Oh dear, more Boeing Dreamliner woes.
#61
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23707519
It's getting farcical!
Boeing has said that it will investigate the wiring defect that was found in a fire extinguisher system on three of its 787 Dreamliner jets.
The fault was found on jets operated by Japan's All Nippon Airways (ANA).
After ANA reported the fault on Wednesday, rival Japan Airlines turned back a 787 plane travelling to Helsinki from Tokyo to check the wiring.
The fault was found on jets operated by Japan's All Nippon Airways (ANA).
After ANA reported the fault on Wednesday, rival Japan Airlines turned back a 787 plane travelling to Helsinki from Tokyo to check the wiring.
#67
#68
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Under a flightpath
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've extracted a paragraph from a Bloomberg report...
"On Aug. 14, Tokyo-based ANA Holdings discovered wiring defects in the fire-suppression system on three Dreamliners. The fault, which would have triggered the wrong extinguisher in case of a fire on one of the engines, was fixed by replacing parts on two 787s, with the third to be repaired by the end of the day, the airline said."
That is just unthinkable, you have a fire on one of the 2 engines and the fire extinguishers operate on the wrong engine, resulting in no engines!!!
"On Aug. 14, Tokyo-based ANA Holdings discovered wiring defects in the fire-suppression system on three Dreamliners. The fault, which would have triggered the wrong extinguisher in case of a fire on one of the engines, was fixed by replacing parts on two 787s, with the third to be repaired by the end of the day, the airline said."
That is just unthinkable, you have a fire on one of the 2 engines and the fire extinguishers operate on the wrong engine, resulting in no engines!!!
#69
Scooby Regular
#71
I've extracted a paragraph from a Bloomberg report...
"On Aug. 14, Tokyo-based ANA Holdings discovered wiring defects in the fire-suppression system on three Dreamliners. The fault, which would have triggered the wrong extinguisher in case of a fire on one of the engines, was fixed by replacing parts on two 787s, with the third to be repaired by the end of the day, the airline said."
That is just unthinkable, you have a fire on one of the 2 engines and the fire extinguishers operate on the wrong engine, resulting in no engines!!!
"On Aug. 14, Tokyo-based ANA Holdings discovered wiring defects in the fire-suppression system on three Dreamliners. The fault, which would have triggered the wrong extinguisher in case of a fire on one of the engines, was fixed by replacing parts on two 787s, with the third to be repaired by the end of the day, the airline said."
That is just unthinkable, you have a fire on one of the 2 engines and the fire extinguishers operate on the wrong engine, resulting in no engines!!!
Faults due to errors in building the aircraft at the factory makes you wonder what is likely to come next!
Les
#72
Scooby Regular
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vu..._and_incidents
Can't remember what other types you've said that you've flown in the past, but I suspect the figures will be similiary poor. The Jaguar was the worst AFAIK.
Probably safer in a Dreamliner
#73
Les
#74
Didn't stop you flying the Vulcans though? Mixture of pilot error and various technical issues/failures destroyed a fair few of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vu..._and_incidents
Can't remember what other types you've said that you've flown in the past, but I suspect the figures will be similiary poor. The Jaguar was the worst AFAIK.
Probably safer in a Dreamliner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vu..._and_incidents
Can't remember what other types you've said that you've flown in the past, but I suspect the figures will be similiary poor. The Jaguar was the worst AFAIK.
Probably safer in a Dreamliner
You have to remember that we were undertaking military operational flying which is in a different league altogether from civilian passenger flying. We did however operate the VC10 completely to civilian rules and regulations as well as a few of our own added on.
The Vulcan was operated in a military fashion as a nuclear attack machine as well as conventional weapons for some twenty eight years. It flew originally at high level until it was forced down to low level by the defences it had to cope with. Do you honestly think it was likely to fly for that long and at such an intensity without experiencing emergencies due to various failures from time to time. We spent hours either in the flight simulator or in the air practising how to deal with any emergency which might occur. That went also for all the other aircraft I flew of course. We expected that sooner or later something would go wrong and we were ready in case it did. Of course we all had problems at times, military flying is by its nature a lot more intense than passenger flying and was likely to lead to more difficult scenarios to cope with. All part of the job of course. I have to say that the Vulcan was essentially a remarkably reliable machine
despite what was required of it.
Some of the others I flew were likely to be a much greater problem when things went wrong however. You often had to work very hard to get away with it. There were often times when you "fell" out of the machine after some excitement or other thinking to yourself that you had really earned your flying pay for that day!
Operational military flying is of course a very different style and requires a different attitude from the crew. The manner in which it is done is nowhere near the same as civilian flying. That does not mean any of us would feel too happy about using something like that Dreamliner which has shown some pretty unfortunate occurrences so far. I really hope they manage to stop the batteries from catching fire!
Les
#75
Pontificating
I thought I'd revisit this thread as I will be getting on a UA B-787/8 on Sunday to IAH, probably not the wisest thing to do
Has anyone flown on one yet if so what was the experience like, speaking to a colleague who's flown on one he only mentioned the air quality seemed better and the cabin pressurisation felt different to the norm ?!?
I guess I can make my own judgement on Sunday, tbh I'm a little nervous and concentrating more on the appeal of having a Wendy Burger at IAH before getting my connection to GIG
Has anyone flown on one yet if so what was the experience like, speaking to a colleague who's flown on one he only mentioned the air quality seemed better and the cabin pressurisation felt different to the norm ?!?
I guess I can make my own judgement on Sunday, tbh I'm a little nervous and concentrating more on the appeal of having a Wendy Burger at IAH before getting my connection to GIG
#77
Yep' - I came back on from florida last year (plane was only a week old - well a week in service with Thomson), it was an overnight flight, seats were good (for a package holiday plane), and I have to say the different lighting, cabin pressure and air quality must have been far better - as we all slept (apart from the annoying kid 2 rows back - who did actaually fall asleep about 30 minutes before we landed !!), but for me - the usual nasty jet lag was far reduced.,
As for the safety thing, I wouldnt worry, you're far more likely to be injured in your Scooby on Britains roads.
As for the safety thing, I wouldnt worry, you're far more likely to be injured in your Scooby on Britains roads.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post