787 Dreamliner production concerns
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cape Town, ZA
Age: 62
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Gordon, but your post is almost a non-sequitur (and I notice your post altered what I quoted in my post). Which aircraft is 'better' is a matter of opinion and debate based on a number of factors - seat mile costs, dispatch reliability and overall reliability, overall cost of ownership. In an era where the vast majority of ticket purchases are based on little more than price, the operators probably don't care that much that the A350 might be more comfortable for the passenger (I have little doubt the 787 passenger experience would be much better if most operators had kept it at the 8 across seating it was really designed for, but then you have to go back to that part about purchase decisions being based on price). BTW, do you have a source for your claim that the 787 sells for 10-20% less than the comparable A350?
What I specifically was responding to was this:
which is demonstrably false. In fact, net announced orders for the A350 so far in 2019 are negative (-4 to be specific) while Boeing shows 38 net orders for the 787 so far in 2019. Despite the continued trashing of the 787 by some posters on this form, it's clear that the operators are in fact rather happy with the aircraft and ordering more - to the extent it's outsold the A350 by a factor of 3 to 1 over the last 30 months.
What I specifically was responding to was this:
It appears A350 sales are starting to accelerate
I quoted exactly what the original comment read, since the forum does not copy multiple quoted text:
If you chose to selectively quote only part of that original comment, to advance a narrow argument, and ignored the rest of the context, then you are playing with semantics, and missing the point entirely in your response to me, and to the original poster. I stand behind my comment. Its fine for you to disagree...
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've noticed exactly the same thing, for a modern aircraft, they are certainly very noisy in the cabin....
tdracer. Airbus has in excess of 927 orders for the A350 with 38 gained during March 19. Keeping in mind the B787 is being produced on 2 production lines and sold cheaper than the A350 I have no doubt the B787 will win the sales race.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(Answer: actually you don't fail to do these things, because there wasn't any spec and there wasn't any plan.)
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Ontario
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well the 787 RR engine issues are still a major problem for the operators. Boeing and in fact the US in general have turned into a total cesspit of aviation and country respectively.
I would rather step foot on an aircraft made by a certain Russian manufacturer than onto a Boeing ever again. Fortunately I fly Airbus.
I would rather step foot on an aircraft made by a certain Russian manufacturer than onto a Boeing ever again. Fortunately I fly Airbus.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,900
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Answer: actually you don't fail to do these things, because there wasn't any spec and there wasn't any plan
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- VNAV mode (especially on descent) The system just doesn't know how slippery the aircraft is and provides some woeful descent profile calculations. To think this got past testing defies belief.
I see Japan Airlines has just taken delivery of their first A350 which also happens to be their first ever Airbus. If it were not for the problems Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airlines experienced with the early B787 deliveries I have no doubt Japan Airlines would have remained a loyal Boeing customer.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just some random observations by someone who has flown the 787 as a pax and for a short while as a pilot.
- Toilet seat lids falling down mid-peeing session. This is a consistent problem across airlines and independent of turbulence.
- Humidity improvement? Really? Flown as a pax in equal measure on A330s, A340s, 777s. I didnt notice any difference.
- IFE screens that don't tilt. Virgin and Norwegian have the same problem. Are there any that do tilt? Pax in front tilts seat. Tough luck with the viewing angle
- Noise. They are noisier than a 4 engined 20 year old A340 as a pax (seated right over the wing) which is a shame because on the outside they whisper comparitively speaking. Conclusion therefore is that cabin noise damping is lower standard
- Cup holders on the flight deck. Rediculously short in height, in moderate chops of 5 minutes half the tea/coffee has fallen out.
- Turbulence in general. The flaperons move for sure but whether or not this helps turbulence is a highly suspect claim IMO
- Yoke clip springs. Impossible to put a note of paper using the clips provided. So weak and ineffectual. Who provided such rubbish to them?
- Scratches on the internal and external surfaces of the windshield! When a surface scratches this easily you know it's a pretty cheap material. Unbelievable this. We have 6 month old aircraft with so many scratches caused by the wipers (on the outside) and a combination of things (including the mind boggingly stupid idea of using a hard metal wire frame based sun shade) on the inside. I have flown 25 year old A320 on their original scratch free windshields.
- VNAV mode (especially on descent) The system just doesn't know how slippery the aircraft is and provides some woeful descent profile calculations. To think this got past testing defies belief.
I would also add to your list the cursor-driven FMC. Slower and more fiddly than what it replaces yet considered progress. And plasticky, cheap-feeling finish to...everything. Cockpit sunshades same as they give away as promotions at Tesco, says it all.
Incredible really that this is what a couple hundred million buys and is sold as state of the art. Feels more like cheap, gimmicky shit. Complete with water-cooled electronics, like some kid's overclocked gaming computer.
But hey, you can auto-program SLOP in now. So there's that. And the HUD is...cool I guess?
The ultimate example of when a magnificent brand is destroyed by corporatism. Never thought I'd live long enough to see a Boeing product referred to by colleagues as a flying trash can.
Last edited by nolimitholdem; 16th Jun 2019 at 15:29.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 68
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see Japan Airlines has just taken delivery of their first A350 which also happens to be their first ever Airbus. If it were not for the problems Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airlines experienced with the early B787 deliveries I have no doubt Japan Airlines would have remained a loyal Boeing customer.
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Uk
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with most of the sentiments though. The cabins are dreadfully built. Windscreens are made of cheese and those sun visors need burning. I have to disagree on the noise though having done recent flights on 744 346 773 the 787 is leagues quieter. Although not at quiet as the 388.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely agree with every point. Especially the VNAV. What an absolute joke. I'm completely certain they slapped the B777 software in and called it done. Very dicey when starting descent from above FL40, will quite happily take you into excessive rates right into Mmo. You can compensate with lower speeds or earlier descent. So why exactly is it even there? Then the speedbrake message comes out, because apparently after multiple years in service it's just too hard to tweak the software to operate correctly to account for the need for drag. It's to the point where I just fly it in manual modes with the calculated path as a rough guide. No problem, but again, how is this proffered by Boeing engineers in 2019 with a straight face? But then when you ask most line engineers what some fault means, they just shrug. They have no idea either. Do a reset, sign the tech log, kick it out the door. "Solved".
I would also add to your list the cursor-driven FMC. Slower and more fiddly than what it replaces yet considered progress. And plasticky, cheap-feeling finish to...everything. Cockpit sunshades same as they give away as promotions at Tesco, says it all.
Incredible really that this is what a couple hundred million buys and is sold as state of the art. Feels more like cheap, gimmicky shit. Complete with water-cooled electronics, like some kid's overclocked gaming computer.
But hey, you can auto-program SLOP in now. So there's that. And the HUD is...cool I guess?
The ultimate example of when a magnificent brand is destroyed by corporatism. Never thought I'd live long enough to see a Boeing product referred to by colleagues as a flying trash can.
I would also add to your list the cursor-driven FMC. Slower and more fiddly than what it replaces yet considered progress. And plasticky, cheap-feeling finish to...everything. Cockpit sunshades same as they give away as promotions at Tesco, says it all.
Incredible really that this is what a couple hundred million buys and is sold as state of the art. Feels more like cheap, gimmicky shit. Complete with water-cooled electronics, like some kid's overclocked gaming computer.
But hey, you can auto-program SLOP in now. So there's that. And the HUD is...cool I guess?
The ultimate example of when a magnificent brand is destroyed by corporatism. Never thought I'd live long enough to see a Boeing product referred to by colleagues as a flying trash can.
What a tale of woe. The VNAV won’t like descent at .85 because it considers its to close to the barbers pole, it always seems to do .838 in the descent so straight away you get “ drag required”. Just start descent 10 miles earlier or up 838 in the cruise just before descent. Hardly taxing is is it ?
incidentally it’s “ chop “ not “ chops” . OP must be from Denmark / Holland as they always refer to turbulence as a measure of a pork dinner.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a tale of woe. The VNAV won’t like descent at .85 because it considers its to close to the barbers pole, it always seems to do .838 in the descent so straight away you get “ drag required”. Just start descent 10 miles earlier or up 838 in the cruise just before descent. Hardly taxing is is it ?
incidentally it’s “ chop “ not “ chops” . OP must be from Denmark / Holland as they always refer to turbulence as a measure of a pork dinner.
Line techs were (still are, I left) Boeing GoldCare. Freely admitted that many of the obscure fault messages were a mystery to them. To be fair, some of those have since been solved with software updates.
Like the Max, Boeing sells this thing as catering to the lowest common denominator pilot but some of the most basic functions of VNAV are crude at best, just plain wrong at worst. Not an issue for those who understand energy management but in the hands of the many magenta line children out there it's a recipe for tears eventually.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Normalisation of Deviance.
Dianne Vaughan explains how systemic failure saw NASA launch an orbiter it knew was not safe on that day. The result the Challenger loss.
These changes occur an increment at a time.
Nobody thinks their particular corner cut makes the difference.
It begins with endless focus on reduction of cost. Drilled into them at the business school, out they flow with economic orthodoxy. They continue the relentless cost reduction, bonus culture and eventually that permeates everywhere.
Customers of the aircraft, consumers of airline product, managers, pilots and even engineers all hearing the same beat of the drum.
Bit by bit margins are reduced.
Boeing has far bigger systemic problems than the share price.
Dianne Vaughan explains how systemic failure saw NASA launch an orbiter it knew was not safe on that day. The result the Challenger loss.
These changes occur an increment at a time.
Nobody thinks their particular corner cut makes the difference.
It begins with endless focus on reduction of cost. Drilled into them at the business school, out they flow with economic orthodoxy. They continue the relentless cost reduction, bonus culture and eventually that permeates everywhere.
Customers of the aircraft, consumers of airline product, managers, pilots and even engineers all hearing the same beat of the drum.
Bit by bit margins are reduced.
Boeing has far bigger systemic problems than the share price.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Castletown
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VNAV PTH descent:Probably "cut and pasted" from 777 FMC software algorisms, so that explains the lack of understanding (software program) of the "wing design" on the 787 and the differences VNAV has on wing efficiency, betwixt 777 and 787 (both wing designs are super brilliant).The same applies to the 747-8 (over speeds on VNAV PTH descent) leading to VNAV SPD and the impending VMO/MMO!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.theguardian.com/business...7-safety-fears
...so, in an aircraft with a history of fires, having a faulty fire suppression system isn't a grounding issue?
Boeing "put passenger safety first" - doesn't sound like it so far this year.
...so, in an aircraft with a history of fires, having a faulty fire suppression system isn't a grounding issue?
Boeing "put passenger safety first" - doesn't sound like it so far this year.
It's by far the worst commercial aircraft currently flying for radio faults that I've noticed at least. Screeching/howling blocking the pilots transmissions or at least making it very difficult to read them, radios getting jammed on one frequency, radios giving up entirely so alternate needs to be used.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
