50,001 hr.
Whether it is a battery or something else aviation has a very long history of problems creeping up after the aircraft was already certified. It is simply unavoidable. A part can be subjected to 50,000 hours of stress test and will pass certification only to fail at 50,001 hr.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing began building Dreamliners before getting U.S. certification in 2011, amassing a record inventory that included dozens of older versions requiring repairs to meet federal standards.
Boeing is struggling to find buyers for 11 of its earliest 787 Dreamliners, collectively valued at $1.1 billion, after two airlines dropped orders for the holdover models from the jet’s troubled birth, people briefed on the plans said.
The partially completed planes, which are heavier than new 787s and can’t fly as far, have been parked for about four years at Paine Field in Everett. Black plastic shrouds the windows, and 17,000-pound counterweights dangle from wings in place of engines to keep the jets balanced.
Boeing has approached PT Garuda Indonesia (GIAA) and Malaysia Airline System Bhd. (MAS) as well as Latin American and Middle Eastern carriers about the early 787s, said one of the people.
Garuda is considering buying twin-aisle planes and is looking at ordering 10 Airbus A330s, the Dreamliners and larger Airbus A350s, a person familiar with the discussions had said earlier this month.
Airline Responses
Russia’s Transaero Airlines opted out of an order for four of the jets in December, three people said, while Indonesia’s PT Lion Mentari Airlines said in January it was switching to Boeing 737s instead of taking five Dreamliners. The sales push also includes two 787s for which RwandAir signed a letter of intent in 2012 and for which no firm agreement has been reached, one person said.
Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg
A Dreamliner logo sits in the cockpit of a Boeing Co. 787 Dreamliner aircraft in Paris.
Transaero, Garuda and Malaysia Air didn’t respond to requests for comment. RwandAir Chief Executive Officer John Mirenge said the carrier’s purchase plans aren’t final and that it wouldn’t take any 787s until 2017. The Kigali, Rwanda-based airline has seven planes.
The 787s are the last of those that Boeing mothballed to fix supplier work done out of sequence and to resolve issues that surfaced during flight tests. The faults included an electric-panel fire and structural weakness where the plane’s wings melded with its body, the repairs that spurred the structural modifications on the so-called teens.
Bargain Hunters
ANA Holdings Inc. (9202), the first commercial 787 operator, and other customers opted to ditch the teens for planes manufactured with the enhancements.
Barring a global aerospace slump, Boeing should be able to place the reworked 787s with bargain-hunting airlines seeking twin-aisle jets to fly shorter, densely traveled routes, said Douglas Kelly, senior vice president for asset valuation at Chantilly, Virginia-based aviation consultant Avitas.
“Asia seems like exactly the right place,” said George Ferguson, senior analyst with Bloomberg Industries in Skillman, New Jersey, especially if Boeing targeted sales to potential customers of the re-engined A330 contemplated by Airbus Group NV. “You can see it as a competitor to the A330.”
Buyers would probably pay less than half the current $211.8 million list price of the 787-8 version, Kelly said. The 787 teens have a market value of $115 million each for a single-unit or small lot sale, according to Avitas estimates. Airlines will probably demand 10 percent to 15 percent discounts, bringing the price closer to $100 million, Kelly said.
‘Good Value’
The upgraded Dreamliners will boast the same warranties as new planes, 10 percent fuel savings over Airbus’s A330-200 and creature comforts such as greater cabin humidity and dimmable electronic window shades, Kelly said. Their range will be about 1,000 nautical miles (1,852 kilometers) shorter than later 787s.
For carriers that don’t need to fly 7,850 nautical miles nonstop, as Boeing promises the 787 can do, the teens “still represent a good value,” Kelly said in a phone interview. “It’s just a matter of what price are you going to be prepared to pay for that versus a standard-build 787.”
In addition to the 11 teens, three other Dreamliners used for test flights also await upgrades, according to Flightglobal’s Ascend Online database. Boeing has firm orders for two of the test aircraft and is seeking a buyer for the third, according to a Feb. 14 company filing.
Boeing fell 2.2 percent, the most among 30 companies on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, to $126.78 at the close in New York. The stock has declined 7.1 percent this year, while the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index is down 0.2 percent.
Margin Pressure?
Boeing’s inventory ballooned to $42.9 billion in 2013 from $8.1 billion in 2006 as Boeing parked some jets, provided cash advances to suppliers and invested in tooling for the Dreamliner and a revamped 747-8 jumbo that was also delayed, according to company filings and data compiled by Bloomberg.
Once customers are found and deliveries begin, the high-cost teens may squeeze margins for Boeing’s airplane business and cause unit costs to briefly surge, said Jeff Morris, head of U.S. equities at Boston-based Standard Life Investments.
Investors have moved on to other concerns, like Boeing’s production cadence as it raises 787 output, Morris said. “The market tends to be forward-looking and this is a legacy issue,” he said.
Boeing faces writedowns if it can’t find customers for the unsold 787s, Teal Group’s Aboulafia said. Boeing recorded a $2.7 billion research and development expense after concluding it couldn’t sell the first three 787 flight-test Dreamliners in 2009 because they required “an inordinate amount of rework.”
“It’s good to remove any residual overhang, any doubt that there’s more like that,” Aboulafia said.
Boeing Said to Seek Buyers for $1.1 Billion of Early 787s - Bloomberg
Boeing is struggling to find buyers for 11 of its earliest 787 Dreamliners, collectively valued at $1.1 billion, after two airlines dropped orders for the holdover models from the jet’s troubled birth, people briefed on the plans said.
The partially completed planes, which are heavier than new 787s and can’t fly as far, have been parked for about four years at Paine Field in Everett. Black plastic shrouds the windows, and 17,000-pound counterweights dangle from wings in place of engines to keep the jets balanced.
Boeing has approached PT Garuda Indonesia (GIAA) and Malaysia Airline System Bhd. (MAS) as well as Latin American and Middle Eastern carriers about the early 787s, said one of the people.
Garuda is considering buying twin-aisle planes and is looking at ordering 10 Airbus A330s, the Dreamliners and larger Airbus A350s, a person familiar with the discussions had said earlier this month.
Airline Responses
Russia’s Transaero Airlines opted out of an order for four of the jets in December, three people said, while Indonesia’s PT Lion Mentari Airlines said in January it was switching to Boeing 737s instead of taking five Dreamliners. The sales push also includes two 787s for which RwandAir signed a letter of intent in 2012 and for which no firm agreement has been reached, one person said.
Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg
A Dreamliner logo sits in the cockpit of a Boeing Co. 787 Dreamliner aircraft in Paris.
Transaero, Garuda and Malaysia Air didn’t respond to requests for comment. RwandAir Chief Executive Officer John Mirenge said the carrier’s purchase plans aren’t final and that it wouldn’t take any 787s until 2017. The Kigali, Rwanda-based airline has seven planes.
The 787s are the last of those that Boeing mothballed to fix supplier work done out of sequence and to resolve issues that surfaced during flight tests. The faults included an electric-panel fire and structural weakness where the plane’s wings melded with its body, the repairs that spurred the structural modifications on the so-called teens.
Bargain Hunters
ANA Holdings Inc. (9202), the first commercial 787 operator, and other customers opted to ditch the teens for planes manufactured with the enhancements.
Barring a global aerospace slump, Boeing should be able to place the reworked 787s with bargain-hunting airlines seeking twin-aisle jets to fly shorter, densely traveled routes, said Douglas Kelly, senior vice president for asset valuation at Chantilly, Virginia-based aviation consultant Avitas.
“Asia seems like exactly the right place,” said George Ferguson, senior analyst with Bloomberg Industries in Skillman, New Jersey, especially if Boeing targeted sales to potential customers of the re-engined A330 contemplated by Airbus Group NV. “You can see it as a competitor to the A330.”
Buyers would probably pay less than half the current $211.8 million list price of the 787-8 version, Kelly said. The 787 teens have a market value of $115 million each for a single-unit or small lot sale, according to Avitas estimates. Airlines will probably demand 10 percent to 15 percent discounts, bringing the price closer to $100 million, Kelly said.
‘Good Value’
The upgraded Dreamliners will boast the same warranties as new planes, 10 percent fuel savings over Airbus’s A330-200 and creature comforts such as greater cabin humidity and dimmable electronic window shades, Kelly said. Their range will be about 1,000 nautical miles (1,852 kilometers) shorter than later 787s.
For carriers that don’t need to fly 7,850 nautical miles nonstop, as Boeing promises the 787 can do, the teens “still represent a good value,” Kelly said in a phone interview. “It’s just a matter of what price are you going to be prepared to pay for that versus a standard-build 787.”
In addition to the 11 teens, three other Dreamliners used for test flights also await upgrades, according to Flightglobal’s Ascend Online database. Boeing has firm orders for two of the test aircraft and is seeking a buyer for the third, according to a Feb. 14 company filing.
Boeing fell 2.2 percent, the most among 30 companies on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, to $126.78 at the close in New York. The stock has declined 7.1 percent this year, while the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index is down 0.2 percent.
Margin Pressure?
Boeing’s inventory ballooned to $42.9 billion in 2013 from $8.1 billion in 2006 as Boeing parked some jets, provided cash advances to suppliers and invested in tooling for the Dreamliner and a revamped 747-8 jumbo that was also delayed, according to company filings and data compiled by Bloomberg.
Once customers are found and deliveries begin, the high-cost teens may squeeze margins for Boeing’s airplane business and cause unit costs to briefly surge, said Jeff Morris, head of U.S. equities at Boston-based Standard Life Investments.
Investors have moved on to other concerns, like Boeing’s production cadence as it raises 787 output, Morris said. “The market tends to be forward-looking and this is a legacy issue,” he said.
Boeing faces writedowns if it can’t find customers for the unsold 787s, Teal Group’s Aboulafia said. Boeing recorded a $2.7 billion research and development expense after concluding it couldn’t sell the first three 787 flight-test Dreamliners in 2009 because they required “an inordinate amount of rework.”
“It’s good to remove any residual overhang, any doubt that there’s more like that,” Aboulafia said.
Boeing Said to Seek Buyers for $1.1 Billion of Early 787s - Bloomberg
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing reports wing cracks on 787 Dreamliners in production
(Reuters) - Boeing Co said on Friday that "hairline cracks" had been discovered in the wings of about 40 787 Dreamliners that are in production, marking another setback for the company's newest jet.
The cracks have not been found on planes that are in use by airlines and therefore posed no safety risk, Boeing said, adding the problem also will not alter Boeing's plans to deliver 110 787s this year.
However, Boeing said the cracks, which also occurred on the larger 787-9 model currently undergoing flight tests, could delay by a few weeks the date when airlines can take delivery of their new planes.
The disclosure raised questions about repair costs and a possible minor increase in the weight of the plane, but did not seem to spell major trouble for Boeing, industry experts said.
Wing-maker Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd notified Boeing in February of the problem, which arose after the Japanese company altered its manufacturing process.
Boeing, based in Chicago, said it immediately notified customers of potential delays. It said none of the jets potentially affected by the problem have been delivered.
"We are confident that the condition does not exist in the in-service fleet," Boeing spokesman Doug Alder said.
U.S. regulators did not immediately respond to requests for comment on whether they planned to take action over Boeing's wing crack issue.
Boeing shares fell 54 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $128.00 in after-hours trading.
TEETHING ISSUES
The cracks are the latest trouble for the Dreamliner, a high-tech jet largely made of carbon-fiber composite that has been beset with so-called "teething issues" since entering service in 2011, three years behind schedule.
Last year, lithium-ion batteries overheated on two Dreamliners, prompting regulators to ground the worldwide fleet for more than three months while Boeing redesigned the battery system. Another battery overheated this year.
Airbus also has struggled with wing cracks on its A380 jet.
"If they can keep the delivery schedule going, it shouldn't be a major problem for customers," said Richard Aboulafia, aerospace analyst at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia.
"But there is an expense."
He added that the manufacturing change was probably aimed at reducing the weight of the plane, as was the case with the A380.
"If they have to revisit that, it could add weight to the design, though only a modest amount," he said.
Boeing said the 787 cracks occurred in shear ties on wing ribs, and will take one to two weeks to inspect and fix.
Wing ribs run parallel to the fuselage of the plane. The ties, made of aluminum, hold the rib to the skin of the wing and will be replaced with an aluminum part.
"If we find an affected area, we'll correct the issue by trimming out the area and applying a fabricated piece in its place," Alder said.
Boeing declined to discuss the manufacturing change that led to the problem. Mitsubishi wasn't immediately available to comment.
Boeing expects to deliver 110 787s this year, and to earn revenue of between $87.5 billion and $90.5 billion. So far it has delivered nine, including one delivered on Friday.
"Deliveries continue as normal outside this potentially impacted 40," Alder said.
AIRBUS CRACKS
Boeing's disclosure comes as Airbus emerges from a painful two-year program of modifications and hundreds of millions of euros of financial charges triggered by the discovery of cracks on brackets attached to wing ribs on the A380.
Reuters reported on Thursday that Airbus had once again ordered more frequent inspections of the wings of the world's largest passenger jet after discovering unexpected levels of metal fatigue, this time during testing on a factory mock-up.
The planemaker has asked airlines to inspect the wing's "spars" or main internal beams during regular major overhauls carried out after six years in service, and then again at 12 years, instead of waiting for the 12-year overhaul, industry sources said.
An Airbus spokeswoman confirmed the discovery of unspecified "fatigue findings" on a factory test plane.
"This will be addressed during routine maintenance inspections and the aircraft remains safe to fly," she said.
Most aircraft undergo a regular pattern of checks from small daily ones to heavy maintenance checks every five or six years.
Aircraft industry experts have known for decades that metal fatigue cannot be eliminated, but they have worked out a system for monitoring it backed up by mandatory maintenance schedules.
The cracks have not been found on planes that are in use by airlines and therefore posed no safety risk, Boeing said, adding the problem also will not alter Boeing's plans to deliver 110 787s this year.
However, Boeing said the cracks, which also occurred on the larger 787-9 model currently undergoing flight tests, could delay by a few weeks the date when airlines can take delivery of their new planes.
The disclosure raised questions about repair costs and a possible minor increase in the weight of the plane, but did not seem to spell major trouble for Boeing, industry experts said.
Wing-maker Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd notified Boeing in February of the problem, which arose after the Japanese company altered its manufacturing process.
Boeing, based in Chicago, said it immediately notified customers of potential delays. It said none of the jets potentially affected by the problem have been delivered.
"We are confident that the condition does not exist in the in-service fleet," Boeing spokesman Doug Alder said.
U.S. regulators did not immediately respond to requests for comment on whether they planned to take action over Boeing's wing crack issue.
Boeing shares fell 54 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $128.00 in after-hours trading.
TEETHING ISSUES
The cracks are the latest trouble for the Dreamliner, a high-tech jet largely made of carbon-fiber composite that has been beset with so-called "teething issues" since entering service in 2011, three years behind schedule.
Last year, lithium-ion batteries overheated on two Dreamliners, prompting regulators to ground the worldwide fleet for more than three months while Boeing redesigned the battery system. Another battery overheated this year.
Airbus also has struggled with wing cracks on its A380 jet.
"If they can keep the delivery schedule going, it shouldn't be a major problem for customers," said Richard Aboulafia, aerospace analyst at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia.
"But there is an expense."
He added that the manufacturing change was probably aimed at reducing the weight of the plane, as was the case with the A380.
"If they have to revisit that, it could add weight to the design, though only a modest amount," he said.
Boeing said the 787 cracks occurred in shear ties on wing ribs, and will take one to two weeks to inspect and fix.
Wing ribs run parallel to the fuselage of the plane. The ties, made of aluminum, hold the rib to the skin of the wing and will be replaced with an aluminum part.
"If we find an affected area, we'll correct the issue by trimming out the area and applying a fabricated piece in its place," Alder said.
Boeing declined to discuss the manufacturing change that led to the problem. Mitsubishi wasn't immediately available to comment.
Boeing expects to deliver 110 787s this year, and to earn revenue of between $87.5 billion and $90.5 billion. So far it has delivered nine, including one delivered on Friday.
"Deliveries continue as normal outside this potentially impacted 40," Alder said.
AIRBUS CRACKS
Boeing's disclosure comes as Airbus emerges from a painful two-year program of modifications and hundreds of millions of euros of financial charges triggered by the discovery of cracks on brackets attached to wing ribs on the A380.
Reuters reported on Thursday that Airbus had once again ordered more frequent inspections of the wings of the world's largest passenger jet after discovering unexpected levels of metal fatigue, this time during testing on a factory mock-up.
The planemaker has asked airlines to inspect the wing's "spars" or main internal beams during regular major overhauls carried out after six years in service, and then again at 12 years, instead of waiting for the 12-year overhaul, industry sources said.
An Airbus spokeswoman confirmed the discovery of unspecified "fatigue findings" on a factory test plane.
"This will be addressed during routine maintenance inspections and the aircraft remains safe to fly," she said.
Most aircraft undergo a regular pattern of checks from small daily ones to heavy maintenance checks every five or six years.
Aircraft industry experts have known for decades that metal fatigue cannot be eliminated, but they have worked out a system for monitoring it backed up by mandatory maintenance schedules.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: El Dorado
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently a Japan Airlines 787 enroute from Tokyo to San Fransisco diverted to Honolulu:
Japan Airlines 787 makes emergency landing in Honolulu - CBS News
Japan Airlines 787 makes emergency landing in Honolulu - CBS News
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then and Now
When I was at school we used slide rules to calculate and technical drawing skills to turn ideas into diagrams. Strangely my generation of old gifts managed to build aircraft that did not have cracks in the wing five minutes after they left the factory.
Slide rules and a clockwork IRS got men to the moon. Pilots were trained to fly on limited panel and we could all safely land an airliner off a visual approach.
Unfortunately the current generation of computer geeks who design and build aircraft seems in love with CAD and efficient aircraft but the latter are poorly made and often include design flaws.
Older pilots often in positions to influence have allowed cost to drive pilot training to the point where we do not adequately prepare crews to cope with the often subtle and complex problems seen on the flight deck.
As of today the A380 has suffered from wing cracking and is now joined by the plastic fantastic B787.
Slide rules and a clockwork IRS got men to the moon. Pilots were trained to fly on limited panel and we could all safely land an airliner off a visual approach.
Unfortunately the current generation of computer geeks who design and build aircraft seems in love with CAD and efficient aircraft but the latter are poorly made and often include design flaws.
Older pilots often in positions to influence have allowed cost to drive pilot training to the point where we do not adequately prepare crews to cope with the often subtle and complex problems seen on the flight deck.
As of today the A380 has suffered from wing cracking and is now joined by the plastic fantastic B787.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably the issue goes much deeper than what Bigpants mentions.
Before I went to school and university to use basic calculators and do drawing, I did already had experience in maintenance and repair of my bike, of some of my toys, later of my motorbike and gliders. I was building model aircraft 10 years before I did my first real aircraft calculation.
It is not only the people working on computers today, it is children growing up without any hands on experience on any basic mechanical equipment.
Issues like the cracking ribs on 787 and A380 are not strictly a computer issue, it is the lack of production experience of those who design parts and define processes. It is about understanding that there is and always will be a difference between theory and reality, called production tolerances. They are unavoidable and need to be dealt with in the whole design process. When drawing a part on the computer it is always 100.0000% correct, you can zoom down to micrometers. When producing a real part it will never be as it is on the drawings, there will always be tolerances. You need to learn and fully understand that. And you need to be involved in the full process, not just dealing with a single part within an assembly not knowing about the mating or surrounding items and the whole manufacturing process.
The same is for pilots, we learned from the beginning to deal with issues. We learned to use or operate items that were not fully functional. Today modern toys (from computers up to cars) quit completely when something is broken, so people do not learn anymore to do a temporary fix and get home on a wing and a prayer. If something is broken, stop using it and give it to somebody to fix it. Unfortunately in mid air you sometimes do not have this option...
Before I went to school and university to use basic calculators and do drawing, I did already had experience in maintenance and repair of my bike, of some of my toys, later of my motorbike and gliders. I was building model aircraft 10 years before I did my first real aircraft calculation.
It is not only the people working on computers today, it is children growing up without any hands on experience on any basic mechanical equipment.
Issues like the cracking ribs on 787 and A380 are not strictly a computer issue, it is the lack of production experience of those who design parts and define processes. It is about understanding that there is and always will be a difference between theory and reality, called production tolerances. They are unavoidable and need to be dealt with in the whole design process. When drawing a part on the computer it is always 100.0000% correct, you can zoom down to micrometers. When producing a real part it will never be as it is on the drawings, there will always be tolerances. You need to learn and fully understand that. And you need to be involved in the full process, not just dealing with a single part within an assembly not knowing about the mating or surrounding items and the whole manufacturing process.
The same is for pilots, we learned from the beginning to deal with issues. We learned to use or operate items that were not fully functional. Today modern toys (from computers up to cars) quit completely when something is broken, so people do not learn anymore to do a temporary fix and get home on a wing and a prayer. If something is broken, stop using it and give it to somebody to fix it. Unfortunately in mid air you sometimes do not have this option...
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Volume,
There isn't enough money to buy the fuel to move an aircraft with the weight per seat and specific fuel consumption of the 707, and it couldn't make a third of the range of a 787.
The lifetime of the new devices is also much better. Fasteners aren't just wrenched and hammered in, their performance is dramatically better.
Brunel's drawing office would make a very very uncompetitive airliner in 2013.
Back in the 1960/70s also consider aircraft losses. That engineering/flying system delivered aircraft into service aboard which passengers and crew were lost about one hundred times more often that in today's in terms of crashes per passenger-km.
There is an issue with the loss of manual skill and intuition in engineers, but the best ones are just as good as the old hands, and overall products produced are dramatically better.
Compare a regular Ford now vs a Rolls-Royce Silver Wotsit in 1970? Which performs better? Is more comfortable? Needs servicing more often?
There isn't enough money to buy the fuel to move an aircraft with the weight per seat and specific fuel consumption of the 707, and it couldn't make a third of the range of a 787.
The lifetime of the new devices is also much better. Fasteners aren't just wrenched and hammered in, their performance is dramatically better.
Brunel's drawing office would make a very very uncompetitive airliner in 2013.
Back in the 1960/70s also consider aircraft losses. That engineering/flying system delivered aircraft into service aboard which passengers and crew were lost about one hundred times more often that in today's in terms of crashes per passenger-km.
There is an issue with the loss of manual skill and intuition in engineers, but the best ones are just as good as the old hands, and overall products produced are dramatically better.
Compare a regular Ford now vs a Rolls-Royce Silver Wotsit in 1970? Which performs better? Is more comfortable? Needs servicing more often?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is hard to deny that many, many products today are of a quality incredibly better than what we had in the past. That however does not allow you to forget about some of the basic principles of design and manufacturing. Manufacturing tolerances of a CNC milled rib for sure are much, much better than that of a sheet metal and standard profile riveted rib 50 years ago. Hovever, if you assume those tolerances are zero today (just because it is all manufactured on CNC machines or by robots), reality will bite you from time to time. And composites is not known for especially tight tolerances...
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not think there is a real quality difference between old mechanical types like me and modern more technologically aware younger people, and I agree that modern planes are generally far better built, more reliable and safer.
There is however a difference in attitude between generations and this showed up in the excellent "21st Century Jet" TV film about designing and making the 777. Air frame and engines were intended not to require testing, but one older engineer spoke up and said that the engine should be test flown on a 767. He was clearly seen as being silly and old-fashioned in his opinion, but eventually he had his way. On first test there was a compressor stall due, basically, to gravity, which had not been considered in the design software. A classic example of E-World and Real World not fully coinciding.
There is however a difference in attitude between generations and this showed up in the excellent "21st Century Jet" TV film about designing and making the 777. Air frame and engines were intended not to require testing, but one older engineer spoke up and said that the engine should be test flown on a 767. He was clearly seen as being silly and old-fashioned in his opinion, but eventually he had his way. On first test there was a compressor stall due, basically, to gravity, which had not been considered in the design software. A classic example of E-World and Real World not fully coinciding.
Air frame and engines were intended not to require testing, but one older engineer spoke up and said that the engine should be test flown on a 767. He was clearly seen as being silly and old-fashioned in his opinion, but eventually he had his way. On first test there was a compressor stall due, basically, to gravity, which had not been considered in the design software. A classic example of E-World and Real World not fully coinciding.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On rotation, the face of the unprecedentedly-large fan and nacelle intake was tilted to the airflow, which caused unexpected changes to the engine.
It was the airflow direction changing, not the gravity direction changing, that made the engine stall/surge.
It was the airflow direction changing, not the gravity direction changing, that made the engine stall/surge.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can not remember Bigpants to have claimed that aircraft have become less safe... (neither did I)
The accident rate of course is not only related to aircraft design and production quality, there are so many more factors to be considered.
The point is not about safety, it is about all these little glitches and flaws that require constant attention. You should show the rate of structrures related airworthiness directives, mandatory one time inspections and retrofits for comparison. Our whole aviation system has become much more failure tolerant, this does not mean that any single aspect has improved, we can only accept more issues today without having a real problem.
The accident rate of course is not only related to aircraft design and production quality, there are so many more factors to be considered.
The point is not about safety, it is about all these little glitches and flaws that require constant attention. You should show the rate of structrures related airworthiness directives, mandatory one time inspections and retrofits for comparison. Our whole aviation system has become much more failure tolerant, this does not mean that any single aspect has improved, we can only accept more issues today without having a real problem.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember it as being that the blades struck the casing when the plane was banking, thanks for correcting me, but the point remains is that a problem DID become apparent in Real World testing that software had not allowed for. No disrespect intended to the plane, engine, or any designers and engineers, but I feel that over-reliance on technology with reference to solid materials and real world situation is something which people must be aware of.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big Pants's comments are ridiculous. Slide rules and "real world" engineering did get NASA to the moon (or not in the case of Apollo 13), but remember how many Redstone rockets blew up before Alan Sheppard's first flight, how many problems the Mercury missions had and the Apollo 1 disaster caused by the stupidity of having an un-necessary 100% oxygen environment? What about Columbia and Challenger, both designed pre-CAD? And outside of NASA and in commercial aviation, what about the DC10 with its blow-out cargo doors and vulnerable hydraulics, the Comet's square windows, the DC9's stabiliser screw jack and the 737 rudder PCU? What about the corrosion traps in older airframes that caused events like Air Aloha's cabriolet?
There is a world of difference in the capabilities of new aircraft achieved through new technologies, including the use of new materials CAD, which allow structures to be both lighter and stronger. To return to slide rules and all metal airframes is preposterous. What is more correct is Volume's assessment in the disconnect between the mentalities of theoretical and practical engineers. Too many engineering projects are micromanaged by MBA board men and accountants leaning on highly qualified but inexperienced or emasculated engineers designing things for an "ideal world". That's why a modern car's engine bay has to be half-stripped to replace a head light bulb and its body shell removed to replace a clutch, and is why modern aircraft with modern materials are suffering structural cracking and electrical overloads. Let the money men run the accounts books and the engineers the design process. Kneecap the cost-engineers and accountants, not the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers, and for god's sake stop giving new graduates positions without a lot of oversight - get them working the assembly line for a year at least to see how designs really equate to the real world.
There is a world of difference in the capabilities of new aircraft achieved through new technologies, including the use of new materials CAD, which allow structures to be both lighter and stronger. To return to slide rules and all metal airframes is preposterous. What is more correct is Volume's assessment in the disconnect between the mentalities of theoretical and practical engineers. Too many engineering projects are micromanaged by MBA board men and accountants leaning on highly qualified but inexperienced or emasculated engineers designing things for an "ideal world". That's why a modern car's engine bay has to be half-stripped to replace a head light bulb and its body shell removed to replace a clutch, and is why modern aircraft with modern materials are suffering structural cracking and electrical overloads. Let the money men run the accounts books and the engineers the design process. Kneecap the cost-engineers and accountants, not the structural, mechanical and electrical engineers, and for god's sake stop giving new graduates positions without a lot of oversight - get them working the assembly line for a year at least to see how designs really equate to the real world.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
remember how many Redstone rockets blew up before Alan Sheppard's first flight, how many problems the Mercury missions had and the Apollo 1 disaster caused by the stupidity of having an un-necessary 100% oxygen environment? What about Columbia and Challenger, both designed pre-CAD? And outside of NASA and in commercial aviation, what about the DC10 with its blow-out cargo doors and vulnerable hydraulics, the Comet's square windows, the DC9's stabiliser screw jack and the 737 rudder PCU? What about the corrosion traps in older airframes that caused events like Air Aloha's cabriolet?
787 Certification Review
FAA/Boeing has just published a joint report on 787 certification issues http://www.faa.gov/about/plans_repor...port_Final.pdf It's soothing in its conclusions but reveals seriously deficient processes. Examples that should cause concern include:
“3.2.3. INSPECTION DELEGATION
........ many of Boeing’s suppliers have unique inspection delegation processes, some of which do not meet minimum industry standards....”
“3.2.4. FAA REGULATORY OVERSIGHT
....... several FAA orders do not align with current practices. Specifically, the FAA orders do not—
• Encourage surveillance at critical subtier suppliers and require risk management models to allow assigning risk and surveillance requirements at integrator tier suppliers.
• Recognize the differing levels of complexity of aircraft manufacturing systems and technologies (small, relatively simple aircraft manufacturers versus large-scale, complex aircraft manufacturers with extended supply chains.)”
“A.2.1.SELECTION PROCESS SUMMARY
Even though Boeing requirements existed, verification/validation of the requirements did not always occur between Boeing and/or subtier suppliers.....
With multiple suppliers involved......the lack of a defined owner resulted in a requirement not being adequately communicated and/or verified....
There were cases where a tier 1 supplier did not correctly flow down specific Boeing requirements to a subtier supplier(s). In these cases, it was expected that industry standard design practices would be followed. Because there was no specific requirement, the supplier considered that aspect of the specification to be optional and made an inappropriate design decision....”
“A.4.3.CONCLUSION
Boeing addressed the shimming issues identified in fuselage sections 46, 47, and 48 through corrective actions implemented before delivery. However, five airplanes were delivered with potentially discrepant shims in section 48.....”
There’s much more and it all helps to explain how the 787 entered service with batteries that did not meet certification requirements.
The report has been released while the aviation industry is distracted by MH370 and I wonder if this is deliberate media management. Call me cynical but I was not born that way; it’s the result of a lifetime in aviation!
“3.2.3. INSPECTION DELEGATION
........ many of Boeing’s suppliers have unique inspection delegation processes, some of which do not meet minimum industry standards....”
“3.2.4. FAA REGULATORY OVERSIGHT
....... several FAA orders do not align with current practices. Specifically, the FAA orders do not—
• Encourage surveillance at critical subtier suppliers and require risk management models to allow assigning risk and surveillance requirements at integrator tier suppliers.
• Recognize the differing levels of complexity of aircraft manufacturing systems and technologies (small, relatively simple aircraft manufacturers versus large-scale, complex aircraft manufacturers with extended supply chains.)”
“A.2.1.SELECTION PROCESS SUMMARY
Even though Boeing requirements existed, verification/validation of the requirements did not always occur between Boeing and/or subtier suppliers.....
With multiple suppliers involved......the lack of a defined owner resulted in a requirement not being adequately communicated and/or verified....
There were cases where a tier 1 supplier did not correctly flow down specific Boeing requirements to a subtier supplier(s). In these cases, it was expected that industry standard design practices would be followed. Because there was no specific requirement, the supplier considered that aspect of the specification to be optional and made an inappropriate design decision....”
“A.4.3.CONCLUSION
Boeing addressed the shimming issues identified in fuselage sections 46, 47, and 48 through corrective actions implemented before delivery. However, five airplanes were delivered with potentially discrepant shims in section 48.....”
There’s much more and it all helps to explain how the 787 entered service with batteries that did not meet certification requirements.
The report has been released while the aviation industry is distracted by MH370 and I wonder if this is deliberate media management. Call me cynical but I was not born that way; it’s the result of a lifetime in aviation!
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds very likely, like when a certain UK Labour government Minister sent Tony Blair a message on 9/11 stating it would be a good day to air bad news. Boeing and the FAA alike have a vested interest in airing this report while everyone is looking the other way. It's not cynicism to believe that, merely a lack of naivety.
While the tone of the report is clearly trying to down play the content, it's pretty damning. It's an aircraft designed by an uncontrolled and uncoordinated committee rather than a disciplined team of engineers. Imagine if MH370 had been a 787 - it'd be the end of the aircraft and would cause untold damage to Boeing as a whole. The MBAs who insisted on this disastrous manner of managing a new aircraft project need to be expelled from the aviation industry permanently - their mindset is totally incompatible with responsibility, safety or long term economics.
While the tone of the report is clearly trying to down play the content, it's pretty damning. It's an aircraft designed by an uncontrolled and uncoordinated committee rather than a disciplined team of engineers. Imagine if MH370 had been a 787 - it'd be the end of the aircraft and would cause untold damage to Boeing as a whole. The MBAs who insisted on this disastrous manner of managing a new aircraft project need to be expelled from the aviation industry permanently - their mindset is totally incompatible with responsibility, safety or long term economics.