|
slidebite posted:JAL grounded their 787s after an emergency landing. Sounds like it was battery related too. When was the last time a technical fault caused a crash of a newly introduced aircraft? 2ndclasscitizen fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Jan 16, 2013 |
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 06:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:When was the last time a technical fault caused a crash of a newly introduced aircraft? Depends on how you define "newly introduced," but the DC-10's cargo door issue started causing major incidents less than a year after it entered service and had its first fatal mishap two years later. And of course you've got the Comet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 07:05
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Depends on how you define "newly introduced," but the DC-10's cargo door issue started causing major incidents less than a year after it entered service and had its first fatal mishap two years later. I guess within <5yrs, enough time for them to start getting a decent number of airlines running them. I was just thinking about in terms of the shitstorm that always surrounds these issues, that despite suffering from teething problems minor or major, I can't remember anything happening to any recent new jets that was actually going to turn it into a lawn dart. I mean, that QANTAS A380 shat an entire engine all over a small island and as far as I've gathered still made it back to land without the pilots losing control of the plane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 07:32
|
|
|
NightGyr posted:I could have sworn I saw an AWACS over JFK after Sandy. I'd imagine it was coordinating military relief flights, but that's just speculation. Do they ever use those for domestic coordination? You saw it from where? If you were on the ground, probably not. There's a fair chance they were up there to coordinate, but they'd be at altitude and you're not going to get eyes on it well enough to ID it. If they were forward-deploying jets to that area, they wouldn't do it at JFK; there are military facilities that are just as well-positioned and actually have the infrastructure available. I've spent weeks up there doing that kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 07:58
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You saw it from where? If you were on the ground, probably not. There's a fair chance they were up there to coordinate, but they'd be at altitude and you're not going to get eyes on it well enough to ID it. If they were forward-deploying jets to that area, they wouldn't do it at JFK; there are military facilities that are just as well-positioned and actually have the infrastructure available. I've spent weeks up there doing that kind of stuff. I was doing relief work out in Jamaica Bay, and it looked like it was taking off from the runways at JFK. I thought it was odd they'd operate from JFK instead of one of the bases in the area, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 09:33
|
|
|
Somebody's crashed a Westland AW109 into a construction crane in the Vauxhall region of London this morning: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21040410 2 confirmed dead already, no mention if they were both in the helicopter.  Reports are low/cloud fog in the area and potentially no visibility lights on the building/crane.The coverage is suprisingly restrained on TV, they just had somebody involved with a helicopter company (didn't catch if he was a pilot or not) who very calmly explained IFR, low visibility flying and air corridors and how this really, really shouldn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 10:38
|
|
|
slidebite posted:JAL grounded their 787s after an emergency landing. Sounds like it was battery related too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 11:43
|
|
|
grover posted:How hard is it for Boeing to fix a loving battery? They don't need an 100% solution _right this instant_, just something that puts out power and doesn't catch fire, and can follow up with lighter-better-cheaper later. The APU battery is a lithium ion battery made by YUASA. Lithium batteries also caused some problems for the Chevrolet Volt when it was first launched.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 11:54
|
|
|
grover posted:How hard is it for Boeing to fix a loving battery? They don't need an 100% solution _right this instant_, just something that puts out power and doesn't catch fire, and can follow up with lighter-better-cheaper later. Problem is paperwork and certification takes forever. And that's once you have a root cause. Trust me, no one at Boeing is sitting on their rear end watching this unfold and waiting for direction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 12:13
|
|
|
Sorry guys I am bad at my job and now airplanes are crashing
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
grover posted:How hard is it for Boeing to fix a loving battery? They don't need an 100% solution _right this instant_, just something that puts out power and doesn't catch fire, and can follow up with lighter-better-cheaper later. Jesus Christ no.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
grover posted:How hard is it for Boeing to fix a loving battery? They don't need an 100% solution _right this instant_, just something that puts out power and doesn't catch fire, and can follow up with lighter-better-cheaper later. That is probably the most heavily loaded, highest duty cycle battery ever installed in an aircraft. You can't just chuck a Diehard in if the OE starts giving you problems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Hey, man, if he has to Bruce Willis will power the whole aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
grover posted:How hard is it for Boeing to fix a loving battery? They don't need an 100% solution _right this instant_, just something that puts out power and doesn't catch fire, and can follow up with lighter-better-cheaper later. Perhaps you're not the ideal person to suggest how to fix things properly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
rscott posted:Sorry guys I am bad at my job and now airplanes are crashing
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Mike-o posted:So how do you guys (and the air force) deal with parking a plane at a civilian airport if you're over-nighting? I'm assuming there aren't any security forces guys following you everywhere you go. The only time we overnight anywhere is if it is approved by the appropriate authority (depends, but normally squadron or air wing commander) and the civilian airport has to meet certain security restrictions. There is almost always a pre-approved list and anything not on the list normally requires jumping through your own rear end in a top hat to get approval. It's up to the requesting pilot to provide documentation that the requested field complies. In more than 5 years doing this I have never seen a USN aircraft ferry live ordnance. When we carry live rounds it is specifically to use on that flight on a designated range. In that case we will always plan for military alternates, and if everything goes to poo poo and we land in the middle of nowhere we will not leave the aircraft (like, I don't leave arm's reach and nobody else gets near me) until the qualified people arrive to safe and secure the aircraft. We do often carry inert/training ordnance (captive carry weapons that can only leave the jet by jettisoning in an emergency: meaning you couldn't arm the jet and release the weapon) but even then we're going to military fields for 1)security (don't want someone stealing even our practice toys) and 2)to avoid causing unsuspecting Joe Public to freak out and call the media about us preparing for an imminent terror attack on their town. (This has happened) I had this happen to me once: diverted as an emergency aircraft to a not-secure-enough field with ordnance on the jet. Thankfully the brain trust on the boat had the sense to send someone with me so we could take turns on watch in the cold, dark night while the other person slept in a nearby hotel. It was not fun. Edit: If you intend on taking a jet somewhere out of the ordinary (air shows, static displays for veterans groups, whatever the excuse) and you can't find an ANG unit nearby that you can bribe with alchohol you're a moron and don't deserve to go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Everyone thinks being an engineer in aerospace means you're a Galahad or a Lancelot, when in actual fact you go to great pains to be Sir Not Appearing On This Paperwork. You would not believe (actually you probably would) how many times I've had to pull the trump card of, "well I'm not signing off on this operation, if you think it's good enough then you sign it" lately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/01/faa-orders-airlines-to-stop-flying-boeing-787/#.UPc4TmdrqF8 Welp, FAA has grounded the 787 until "proven safe."
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
Mobius1B7R posted:http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/01/faa-orders-airlines-to-stop-flying-boeing-787/#.UPc4TmdrqF8 So much for going down to San Diego and seeing a JAL 787 before school starting next week then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Oh great. Now we'll have to keep these whipping these tired old 767 nags even longer. Haven't they (and by they I mean I) suffered enough? Give us new planes with new problems we can fix! (and by fix I mean defer under MEL)
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
Mobius1B7R posted:http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/01/faa-orders-airlines-to-stop-flying-boeing-787/#.UPc4TmdrqF8 This will be interesting to watch first thing tomorrow
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
gently caress I own that 
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
Hang on to it. Buy even more tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not seeing any orders getting canceled because of this unless the problems are far more severe than what they've been saying so far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Hang on to it. Buy even more tomorrow. If I could legally buy airline stocks and had some money laying around I'd buy the poo poo out of it. It's not like the wings are falling off of them, it's a loving battery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
Are we out of luck with manufacturer stocks too?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
fknlo posted:If I could legally buy airline stocks and had some money laying around I'd buy the poo poo out of it. It's not like the wings are falling off of them, it's a loving battery. This is the time to buy YUASA. They're not going under. They're going to fix this, and make bank. Their stock is down 50% from a year ago, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
I would buy it too, it'll just be an interesting ride when the bell rings tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
I just put in an order at $60. Let's see if it hits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 07:25
|
|
|
On the other hand, this is definitely going to have a severe negative impact on project profitability, but Boeing will break even off this project in the end. The problem would be if future orders go to the A350, assuming the A350 doesn't have similar teething problems (which is extremely unlikely).
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 13:48
|
|
|
Eurowhite livery is coming to America...n: http://www.aa.com/newamerican Except for that godawful tail.  ManifunkDestiny fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Jan 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Eurowhite livery is coming to America...n: http://www.aa.com/newamerican Ugh I'm no graphic designer but that transition to the tail/rear paint job (or lack of rather) is just jarring. Please try again American
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Eurowhite livery is coming to America...n: http://www.aa.com/newamerican That is really ugly. It reminds me of some South American airline from the 70s or 80s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Eurowhite livery is coming to America...n: http://www.aa.com/newamerican I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Whelp, other than the first thing AM automated sells, it seems to be a pretty small hiccup so far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
Blech, that tail. It's like Dominicana or something except way, way worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:That is really ugly. The typeface looks like something a 2007-era tech startup would use to set their name.  The tail's too jingoistic, like a state-owned (or formerly-state-owned) airline.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
Just got an email from Delta stating their frequent flier program will no longer require just 25000 miles per tier, but also $2500 in spending, effective 1JAN14. All my flights are GSA contract tickets which are stupid cheap, though, unfortunately. Guess my days of getting free upgrades on Delta are about done http://www.delta.com/content/www/en_US/skymiles/about-skymiles/medallion-program/medallion-qualification-dollars.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:The tail's too jingoistic, like a state-owned (or formerly-state-owned) airline. It is very jingoistic, though in photos of aircraft actually painted in it it's more complex (slightly) than it looks in that CG video, there's a bit of back-and-forth gradation in the striping.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:04 |
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:The typeface looks like something a 2007-era tech startup would use to set their name. Helvetica Neue Medium: For when you absolutely positively have no ideas, but still want to get paid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:18
|
|
