787 unsafe?

[C]

Not sure what else could be done really. All metal interior, although easyjet arn't that far off.

I've always thought that if the source of fire (fuel) can be 'distanced' from crashes then there is a lot less need to worry about flammable and toxic interior fittings. I think, and there's probably some very good reason why this is not possible, that fuel tanks should be jettisonable from the aircraft. In the event of an emergency, the pilots, if able, would get the plane down low-ish, jettison the fuel tanks, and glide the rest of the way.

P.S...I wonder how much damage one of those back-of-the-seat screens could do to a person if it burnt in a crash...

Just a quick observation, but I'll give you an example; say an airliner has a take off weight of 150tonnes - the fuel alone may be half of that. The wing is full of fuel, and the fuel actually adds strength to the structure. Hence why fuel dumping takes a fair few minutes, and only a few tonnes per minute, otherwise the aircraft could become unflyable in seconds by going completely out of trim.

[expat]

couple of things.
Firstly this guy was fire for leaking secrets of boeing.

According to the article he was "dismissed for threatening a supervisor".

Secondly, the 787 has passed all its safety tests, be they simulated or full on tests. It wouldn't be allowed to fly if it hasn't.

I'm pretty certain the most toxic fumes in a fire are caused by the interior furnishings. This applies to all aircraft & despite investigation report recommendations following fatal fires over the years I'm not convinced that anything has been done about it. :-/

The only thing that has been done in the area of interior fires is that the insulation matting has now been outlawed. This was as a direct result of the crash of Swissair Flight 111. It has to be retro fitted with a foil type to all existing aircraft and to all new aircraft. I cannot remember the time scale, I think it has already passed. As for plastic and foam, fireproofing them is just a case of a chemical impregnation or retardant coverings, just like all new sofas you buy. Why is it not done, good question, well presented, but I have not got a clue. It is rather criminal at the end of the day.

Not sure what else could be done really. All metal interior, although easyjet arn't that far off.

P.S...I wonder how much damage one of those back-of-the-seat screens could do to a person if it burnt in a crash...

As LCD screens are not known for spontaneous combustion, if the one in front of you is on fire, I think you have greater problems than worrying about being burnt by it.

Matt

[C]

Whether safe or not, Boeing have announced in the last hour or two that the 787 will face a six month delay on the delivery schedule to airlines...

[spitfire boy]

Whether safe or not, Boeing have announced in the last hour or two that the 787 will face a six month delay on the delivery schedule to airlines...

To be quite frank it's no surprise. The A380 suffered the same problems as I'm sure we all know. Goes hand-in-hand with making new and advanced aircraft, sadly.

[expat]

Whether safe or not, Boeing have announced in the last hour or two that the 787 will face a six month delay on the delivery schedule to airlines...

That means at least 9 months possibly 18 months in real speak. Six months is just the start to stop prospective customers from saying anything negative or canceling orders. In other words, blowing small amounts of grey wispy stuff into a small dark orifice that does not see much sun light.

Matt  

[C]

Whether safe or not, Boeing have announced in the last hour or two that the 787 will face a six month delay on the delivery schedule to airlines...

To be quite frank it's no surprise. The A380 suffered the same problems as I'm sure we all know. Goes hand-in-hand with making new and advanced aircraft, sadly.

Of course it's no surprise. It's just odd that Boeing have finally admitted it...

...oh no, they waited until the week after they'd announced the rather large BA order...

I wonder how all the A380 delay bashers are feeling now...

[Papa9571]

If you want to compare the delay of the 787 to the delay of the 380 at least make sure you do the right comparison.

The A380 was delayed because of design problems in the software the various plants used to design parts of the aircraft. As a result things didn't quite fit or wire together properly. All of this was because of a decision made by Airbus management not to update the various Airbus factory software packages to be at the same revision level.

At Boeing the issue is completely different. Their delay is caused by a lack of the proper fasteners and flight control software problems. Both of these issues are not the fault of Boeing but the fault of their fastener supplier, Alcoa I believe, and the flight control software programmers at Honeywell.

Oh, Airbus is facing the same fastener problem that Boeing is but you don't hear anything about that. I wonder why?

Sorry for the rant but I had to get that off my chest.

[spitfire boy]

If you want to compare the delay of the 787 to the delay of the 380 at least make sure you do the right comparison.

The A380 was delayed because of design problems in the software the various plants used to design parts of the aircraft. As a result things didn't quite fit or wire together properly. All of this was because of a decision made by Airbus management not to update the various Airbus factory software packages to be at the same revision level.

At Boeing the issue is completely different. Their delay is caused by a lack of the proper fasteners and flight control software problems. Both of these issues are not the fault of Boeing but the fault of their fastener supplier, Alcoa I believe, and the flight control software programmers at Honeywell.

Oh, Airbus is facing the same fastener problem that Boeing is but you don't hear anything about that. I wonder why?

Sorry for the rant but I had to get that off my chest.

My point is not as specific as that... and please lets not get into another infamous AvB war... my point is that, whatever the reason, delays are to be expected on projects of this size and ambition... A380 and 787 alike.

[C]

If you want to compare the delay of the 787 to the delay of the 380 at least make sure you do the right comparison.

Easy tiger, we we're just mentioning it. After all, who is responsible after all...


...Boeing. Yes suppliers could cause problems, but then maybe they should have factored it into the (probably excessively) ambitious timeline they were working too... Don't try and develop this into another Airbus v Boeing row. I simply couldn't really care less, as long as they both have competition between each other.

[Wii]

Yes, this dude is saying things that he probably isn't even telling the truth about. Of course Boeing will come through with making an excellent aircraft (it may not be here soon but it should go well.) I am not for Boeing or Airbus. They both have their ups and downs, but what worries me most of the new 380 is similar to the 747 crashes over the atlantic ocean. Of course if they keep their planes up to maintenance then we won't have to worry about that but so many people in the 380 and it crashes...it would be a catostrophic cotastrophy (read that in a book  ;D)

[Wii]

Boeing vs Airbus. I like both.  :P

[spitfire boy]

[quote]Yes, this dude is saying things that he probably isn't even telling the truth about. Of course Boeing will come through with making an excellent aircraft (it may not be here soon but it should go well.) I am not for Boeing or Airbus. They both have their ups and downs, but what worries me most of the new 380 is similar to the 747 crashes over the atlantic ocean. Of course if they keep their planes up to maintenance then we won't have to worry about that but so many people in the 380 and it crashes...it would be a catostrophic cotastrophy (read that in a book

[an-225]

Airbus aircraft actually look like they can fly (with the exception of the A300 and A320 families).  Whereas Boeing aircraft (767 ESPECIALLY) look like they are struggling, I love how little effort an A330/A340 or A380 uses on approach to a runway. They appear to just "catch the wind" and glide in like a feather. And the Boeing 767 (747 and 757 don't struggle too much), 777 and 737 pull up to what seems to be (on the ground) 30 degrees of pitch to actually maintain altitude. Extra long wings really influence how well a plane handles.

Papa, I don't see much difference between that and Boeing's problem, after all, it is the software designers fault that the program is faulty.

[Layne.]

[quote]Boeing vs Airbus. I like both.

[an-225]

Those are just random companies Layne...Piper and Cessna make GA and (Cessna makes) BizJets while Douglas make airliners.  :-? Rather odd, to compare three very different companies (in fact, for the most part, Piper make high performance transports, while Cessna make low powered planes to buzz around in).