Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

Worldwide 787 fleet grounded!

Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

Worldwide 787 fleet grounded!

Old 9th Dec 2012, 07:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On a Wing!
Posts: 227
Exclamation Worldwide 787 fleet grounded!

Just heard that the FAA has passed a Safety Directive grounding all 787's airborne worldwide with unmediated effect.
Apparently the fuel lines feeding fuel into the engines have developed a leak in a number of the airplanes flying commercially.
This is another shocker for Boeing.
The Boeing engineers compare this to a severe headache rather than a heart attack.
Wonder what that means and what it's gonna do for the reputation of the 787.
Very unlike the reliable 777 is this.
King on a Wing is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 07:31
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 679
Do you have a link somewhere?
The FAA site does not show any directives pointing in this direction.
fox niner is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 07:51
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On a Wing!
Posts: 227
Let me see if this link works....

FAA orders airlines to inspect 787 Dreamliners for fuel leaks | Business & Technology | The Seattle Times


Of course the groundings are subject to investigations and repairs. The faster the repairs the faster the Dreamliner takes to the Clouds!
King on a Wing is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 07:52
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Originally Posted by King on a Wing
Just heard that the FAA has passed a Safety Directive grounding all 787's airborne worldwide with unmediated effect. ...
Grounding? Your source must be awful.

Let´s judge this "problem" with the AD itself:
AD 2012-24-07

If you read above linked AD, you find :
- ...Within 7 days after the effective date of this AD, ensure that the lockwire installation on the rigid and full flexible couplings is correct. ...
- ...Within 21 days after the effective date of this AD, inspect the rigid and full flexible couplings for correct assembly, including replacement of the o-rings with new o-rings, confirmation that the proper retainer rings are installed in the full flexible coupling, a general visual inspection for damage of the blade seals, and all applicable corrective actions. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight. ...
I think that 7 days to check a lockwire und 21 days to do a 10 work-hour job is far away from grounding.

Last edited by IFixPlanes; 9th Dec 2012 at 07:53.
IFixPlanes is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 07:53
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: far too low
Posts: 231
They've ordered fuel line inspections and issued an airworthiness directive. Don't think they've grounded anything though.

As aircraft get more complex expect more teething problems. Fuel lines in 787, cracked wings in a380 I'm sure there will be other problems too
gorter is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 08:05
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
First of all, FAA doesn't have the power to ground anything worldwide.
criss is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 08:05
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EGGW
Posts: 2,049
King on a Wing

Now let me see, if Boeing has taken any notice of what a certain Irish airline has been getting up to, with some forums, l would expect a law suit in the coming days.
Best to read before trying to engage what is between the ears.
Mr @ Spotty M is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 08:32
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Dock of the bay.
Posts: 39
It's just an AD. Completely normal on a new and complicated type.

Please note that if it was serious enough to put them all on the ground, the FAA as the original issuer of the type certificate, can ground the worldwide fleet by suspending or revoking that type certificate.

EASA grounded the Dassault Falcon 7X worldwide last year (at the request of the manufacturer) by doing exactly that.

Its an emergency brake and it works. Once the issue is addressed, the type cert is re-instated.

But this is just an AD. Move along.
Max Torque is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 10:56
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,213
A little knowlage......

I can't help thinking that this shows how little some of the people on this forum know about how the AD system works and at least one of the above it would seem can't read and understand the news report that he has gathered the information from, this is not a "worldwide grounding " it is a call for the aircraft to be inspected and if approprate rectification work to be carried out, no more than that.

I can't help thinking that the title of this forum was written by the same people who have been publishing pictures of aircraft with extended noses.
A and C is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 11:49
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Where it is comfortable...
Age: 56
Posts: 737
Where are the moderators when you need them ...

Legitimate news get banished to obscure corners of the site within 15 minutes of posting, yet this managed to stay as the leading thread on Rumors & News for over twelve hours now...

Last edited by andrasz; 9th Dec 2012 at 19:59.
andrasz is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 12:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,350
What we have here is a failure to understand what a grounding is and why there are so few cases. Blame it on the press who play up the words to the point where they are meaningless to aviation readers.

Of course I have no Idea what the OP words
unmediated effect
means
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 12:41
  #12 (permalink)  
Uneasy Pleistocene Leftover
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Gone, but not forgotten apparently?! All forums marked "Private"...
Posts: 320
IFixPlanes wrote:
I think that 7 days to check a lockwire und 21 days to do a 10 work-hour job is far away from grounding.
From your link above:
Estimated Costs
Action Labor cost Parts
cost
Cost per
product
Cost on U.S.
operators
Coupling inspection, o-ring
replacement, retainer ring
installation, blade seal
inspection, and lockwire
installation and blah blah...
10 work-hours X $85 per hour = $850 / parts cost $54 / cost per aircraft (only 3 aircraft registered in USA at this time) $904 / total cost for all 3 x USA registered aircraft $2,712
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the oncondition
actions specified in this proposed AD.
I'd question whether or not the "10 work-hours" required can be conducted concurrently (by say using 10 engineers - problem resolved in 1hr) or that this would involve disabling the aircraft from flying operations for 10 hours - a small fortune (loss) for airlines, especially the few operating this new Boeing...?!

I can almost imagine an Irish low-cost carrier contributing: "We were envisaging the replacement of some of our smaller Boeing B737s with B787s on certain routes. Unless the fuel leakages reach significant quantities, which cannot be recovered by simply adding 20 pence for access to the coin-operated toilets aboard our aircraft, sales of sandwiches recovered from the French autoroute opeartors the day before, or just excess baggage, we'll be reconsidering all options. Including relocating our HQ to Luxembourg for all online ticket sales.
airship is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 12:45
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,420
Let's not be too hard on our fellow ppruners; explanations of the regulatory terminology used in relation to continued airworthiness do not come with the MS Flight Sim package.
Capot is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 13:00
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,076
I'd question whether or not the "10 work-hours" required can be conducted concurrently (by say using 10 engineers - problem resolved in 1hr) or that this would involve disabling the aircraft from flying operations for 10 hours - a small fortune (loss) for airlines, especially the few operating this new Boeing...?!
Neither.

10 engineers falling over each other all attempting to inspect the same engine fuel feed manifold coupling would be daft.

But equally, occupying one engineer for 10 hours, thereby tying up the aircraft for the same length of time, would be stupid - at the very least you could halve the required downtime by using two engineers and inspecting both engines at the same time.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 13:39
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 462
Who knows how accurate the 10 hours is in the estimate. Could just mean it's close to 10 than it is to 1 or 100.
Chu Chu is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 14:16
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,350
at the very least you could halve the required downtime by using two engineers and inspecting both engines at the same time.
Did I hear "O" rings mentioned

We better have a third inspector in there somewhere if both engines are going to be screwed up by maintenance at the same time
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 14:26
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,342
First of all, FAA doesn't have the power to ground anything worldwide.
Yes but if a carrier does not comply with this A.D. and anything happens, the big turd sandwich is in their lap. They really can only fine domestic carriers up to the point of revocation of an operating certificate if the negligence gets bad enough.
grounded27 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 14:32
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,342
As for the 10 man hours, it is always a liberal estimate and can certainly be accomplished on the aircraft's next overnight without a hickup in service. This is no big deal.

Not like the A330 Air Transat Flight 236 that ended up a glider because of a fuel leak in the pylon.
grounded27 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 14:36
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,076
Who knows how accurate the 10 hours is in the estimate.
That's why it's called an estimate.

No different from any AD that calls for inspection action and then, depending on the findings, possible corrective action.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2012, 14:37
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Over the Pacific mostly
Posts: 1,035
Oh for the love of Christ! Airlines will spend 200 million dollars in an airplane and then ground it by putting off an inspection that requires a few man hours to complete have a nice day drama queens
The Dominican is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.