For the second day in a row, a Japan Airlines B787 Dreamliner has a problem. A day after a fire was reported in one of JAL's Dreamliners, today there is report of a fuel leak on a different Dreamliner. (www.boston.com) Mehr...
according to Boeing and the FAA the 787 was such a reliable and tested airplane that right from the start it got nearly unlimited ETOPS. Anyone with more than 2 working brain cells knew that was dangerous: new design, new materials, new engines, new electronic architecture..... So they decided that computer testing and some flying would be the same as years of flying and millions of flight hours. Well, these incidents (3 serious ones in 3 days) show how wrong they were; a typical US business style to put profits before safety. Because if that fire would have started in the air while flying over the ocean we would have seen the first deadly 787 crash. And losing a lot of fuel on take-off also is not promoting safety as well. Strange that nobody questions these ETOPS permission for a new and unproven plane... I for my part know for sure I won't fly a 787 for the first 3 years, I prefer proven planes like the 777 or the 330. Let others be the crash test dummies...
"one of four valves connecting the center and left main fuel tanks was open. That led to fuel flowing between the center and left tanks to a surge tank near the wing tip and then out a vent, spilling about 40 gallons."
I like Boeing the 737’s are like a C-172 to me just one of the best ever built. But I must say the 787’s have had a ton of problems. Most of the problems were bad business decisions on Boeings part with how it was built (to me). First flight was to be in 2007 and it didn’t fly till Dec 2009 and at that point had cost 15 billion dollars more than it should have. To me it has been pushed to get the 787’s in service thus lots of big problems. Like fire & gas dumping out of it. It may have a 20% +/- savings in fuel but I would guess all the problems have cost the airlines a lot more. Airbus has not had problems like this on the A380’s and that’s a lot more airplane. I will not ride the 787’s anytime soon.
Maybe not to the visibilty points of the pax and news media like these did, but it will cost the Airlines and Airbus big $ on the wing fix and let's don't forget about the problems with the RR engines at first that nearly crashed one for Qantas.
There is fix on the A380 wings underway now and I understand has not been hugely serious problem to fix although a bit time consuming. RR engines problems were due to a manufacturing problem on a very small component, admittedly did cost insurers and RR £90m in compensation to qantas. The 787 seems to have problems occurring with build quality which is very worrying especially with forthcoming production escalation.
I think I read somewhere that the wing problem was not going to be a big deal for right now; that it was just going to be inspect and and go on but come major time is when the downtime and real fix was going to happen and that they are making those changes on the new ones while still on the line. Hopefully, the 787's problems will get ironed out. I don't care who builds it. If it is new or a major mod, there will be bugs. The 787 did run behind and get rushed but so did the 380, trying to get AB a jump on the BIG market
Maybe so. But, how many Airbus planes have crashed over the years..........? I wonder what's worse! I just can't believe Boeiing would jeopardise its reputation on issues like fuel caps that come off. There must be other causes for that. Besides, every new product will show some imperfections that will be sorted out, be it an electric toothbrush or an airplane.
Actually it was a fuel cap; it was a sticking internal valve that let some fuel go to a vent valve, but it was seen and we are erring here on the side of caution. Could've happened on anything.
I will give you that but that was not Airbus or Boeing that was a RR thing that to me is not new. We have seen a lot of big problems with fan's going bust way back to the old Tri stars or 3 eng ones. I would say that to me the Qantas was not going to crash. I hope it will fly on 2 or 3 of its 4 eng's.
Well, it was designed to. 1 out shouldn't be a deal but that thing literally blew up and tore the bejesus out of that side. Qantas had 5 senior Captains in there for various reason, and I think they said that 1-2 were flying the plane and the others were running down checklist and alarms. Had they not all been in there, by their words, the outcome would have been a lot different.
Yea checklist to me are way way to long for some stuff. I will admit i have had problems that by the POH or SOP i sould have ran more or all of the checklist and i just got the thing back on the ground due to min fuel or very bad IMC. Most of the time a big problem you are on your own and the list dont help.
Yes true, it wasn't losing the engine it was the damage to the wing with associated piping and wiring that were damaged. It is extremely rare to have uncontained ejection from an engine because of the damage it can cause they are built to withstand that.. They had little control on flaps, the other engine and so many other sensors caused by damaged wiring. There is very good 45 min video on YouTube well worth watching.
I ask my first instructor when I went to flying jets, what’s the worst thing you can have happen he told me to read about UAL in Sioux City. After I did that has been my #1 fear. I had the left engine come UN done in a Citation 501 I was single pilot in IMC and I will admit I kissed the ground when I got out. That was a maintenance problem dumb guy did not set some bolts the correct way when it was in for OH. I pulled the fire bottle on it started down to FL180 from FL280 went IMC at about 210 was doing the CK list looked down for what I thought was 10-20 sec and looked up to see I was in a 30* turn and low on air speed. Ck list went in the floor Lol. Got it back to AHN safe. But that’s the kind of lesson that will sure enforce FLY THE DAM AIRPLANE first and the rest can wait. My mom gave a card the day before that said Mamas Angel’s is always with you, I put it in my flight bag. When I got my stuff out of that plane that night that card had fell out and was on top of the check list. It look bad after 12 years 12K hours but I don’t get in the cockpit without it.
Mommas are like that, yeah they are. I expect besides kissing the ground there was a pucker in that seat too.lol. If it ain't routine, that checklist don't mean much. Sometimes, if you can fly the plane, I have made a recovery before I could even get the checklist out and the recovery was nothin' like what the list said.lol
Isn't it days like yours and the Qantas A380's Captain what all the training is about? On reflection, it must be rather pleasing on how you coped in the emergency and basically overcame fear and just flew the damn thing and got it down safely!!
A lot of this is new plane blues. It has been a long time since we have seen a truly new plane off the production line... They have been derivatives from other planes. Things are going to happen. I just prefer them find them before something happens.
Japan Airlines Co. (JAL) said Wednesday the cause of the fuel leak in its Boeing 787 Dreamliner at a US airport bound for Tokyo on the previous day is a malfunctioning valve. "The valve on a pipe connecting the fuel tank in the aircraft's body with the left wing was open, and this caused fuel to spill out," JAL said. The fuel leak forced flight JL 007 with 181 passengers and 11 crew members to postpone takeoff. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner was towed back to the gate after about 150 liters of jet fuel leaked when the plane was taxiing toward the runway for takeoff. All passengers temporarily disembarked and the aircraft eventually left for Tokyo after almost four hours. None of the passengers and crew on board was injured. JAL said it plans to inspect the aircraft further after it arrives in Tokyo's Narita Airport later in the day.
Boeing's problems continue - even with a brand new a/c delivered to UAL http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2013/01/08/a-series-of-unfortunate-events-boeings-bad-month/
They have to have fuel caps... How do you fuel the plane when the Pressure fueling is not working or not available for some reason. You Over Wing It... These caps are similar to that of a Cessna, but they have better seals and a tighter lock.
I didn't read the article, but the 787 had to make an emergency landing in Laredo, TX due to an electrical problem. It was during the testing before it entered service. I can't remember if it actually caught fire or not.
It did. But, I didn't think that the first delays were caused by electrical problems -- as I took it to be implied. Delivered only a year later (more or less), it read to me like they were blaming three years of delays on them.
Airplanes do not. They assume the pilot has done a walk around and the fueler has closed things up... Sometimes this is a false assumption. I once had to do a go around from close final because someone lost their fuel cap on take off. Even though rarely... it does happen.
JAL Boeing 787 Suffers Fuel Leak as it Prepares for Takeoff at Boston Logan
A Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 787 Dreamliner had to abort its takeoff this morning at Boston Logan Airport (BOS) when fuel spilled out of the aircraft.
Diese Website verwendet Cookies. Mit der Weiternutzung der Website drücken Sie Ihr Einverständnis mit dem Einsatz von Cookies aus.
Schließen
Wussten Sie schon, dass die Flugverfolgung auf FlightAware durch Werbung finanziert wird?
Sie können uns dabei helfen, FlightAware weiterhin kostenlos anzubieten, indem Sie Werbung auf FlightAware.com zulassen. Wir engagieren uns dafür, dass unsere Werbung auch in Zukunft zweckmäßig und unaufdringlich ist und Sie beim Surfen nicht stört. Das Erstellen einer Positivliste für Anzeigen auf FlightAware geht schnell und unkompliziert. Alternativ können Sie sich auch für eines unserer Premium-Benutzerkonten entscheiden..