777X set for January 23rd first flight
You better get comfortable, although I can see a few glimpses of blue sky, the rain isn't supposed to lift for at least an hour.
I'm going to be at a sports field near the airport between about noon and 1pm (local time), maybe I'll get lucky
I'm going to be at a sports field near the airport between about noon and 1pm (local time), maybe I'll get lucky
Bored now.
Don't think they're going to do it without really good Metar - can't/ won't risk an RTO/ wing flapping scenario.
Stand down.
Having said that it does look like the weather is brightening up and the sun has come out...
Watching...and it DOES look like a really lovely aircraft...I'd like to fly that.
Don't think they're going to do it without really good Metar - can't/ won't risk an RTO/ wing flapping scenario.
Stand down.
Having said that it does look like the weather is brightening up and the sun has come out...
Watching...and it DOES look like a really lovely aircraft...I'd like to fly that.
I was there for the original 777 first flight in 1994. The tail wind was fluctuating around the 10 knot limit the whole time - there was some speculation at the time that Cashman was rather selective about which wind reading he was going to use to allow the takeoff.
Today was between 15-20 knots most of the time, so I suspect even Mr. Cashman would have been hard pressed to come up with with a reading that would have made it permissible...
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Argentina
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if I may quote Mr. Cashman:
This was during his retirement (according to the source seattlepi): After 40 years at Boeing, chief test pilot John Cashman is retiring
Is interesting about what I think we all agree here. Unlike other pieces of hardware and software nowadays, where the design phase 'catches all they can get' and after release the product, so the market starts using it and report back the 'glitches' or 'faults' so fixes are applied later on. There's a small-huge difference on an airplane:
The flight test engineers and test pilots are trained to try, find and correct those glitches and errors. But the common day-by-day pilot may not fall into that category, and when faced with the unknown may react differently.
At that point, the pilots cannot just 'shut down and restart' or stop in the middle of the air to report the glitch to the manufacturer.
As the machines we fly become more sophisticated, there is more things that lies deep buried on the software coding and hardware that is supposed to 'kick-in' at the right time, to save the day. In the past, that hardware was the pilot, and the software was their ability, experience, feeling, etc., right now, well, it seems that the direction is other. Machines that 'automatically' correct, the errors or situations. Until it gets to the point of being 'out-of-the-script', when something happens that is outside that predefined set of 'triggers' and we have to rely again on the pilots.
Is an interesting paradox to think about, when everything is pointing to the point of 'single pilot' crew (save money, maximize profit), completely automated flight (idem)... hell, when machines are operating, who will be responsible if something goes wrong?. Be aware Boeing / Airbus... you will... there will be no more 'pilot error' mentioned on the investigations... will you take the bet?
Despite years of training and planning and preparation for that first 787 flight, the pilots will no doubt encounter the unexpected
"That's what we do," he said. "We find things so our customers don't have to."
"That's what we do," he said. "We find things so our customers don't have to."
Is interesting about what I think we all agree here. Unlike other pieces of hardware and software nowadays, where the design phase 'catches all they can get' and after release the product, so the market starts using it and report back the 'glitches' or 'faults' so fixes are applied later on. There's a small-huge difference on an airplane:
The flight test engineers and test pilots are trained to try, find and correct those glitches and errors. But the common day-by-day pilot may not fall into that category, and when faced with the unknown may react differently.
At that point, the pilots cannot just 'shut down and restart' or stop in the middle of the air to report the glitch to the manufacturer.
As the machines we fly become more sophisticated, there is more things that lies deep buried on the software coding and hardware that is supposed to 'kick-in' at the right time, to save the day. In the past, that hardware was the pilot, and the software was their ability, experience, feeling, etc., right now, well, it seems that the direction is other. Machines that 'automatically' correct, the errors or situations. Until it gets to the point of being 'out-of-the-script', when something happens that is outside that predefined set of 'triggers' and we have to rely again on the pilots.
Is an interesting paradox to think about, when everything is pointing to the point of 'single pilot' crew (save money, maximize profit), completely automated flight (idem)... hell, when machines are operating, who will be responsible if something goes wrong?. Be aware Boeing / Airbus... you will... there will be no more 'pilot error' mentioned on the investigations... will you take the bet?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts