Originally Posted by mattyj
(Post 10786355)
the trouble with the 787 is that the issues with the rollers haven’t gone away and cargo is the white horse at the moment and the 78 can’t carry any
Seems that Avianca are able to do cargo only flights in the passenger version, and have been for a month: https://theloadstar.com/avianca-ramp...oost-capacity/ (text not picture) https://www.aircargonews.net/airline...nger-aircraft/ |
Originally Posted by Spooky 2
(Post 10786391)
I believe UAL pilots include the 767-400 in their 767 category bid?
At one time, the plan was to extend the 767-400 flight deck to all new production 757/767, so keeping the type rating common was a high priority. |
The 78s don’t have good volume so can’t take larger sized pallets, and the problems with the rollers are the Rolls Royce (Trent) materials issues and also something to do with the bleed air system (or lack of) adds up to an engine that’s highly stressed and every issue they solve puts another part of the engine under stress. Also there’s an issue with resonance at some power settings. There’s a bunch in our company with EDTO limitations. The engine is fairly similar on the A350 and they’ve had the odd one go boof too.
|
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10786407)
The 767-400 is included in the 757/767 common type rating. Yes, the flight deck is unique to the 767-400 (it's based on a 777 flight deck), but the layout is pretty much common (with bigger displays) and the procedures are common.
At one time, the plan was to extend the 767-400 flight deck to all new production 757/767, so keeping the type rating common was a high priority. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10786407)
The 767-400 is included in the 757/767 common type rating. Yes, the flight deck is unique to the 767-400 (it's based on a 777 flight deck)
|
Originally Posted by Spooky 2
(Post 10786904)
I was commenting on the fact that Delta, unlike UAL has a stand alone 767-400 category for pilots. They don't fly the 767-300 at all, just the -400. Where as I believe UAL comemingles the -300 and -400 flying and 757 as well. Agree the one type rating covers all the 767 models.
Anyway, as I commented earlier, the separate Delta B-764 bid (and pay) category may be a thing of the past as moves are made to 'right-size' the airline in the downturn. |
I have never heard of that engine specific issue on any non FAA rating and where I worked and we were 98% non FAA training. If you can identify an authority that mandated this I would be grateful. I know that Canada for instance, has a separate type for 737 Classic and NG, if that's what you mean?
|
Originally Posted by Spooky 2
(Post 10787018)
I have never heard of that engine specific issue on any non FAA rating and where I worked and we were 98% non FAA training. If you can identify an authority that mandated this I would be grateful. I know that Canada for instance, has a separate type for 737 Classic and NG, if that's what you mean?
|
Originally Posted by lomapaseo
(Post 10782972)
Is there an engine pix somewhere with six seats across and a trolly in the aisle
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....325bb93187.jpg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6a877dc3c.jpeg |
Originally Posted by Intruder
(Post 10786911)
I thought it was based on the 744...
Which, BTW, was easy to do because the 757, 767, and 777 all use the same flight deck structure (aka "Section 41"). That's why the nose profile of the 757 and 777 look a little odd (and why you step down into the 757 flight deck). |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10787157)
Nope. Large parts of the 777 flight deck were transplanted directly into the 767-400. The aisle stand/thrust levers are largely common, displays are largely common, etc.
Which, BTW, was easy to do because the 757, 767, and 777 all use the same flight deck structure (aka "Section 41"). That's why the nose profile of the 757 and 777 look a little odd (and why you step down into the 757 flight deck). What exactly is this section 41 that you speak of? |
Originally Posted by Check Airman
(Post 10787273)
What exactly is this section 41 that you speak of?
One story of origin is that the compartment was numbered 41 on the original 707 drawings. I was told years ago by a guy in a white hat that it started 41 inches behind the nose datum but that doesn't seem to be true for the other section numbers. |
I believe it's named section 41 because it started (probably at one time) 41 inches behind a datum near the nose of the plane. Or, so I was told many moons ago. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10787314)
I don't know the origin, but I'm reasonably sure that's not it - Boeing calls all the fuselage bits "Section 4x" - e.g. the tail is Section 47/48.
|
Ed, check your 6
Ed Bastian needs to lookout for his 6 as a hot-shot startup will buy and use those 777's and flame him.
|
Ah so the entire nose area (forward of the L1 entry door maybe?) would be referred to as section 41 on the assembly line?
|
Originally Posted by ATPMBA
(Post 10787323)
Ed Bastian needs to lookout for his 6 as a hot-shot startup will buy and use those 777's and flame him.
Porter notes that the new Eastern is expected to acquire a fleet of several Boeing 767 and 777s, with at least five second-hand 777-200s joining in by May 2020. |
Originally Posted by Check Airman
(Post 10787460)
Ah so the entire nose area (forward of the L1 entry door maybe?) would be referred to as section 41 on the assembly line?
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f140840f60.jpg |
Much appreciated. Thanks DaveReidUK
|
FWIW, I Checked with a former associate who works Regulatory STandards at Boeing. He is not aware of any such present day requirements.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:48. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.