777-300ER delivery problem?
 

I was talking to an ATC friend who seemed to think that the latest 777-300ER to Air France had to divert on its delivery flight.

He didn't have any details although thought that it was engine related.

I heard that the engine had to be shut down on the delivery flight. The aircraft continued to CDG and had an uneventful landing.

Nothing of particular interest for this forum.

from an engineering point of view it would be interesting to know why it had to be shut down so if you do find out the reason AP please post

cheers ....

nosedive00 perhaps the "Bus" drivers would be interested! :}

It was an IFSD due to oil loss caused by I'm led to believe, a collapsed scavenge tube.

Gas Path, You don't think that the oil scav tube is the same reason why the first aircraft has been on watch since delivery?:{

If only I could tell.........:E

747Focal, I thought you were always eager to share your pearls of wisdom!:O

747Focal is VERY quiet this time,if it had been an Airbus...Well that's a different story.
Shame Boeing have put all their eggs in one basket by exclusive use of GE90's on the 300ER version!

That whole airplane has problems that can't be fixed. You pilots make sure and bring your sick bags when you fly her. ;)

747Focal.

If its that poor why don't you withdraw it from the market and recommend operators switch to the bus! :}

Or how about re-engining :E

It could save any further embarrasment :ouch:

The problems I was refering to have nothing to do with the engines. :{

sounds like 747 is talking about this particular airframe? ......

I think Focal is on about a certain "feeling" the 773 gives you, esp when sat at the back. :yuk: :mad:

It's alright, Harry Stonecipher at Boeing has "done a deal" with GE, so that keeps everything nice and cosy on the ER, whether it works or not.

I just think Harry is getting his own back on Boeing from all the days he spent at McDD being trounced by them !

Well when all 777-300ER pilots nickname her "galloping gearny" don't say I did not tell you so. :E

What do you want to bet, when any 'problems' are fixed, it will become very successful for Boeing, much like the B747 was, oh so many years ago.
With that aircraft, I was kept busy for a year delivering various bits in a Skyvan to Seattle...and the 747 swept all others aside.
Airboos, phooey...they can't even get the FD to give correct pitch indications for takeoff, at least on the EK machines...:yuk:

Ho Hum! sliding down that slippery slope of Bus versus Boeing again!
I wonder what Mr Boeing will do when BA asks for 15 777-300ER aircraft (plus options!) but not with that powerplant?:hmm:

411A, You got years of experience on me, but on this one I have intimate knowledge. It can't be fixed, not easily without new wings.

If you get to fly one I was not kidding about the sick bags for the pilots. ;)

and for those in the back.

This is an interesting line of discussion,


1. I would have thought that airframe issues such as (what I think) is being described here would have been sorted at design stage in a wind tunnel?

2. If there is "unusual motion" that causes nausia for the pilots, does that not represent a safety risk?


Invictus

(I am not a pilot).