heymisterk Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21041265 As a bit of an aviation enthusiast, I was really rooting for this plane, despite being way over-budget and delayed for three years. All of the innovations do indeed make it "a game changer," as so many in the aviation industry have said. But in the end, all the innovations in the world don't mean sh*t if the plane doesn't fly. I hope Boeing can solve these problems...and quick. Otherwise, I fear Airbus really is winning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc3c46 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21041265 As a bit of an aviation enthusiast, I was really rooting for this plane, despite being way over-budget and delayed for three years. All of the innovations do indeed make it "a game changer," as so many in the aviation industry have said. But in the end, all the innovations in the world don't mean sh*t if the plane doesn't fly. I hope Boeing can solve these problems...and quick. Otherwise, I fear Airbus really is winning... Of course Aibus is winning. It is the better aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted January 16, 2013 Author Share Posted January 16, 2013 Of course Aibus is winning. It is the better aircraft. I don't know. Back in the late '90s, I worked at FedEx. At the MPS airport where I worked, three planes carried the FedEx freight: a DC10, a 727, and an Airbus - it was either a 319 or 320. Anyway, the Airbus broke down or had more maintenance issues than either of the other two. One of the pilots told me this: "The Airbus is like a German car: It's great when it works." Now, having said that and being a fairly frequent flier, I have never been delayed on an Airbus due to maintenance issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc3c46 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I don't know. Back in the late '90s, I worked at FedEx. At the MPS airport where I worked, three planes carried the FedEx freight: a DC10, a 727, and an Airbus - it was either a 319 or 320. Anyway, the Airbus broke down or had more maintenance issues than either of the other two. One of the pilots told me this: "The Airbus is like a German car: It's great when it works." Now, having said that and being a fairly frequent flier, I have never been delayed on an Airbus due to maintenance issues. Well, as far as the 727 goes, in my eyes the greatest airplane ever built. Great payload and nice to fly. I myself am not so comfortable with all the electronics and the fly by wire in all these modern aircraft.My aviation career involved flying C-46 and DC-3 and there was not even an autopilot - I as F/O was the autopilot. I did like the direct feel of the controls and the challenge of "real" flying into small strips in the bush and at a level where the weather can be quite crappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 I never piloted a jet but I did fly a Cessna 152 and 172 many times. I have more pilot friends than I can count and they say the same exact thing. I provided improvements to the Navy's automatic carrier landing system years ago. Wow, these Navy pilots DID NOT like computers flying their planes and they always let me know that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 I read something where the Boeing guy goes "Our reliability on the 787 is over 90%." I'm like "WTF is this guy trying to say?" First of all, reliability isn't measured in percent. Percent what? Ninety percent of the components don't fail every five minutes? That would correspond roughly to the plane collapsing on the tarmac in a heap of parts every time they fire it up. The only way they could be measuring in percent would be like "90% of the planes don't crash on any particular flight." Or "ninety percent of components don't fail throughout a certain defined lifetime." Ninety percent (per whatever) is not a particularly good survival rate for anything. Especially planes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 I'm a Boeing man. But then, a lot of that is national pride. And a lot of the debate between which is better is absolutely because of this bias, and politics as well. I don't give much credibility to a "BBC" article. Especailly one that doesn't say much beyond "It's got issues". Boeing might have a slight edge on reliability, but really, neither is unsafe. And ALL designs, regardless of who has made it, has always had teething problems. That could explain the difference right there, as Boeing designs on the whole are older than the Airbus. Also, the most reilable and safest planes are the ones that have been manufactured for a time, and in service for a time. The 787 doesn't really exite me. It's boring. The carbon-fiber-ness doesn't seem Boeing like to me. It seems more geared toward efficiency and smoothness than flight envelope performance. 727 was my favorite. The thing about Boeing, was regardless of what mishaps could occur, it just ain't gonna break. And the Boeings, particularly the 727 and 737, were made with WAY better performance than needed. Built like tanks, HUGE flaps. And you feel it when the pilot/plane does this or that. Airbus? Computers are nice, makes it easy on the pilot. Until, of corse, something goes wrong. Don't like the idea of the tail breaking off, or that the fix for it was computer over-ride to prevent the pilot from stressing the airframe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyT Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Boeing engineers warned corporate about outsourcing a lot of the airplane instead of using USA built parts. The suspicious battery packs are outsourced from Japan. I hate seeing any problems as I work for Boeing. PS, this site has lots of info. http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ba&ql=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 From an armchair perspective... Air travel...as well as water,road and rail...continues to evolve by leaps and bounds With more electronics,computers etc chasing the 'perfect' smooth enjoyable experience Adding in greater fuel efficiency...synthetic body materials etc...further complicates the issues Notwithstanding commercial competitive drive to 'better out' the opposition... :blink: Seattle has other 'strings to it's bow'... V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted January 17, 2013 Author Share Posted January 17, 2013 Boeing engineers warned corporate about outsourcing a lot of the airplane instead of using USA built parts. The suspicious battery packs are outsourced from Japan. I hate seeing any problems as I work for Boeing. PS, this site has lots of info. http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ba&ql=1 I was listening to Marketplace last night on NPR, and some analysts were saying that the 787 has reached the limit of its "growing pains threshold," and if things continue to go wrong, Boeing is going to have a real problem on its hands. I, for one, am really rooting for Boeing: In reading about the 787, it really is an incredible jet. I am not sure how concerned I would be about Japan making the batteries: My guess would be that they have more experience in this technology than the U.S. does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 This is common with completely redesigned (new) planes. The tech is new so we don't know what could go wrong...and so on. Lots of troubleshooting for new planes, its the same thing with most "new" automotive and transportation technology...**** goes wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windmills Optional Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 New technology does tend to result in a lot of glitches to be resolved in new aircraft. A classic story is the de Havilland Comet, the first commercial jetliner. A big success until about a year after introduction they started breaking up in flight. Ultimately the cause was determined to be metal fatigue from repeated pressurization, particularly along the edges of the plane's square windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyT Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 Some news on batteries from a local Seattle station. http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/lithium-ion-batteries-have-caused-fires/nTyjD/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat_Man_Curtis Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 From what I understand, most, if not all, recent problems surround the lithium Ion batteries used in the APU's. Again, from what I understand LIB's were/are restricted in aircraft, but an exception was made for the 787. I am not concerned at all that the 787 will be just fine. It is a radically new aircraft and will have the bugs ironed out very soon. I wonder though if Boeing ever envisioned that the 787 would be used like a city bus in most asian countries. Heck, Japan uses the 787 to fairy people across Tokyo on 20 minutes flights. Amazing. I fancy myself a plane-spotter and photograph planes every chance I get. I took this picture at DFW airport here in Dallas, TX a couple days ago of a British Airways 747-436 which is still the most beautiful plane in the air today: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingarmadillo Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 From what I understand, most, if not all, recent problems surround the lithium Ion batteries used in the APU's. Again, from what I understand LIB's were/are restricted in aircraft, but an exception was made for the 787. I am not concerned at all that the 787 will be just fine. It is a radically new aircraft and will have the bugs ironed out very soon. I wonder though if Boeing ever envisioned that the 787 would be used like a city bus in most asian countries. Heck, Japan uses the 787 to fairy people across Tokyo on 20 minutes flights. Amazing. I fancy myself a plane-spotter and photograph planes every chance I get. I took this picture at DFW airport here in Dallas, TX a couple days ago of a British Airways 747-436 which is still the most beautiful plane in the air today: It's been illegal to carry LI-ion batteries in checked luggage since 2008. The restrictions are here: http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html Exceptions were created to the regs for the 87. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cat_Man_Curtis Posted January 18, 2013 Share Posted January 18, 2013 It's been illegal to carry LI-ion batteries in checked luggage since 2008. The restrictions are here: http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html Exceptions were created to the regs for the 87. Thanks for the confirmation of what I thought was the issue. The LIB's have always been plagued with overheating issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.