Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

777x woes

Old 4th Jul 2021, 01:13
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,375
The B777X will probably be the new Jumbo jet when it eventually gets into service, it will replace the B747/A380 with a twin engine modern aircraft having lower running costs. Pushing the entry into service date back a few years would give Boeing time to address all its issues and present a safe, thoroughly checked aircraft to its customers when the travel market recovers in 2024.

At that time it would be a decent option for airlines looking to replace their A340/A380s and B747s which were grounded during COVID and may not be worth bringing back given the expense of operating quad jets with a limited life remaining.
krismiler is offline  
Old 4th Jul 2021, 01:31
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West Coast Canada
Posts: 4,288
On any significant long haul run, for a given total seat count/day fewer big twin engine airplanes make more profits than more smaller twin engine aircraft. For that reason there will be a future significant market for 777X sized aircraft. The challenge for Boeing is not to Fu*k it up like they did the MAX. Early signs are not promising.....
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 4th Jul 2021, 15:15
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,300
Amazing to look at the original 777 programme and compare it to the absolute proverbial show that everything Boeing have done these last 10 years or more has been. I remember when they broke the machinist and engineering unions, started the factory in Charlston to undercut the Ts & Cs of their Washington staff, cut every financial corner possible, it all added up to ruin what was once the company the rest of the world envied. When you treat your staff as the enemy, the best and brightest of them won't stay around for long...

Didn't the board cut the development budget of the 787 by a couple of billion, only to have the cascade of problems that ensued end up costing multiples of the original budget? Even before the issues over the last 12 months affecting the 787, they hoped at best to just about break even on the programme with the current order book.

They built pretty much the best airliner of all time in the original 777, and got it certified damn quick too. It's depressing to see what they have become.

Last edited by Una Due Tfc; 4th Jul 2021 at 15:30.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 4th Jul 2021, 23:55
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,375
krismiler is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2021, 16:22
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,203
Una Due Tfc

The original 777 had its fair share of issues too. I worked on the 777 Fuel Quantity Indicating System (FQIS) in the late 90s. We had entire ship sets of the ultrasonic probes for the aircraft already in service back for rework/replacement. Most new models of aircraft will have components which don't have same performance, reliability or life as those further down the production run.
Mechta is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2021, 02:54
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 72
Posts: 753
Aircraft development routinely includes design problems and challenges. The original 777 certification was probably the most challenging, complex and yet supremely successful and as far as I know unequalled. The 777 service bears that out as well. It was a different, pre-1995, Boeing then. Blessed with world-class technical and engineering talent. Highly experienced, the envy of the aviation world. Boeing still possesses many great engineers, but it’s not the company it once was.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2021, 06:28
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,827
Mechta

"The original 777 had its fair share of issues too. I worked on the 777 Fuel Quantity Indicating System (FQIS) in the late 90s. We had entire ship sets of the ultrasonic probes for the aircraft already in service back for rework/replacement. Most new models of aircraft will have components which don't have same performance, reliability or life as those further down the production run.."

Yes, you could replace 777 with just about any airliner developed in the last 60 years, and the above statement would still hold true, That's just the nature of certification and service entry.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 8th Jul 2021, 06:40
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 66
Posts: 3,559
I was in the middle of the original 777 design, and it did seem like a train wreck to those of us involved. AIMS and the FQIS were both very, very bad early on (FQIS used a new technology for measuring the fuel levels in the tank and it had more than it's share of teething problems). I was responsible for the engine running functional test and so spent many hours on the first aircraft (WA001) between initial engine runs and first flight, monitoring engine ground runs. At one point, we'd run engines (sometimes at power) for several hours before the engine run guys took a meal break. When we got back on the aircraft, the FQIS reported we had 20,000 lbs more fuel on board than when we'd started running engines hours earlier .

During another engine run functional test, we took a break and a young fresh faced Electrical Engineer was talking to his lead and asked if 'the 747-400 electrical system had ever been this bad'. His lead (a good friend) looked him straight in the eye and responded "the 747-400 electrical system is still this bad".

tdracer is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2021, 05:20
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,979
tdracer

Well
you can’t just leave that last statement out there !
Care to elaborate ?
stilton is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2021, 01:15
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,375
Now the FAA aren't happy with the flight manuals. Obviously it doesn't pay to get on the wrong side of your industry's regulatory authority.

krismiler is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2021, 08:40
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: big green wheely bin
Posts: 736
Boeing dropped them in the with the MAX, the FAA are in payback mode!
Jonty is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.