Waiting for the Dreamliner? Dream On!

[Guest beachlover]

Ah right... I hadn't heard of the Paris DC10 crash before.

[PeterRS]

Back to the Dreamliner. Guess what? Hot on the heels of a Qantas A380 having an engine explode leading to the grounding of its fleet of six, and Singapore Airlines replacing the engines on three of its bigger A380 fleet, now the Dreamliner has been grounded. So this means yet another delay in delivery to airines. CNN is reporting that one of the Dreamliner test aircraft had to make an emergency landing in Texas after smoke was discovered in the cabin during a routine test flight on Tuesday.

 

"Until we understand the event, we're not going to schedule any new flights," said Lori Gunter, a Boeing spokeswoman.

 

Sorry, but I'm keeping well away from this aircraft until it has been in service for a few years. Perhaps I remember too well the story of the revolutionary de Havilland Comet, the first commercial jet passenger aircraft. No less than three exploded in mid-air, a problem eventually discovered to be a design fault. It was 4 years before the modified aircraft re-entered service as the Comet 4. But the damage has been done. The plane was never thereafter a commercial success, having been overtaken by the Boeing 707 and the Douglas DC8.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/10/boeing.dreamliner.test/index.html

[Guest]

Sorry, but I'm keeping well away from this aircraft until it has been in service for a few years.

 

That's exactly what I do too. I'll be avoiding the A380 for at least 2 more years yet & hope to avoid the Dreamliner for around 5 years after launch.

[PeterRS]

I've reached the point where I'm happy to take an A380 flight. The Rolls Royce engine problems are worrying, but other airlines use different engines. I'l try an Emirates flight quite soon. Re the Dreamliner, my concern is that so much of that plane is new technology. There's no reason why it should not fly successfully after its full test schedule. On the other hand, not matter how much people enjoy flying it, I prefer to wait a couple of years

[kokopelli]

Give me a 747 or give me death! For me the best of the best.

[Bob]

Until they figure out what's the problem with those Trent engines (which are on some but not all of the 380's), there's not a chance I'd fly any 380 with one of those engines. The one incident could have brought down that airplane (the engine or cowling explosion did damage the wing above it).

[Guest beachlover]

That's exactly what I do too. I'll be avoiding the A380 for at least 2 more years yet & hope to avoid the Dreamliner for around 5 years after launch.

Wow... it's a personal decision but sure you're not being overly cautious? I've flown on the 380 7-8 times since it was launched. Flew on the first Singapore Airlines 380 about two months after it started commercial flights. Lovely aircraft.

 

Give me a 747 or give me death! For me the best of the best.

Not sure if you realise, 2 out of the 3 last Qantas incidents I read about involved 747s.

 

31 August 2010: Qantas 747 engine blew up 45 mins out of San Fransisco and the plane had to return for an emergency landing.

 

4 November 2010: Qantas 380 engine explosion.

 

5 November 2010: Qantas 747 engine failed a few minutes out of Singapore (reports of explosion and flames). Ironically, this 747 was carrying crew from the 380, which had the engine explosion just previous to this.

 

Most serious incident on a recent Qantas 747 was two years ago when an oxygen tank exploded in mid-air between Hong Kong and Melbourne, blew a large hole in the fuselage leading to rapid decompression and emergency descent.

 

I'd rather be on one of their 380s than on their older fleet of 747s.

 

Until they figure out what's the problem with those Trent engines (which are on some but not all of the 380's), there's not a chance I'd fly any 380 with one of those engines. The one incident could have brought down that airplane (the engine or cowling explosion did damage the wing above it).

Yeah, lots of people don't realise how close they came to having an entire 380 downed. The explosion wrecked part of the wing and cut off certain controls and hydraulics. It could also have ignited the fuel in the wings (full tank), punctured the fuselage or cut off the left wing completely!

[Guest]

Wow... it's a personal decision but sure you're not being overly cautious? I've flown on the 380 7-8 times since it was launched. Flew on the first Singapore Airlines 380 about two months after it started commercial flights. Lovely aircraft.

 

There are probably people who survived 7~8 Comet flights too.

I would rather they ironed out the teething problems with other customers on board. Like on the recent Qantas flight.

 

Of course, if the only flight to Thailand was on an A380, I would take it. However, in the real world, I do not need to do this.

 

Rolls Royce have apparently already found out where the faulty component is. I would still like to know how an "oil leak" results in part of the engine going through the wing. It's not supposed to happen like that...

[PeterRS]

There are probably people who survived 7~8 Comet flights too.

 

Sadly, not on the three I mentioned. They all exploded mid-flight and all on board were killed instantly. The problem on the first Comets was the design of the square shaped windows. Great to look out of them, but they resulted in minute stress fractures at the corners. After a certain number of take-off and landing cycles, the fractures developed into full blown cracks. Thereafter RIP! I may be wrong but I know of no Comet disasters when any on board actually survived.

 

Sorry kokpelli, the 747 looks to be on the way out. It will take some years, of course, but the long range airliner of preference is likely to be the 777, with the extended Airbus A340 also filling in until the A350 is ready in a few years time. The Dreamliner, whenever it finally makes it off the test bed and starts flying passengers, will be the medium-size point-to-point carrier. However, the longer it is delayed, the more the A350 is catching up. The 747 is basically a 1960s deign, although with a vast number of modifications and upgrades over the years. It does seem that Boeing has not received enough orders for the fourth version, the upgraded 747-800 series. The order book has less than 50 for passenger aircraft at present. SO the chances of that getting off the ground are not high. I also think it's a pity as I love the space on a 747. But then , I haven't tried the A380 yet.

 

The Rolls Royce accident on the Qantas A380 is certainly worrying. As part of their engine testing programme, engine makers deliberately destroy an engine going at full throttle. It has to pass that test without bits flying out of the outer casing before it can be certified. As Bob rightly says, "it's not supposed to happen like that!"

[Bob]

I would still like to know how an "oil leak" results in part of the engine going through the wing. It's not supposed to happen like that...

 

While it's nice to know that it's fairly certain that the manufacturer will acknowledge exactly what happened, any engine ultimately would freeze or blow up if there is inadequate oil pressure to a moving part. For example, lack of adequate oil to a car engine cylinder can result in the piston actually puncturing the engine block.

 

Something blew apart on that Trent 900 engine and a piece of something of that engine put a fairly nasty gash in and around the leading edge of the airplane wing. They're lucky that there was no puncture of the fuel tank in that wing or we likely would have witnessed another disaster like what happened with the one Concorde.

 

Given they've found other Trent 900 engines with unusual oil stains (meaning: oil leaks), it was wise of them to ground all of those engines until the problem can be fixed.

[Guest]

1 People may have done as many a 7~8 Comet flights where there was no crash at all. So surviving the crashes doesn't come into it.

 

2 My car has a light which warns me if the oil level is low & I get a different warning if the oil pressure drops. So it's possible to switch the engine off before the con rods would come through the block.

Rolls Royce monitor their engine performance in the field via satellite links, so I would expect their instrumentation should be sufficient to advise the pilot to shut down the offending engine in many cases. Maybe that cannot cover 100% of failure modes either.

As has already been stated above, even if it goes wrong, the engine parts should be contained within the engine.

 

3 Chinese plane manufacturer Comac has now taken orders for it's 737 & A320 competitor, from 3 Chinese firms and GE Leasing. Does anyone fancy trying that within the first 5 years? Not me!

[Bob]

Chinese plane manufacturer Comac has now taken orders for it's 737 & A320 competitor, from 3 Chinese firms and GE Leasing. Does anyone fancy trying that within the first 5 years? Not me!

 

More than likely the Chinese surreptitiously have a full set of all Boeing and Airbus plans for all their planes. The issue, of course, is whether they adhere to the necessary material and manufacturing standards and, on that note, I'd be a bit nervous about it too.

[kokopelli]

 

Sorry kokpelli, the 747 looks to be on the way out.

 

Well, Maybe like me, when they are gone I will be phased out also!

[Guest beachlover]

Just how close the Qantas 380 came to being downed... http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/qantas-aircraft-could-have-exploded-20101118-17zer.html

 

What happened in the cockpit after the Qantas 380 engine explosion:

 

When the first warning blared in the cockpit of QF32 six minutes after takeoff from Singapore, the first officer, Matt Hicks, instinctively pressed his stopwatch.

 

As the captain, Richard de Crespigny, was flat out flying, Hicks and the three other pilots went into rescue mode as they tried to sort through more than 50 error messages after one of the A380 superjumbo's four engines exploded. The debris from the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine pierced a fuel tank and knocked out multiple systems including the left-side fire extinguishers, the auto-brakes and the anti-skid. In any pilot's terms, it was a worst-case scenario.

 

The next time Hicks, a former infantry soldier, got a chance to look at his watch he was shocked to discover more than an hour had passed. The pilots had been working non-stop to ensure the plane could attempt an emergency landing at Singapore's Changi Airport.

 

As has become apparent since November 4, the Qantas pilots had narrowly prevented the superjumbo carrying 440 passengers from becoming Australia's worst air accident. Without doubt, a certain amount of good fortune was on their side. Fire did not engulf the wing despite debris piercing the fuel tank.

 

''It could have been much, much worse,'' says Richard Woodward, a Qantas A380 captain and a vice-president of the Australian and International Pilots Association. ''It could probably be termed a one-in-100 million event with bits and pieces going everywhere.''

 

http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/pockets-of-turbulence-for-rollsroyce-20101119-18100.html

 

I would rather they ironed out the teething problems with other customers on board. Like on the recent Qantas flight.

 

Of course, if the only flight to Thailand was on an A380, I would take it. However, in the real world, I do not need to do this.

 

Rolls Royce have apparently already found out where the faulty component is. I would still like to know how an "oil leak" results in part of the engine going through the wing. It's not supposed to happen like that...

Fair enough... I'm not making any effort to avoid the A380s though. Especially since you get a much newer cabin and a bit more room on some of them. Also, the two airlines I fly most often (Qantas and Singapore Airlines) have their 380s doing the afternoon flight out of Sydney, which is my preferred flight time.

 

Also, I don't think there's been significantly more incidents with the A380, than there have been with the 747s Qantas flies, which are fairly old now. Another Qantas 747 leaving Sydney bound for Argentina had to return after smoke was reported in the cockpit (3rd Qantas 747 to be involved in a serious incident within the space of a few weeks)... http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/smoke-in-cockpit-more-trouble-hits-qantas-20101115-17tqs.html

 

The Rolls Royce accident on the Qantas A380 is certainly worrying. As part of their engine testing programme, engine makers deliberately destroy an engine going at full throttle. It has to pass that test without bits flying out of the outer casing before it can be certified. As Bob rightly says, "it's not supposed to happen like that!"

It looks like RR are going to replace a lot, if not all the A380 engines: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/rollsroyce-to-replace-up-to-40-a380-engines-qantas-20101118-17yit.html

 

Apparently, Singapore Airlines crew refused to fly one of their 380s when oil was found in one of the engines where it should be: http://www.perthnow.com.au/travel/singapore-crew-refuses-to-fly-a380-after-oil-found/story-e6frg3tu-1225950899235

 

Chinese plane manufacturer Comac has now taken orders for it's 737 & A320 competitor, from 3 Chinese firms and GE Leasing. Does anyone fancy trying that within the first 5 years? Not me!

I think it's awesome both Brazil and China have a growing aircraft manufacturing industry, which may some day match Airbus and Boeing. Russia is producing commercial jets again now too.

 

Check out the new Chinese Commercial Jet: http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/china-throws-down-the-gauntlet-to-boeing-airbus-20101116-17vx1.html

[Guest]

Actually, the Brazilian aero industry is very well established.

 

For planes just below the size range covered by Airbus & Boeing, the 2 big global players are Embraer of Brazil & Bombardier of Canada.

[Guest beachlover]

Yeah, I know... some of the major airlines in Australia use Embraer airline jets.

[Guest beachlover]

More about how close the Qantas 380 came to being totaled...

 

http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/qantas-jet-could-have-exploded/story-e6frfq80-1225956388231

 

Apparently there were five pilots onboard (WTF?). One pilot flew the plane while the other four worked flat out for two hours dealing with all the problems to get the situation under control and ensure the plane could be landed.

 

NEW details have emerged revealing just how close Qantas flight QF32 came to disaster earlier this month.

 

Turbine fragments flew out of the plane

[PeterRS]

Apparently there were five pilots onboard (WTF?).

As most frequent flyers know, four pilots is standard for a long haul flight with 2 resting whilst the other 2 fly the plane. I presume the fifth was a passenger being flown to London where he'd then pilot a flight out. But thank goodness he was on board, as it seems clear they needed all five to get that plane down safely.

 

I see Qantas will have at least some of its A380s back in the air by the end of the week.

[Guest beachlover]

Ah yes, that I didn't think about. That would explain the five pilots. I rarely fly routes more than 10 hours and don't know what goes on up front of the aircraft. Do they have a second set of pilots for 7-10 hr flights?

 

Qantas CEO says he'll be on the first 380 flight when the aircraft is certified to fly again.

[Guest beachlover]

More details on how close the Qantas A380 came to complete disaster.

 

Apparently the pilot stopped the aircraft with just 120 metres of runway to spare. Emergency crews were positioned all along the run way as there was fuel leaking from the plane and they were worried it would ignite during landing.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/qantas-keeps-its-head-above-water-despite-titanic-nearmiss-20101121-182hg.html

 

Qantas keeps its head above water despite Titanic near-miss

 

The Airbus A380 represents the pinnacle of global aviation. It is especially the jewel in the crown in Singapore, where the government-owned Singapore Airlines was the launch customer. But when an A380 was coming in to land at Singapore's Changi International Airport on the morning of November 4, the emergency ground crews were filled with trepidation. This was a disaster waiting to happen. This A380 was the Nancy Bird Walton, the flagship of the Qantas fleet.

 

All the ingredients were in place for the 90th anniversary of Qantas to be marked by a catastrophe. I don't think many people, outside the experts, realise how close it came to a spectacular end to Qantas's brilliant run as the world's safest major airline.

 

Flight QF32, Singapore to Sydney, departing at 9.30am, was in distress just six minutes into the flight when the number two engine blew up. The plane was put into a circle pattern over open water for more than an hour as the five-member flight crew worked furiously on diagnostic checks to see what controls they had and what had been lost.

 

The hydraulics system was badly compromised. There was total loss of hydraulic fluid in the Green system, while the Yellow system remained intact. There was an open gash in the wing, with a fuel leak, and a second massive leak in a mid fuel tank. The left inner tank was also leaking. Part of the fuel distribution system had ceased to function, so fuel imbalances could not be fixed, or fuel jettisoned from the tail tank. It meant they would not be able to balance the aircraft properly for landing.

 

There was more: a hole in the upper wing surface; damage to leading edge slats on the wings; only partial use of speed brakes; shrapnel damage to some wing flaps. The pilot was unable to shut down the number one engine using the fire switch, thus no fire protection was available for that engine. The auto-brakes were compromised. The anti-skid mechanism was gone. One of the two engines that could provide reverse-thrust on landing was no longer operating.

 

The pilot, Richard Champion de Crespigny - remember that name - was going to have to battle the plane down with numerous elements inoperable that would have stabilised the aircraft. One tilt of the wings, one crumpling landing gear, one burning tyre, and sparks would shower on the tarmac. With an open and leaking fuel tank, sparks could create a fireball.

 

Four hundred and fifty-nine dead. The airline equivalent of the Titanic.

 

The crew decided to get the plane down rather than wait. They were concerned by the plane's worsening lateral imbalance. With so many pieces missing, the captain would need almost every metre of the runway, and fuel would be leaking throughout. The plane still had 80 tonnes of fuel. It was overweight. It would also have to make a high-speed landing. Every emergency crew at Changi was being positioned to lay down fire-retarding foam.

 

At the moment of crisis, the largest, most complex plane ever created was dependent on a pilot to get it down intact. By the time Captain de Crespigny brought the plane to a halt, he had just 120 metres of tarmac to spare. A reconstruction of events would make a compelling documentary. Several important and perhaps unappreciated elements emerge from this story:

 

This was not a problem of Qantas's making. It was a new jet, with new engines, all tests made and all systems checked. This problem was created in the Rolls-Royce factory in Derby where the Trent 900 engine was manufactured. Vested interests have conflated this incident into a wider industrial argument about the standards of Qantas maintenance. The two issues have nothing to do with each other.

 

Disaster was avoided by the one thing Qantas did control - the training and quality of the flight crew. They were outstanding. Qantas maintains world-best-practice in training.

While Qantas has grounded its A380s, Singapore Airlines, which flies the same aircraft with the same engines, temporarily grounded three A380s to replace engines, but kept eight of its 11 A380s in the air. Singapore Airlines enjoys a reputation as one of the world's best airlines.

 

This abundance of caution by Qantas would be partly caused by an unhappy spate of in-flight mechanical incidents requiring aircraft to turn back. All airlines suffer grounded flights, and sometimes these come in clusters. On Friday, a Virgin Blue flight made an emergency landing in Melbourne. But the Australian media is on a constant drip-feed of negative information about safety at Qantas as part of a union campaign against maintenance being outsourced overseas.

 

The most detailed account of the QF32 incident appeared anonymously on the internet before any news stories or detailed statements from Qantas. It turned out to be accurate, more evidence that the internet is making the world more transparent even amid all the disinformation that also pours through cyberspace.

 

The Airbus A380 is a commercial aviation engineering project of unprecedented ambition. In a system so large and complex the number of things that can go wrong is also large. Perhaps the A380, with its vast bulk, is operating closer to the limits of technology than we first understood.

 

I've never been on an A380 but I won't blink when the time comes. I look forward to it. Every time we step into a motor vehicle, or ride a bicycle into traffic, we have already done a risk/reward assessment. It's no different with planes, except that the odds are still better in the air.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/qantas-keeps-its-head-above-water-despite-titanic-nearmiss-20101121-182hg.html

[PeterRS]

Do they have a second set of pilots for 7-10 hr flights?

I am not sure how long the flight has to be for a second set of pilots to be used by airlines. Most overnight flights of 10 hours or more will have them. 8 hours or less - probably not, but that's a guess. I know there is an ongoing study by Boeing, Airbus and an International Flight Safety Committee on the most effective times for crew rest periods. All long range aircraft have bunk beds for pilots just behind the cockpit area.

[Guest beachlover]

Fair enough. I should think 6 to 9 hours (my most common long-haul flights) is easily done with one set of pilots.

 

I heard a recently-concluded investigation about an air crash in India, which killed quite a lot of passengers sometime ago reported that part of the cause was the pilot FELL ASLEEP for part of the flight (light snoring noises heard in the recordings) and so when things started to go wrong during the landing he was slow to react and correct things as he was suffering from the drowsiness associated with waking up (can't remember exact term).

[PeterRS]

I've flown on the 380 7-8 times since it was launched. Flew on the first Singapore Airlines 380 about two months after it started commercial flights. Lovely aircraft.

I have been meaning to ask what the A380 experience is like. Is there a lot of space to walk around? Are the staircases 'grand' a la Titanic - or just larger versions of the 747's? Does it 'feel' much different from a 747-400?

[Guest beachlover]

Since I fly economy, main difference from the 747 is it's got newer interior fittings with more refined seat/cabin design. It feels nicer and is a little more comfortable. I think you get a tiny bit more space too.

 

1. Feels bigger inside. Feels more stable and steady flying/takeoff/landing. Boarding seems to take much longer.

 

2. The staircase at the back of the aircraft is kind of big and curves around. I've only walked up it on the Qantas A380.

 

3. Slightly quieter. Apparently people up the front (first/business) complain it's too quiet and you can hear people talking/snoring too easily. I don't notice this up the back.

 

4. I like the Qantas one better (though SIA crew are nicer). Qantas won a design award for its economy class seat design. They certainly are a bit more comfortable and nicer than the crappy old seat design. Looks cool too. You get self-serve a snack bar stocked with fruit, biscuits, crackers and soft drinks, which is nice for economy.

 

6. For economy passengers, the biggest windfall you get is on the Qantas A380. If you get a window seat in the upstairs cabin, due to the fuselage curve, the seat is approx 30 cms away from the fuselage. So between your seat and the wall, there's table/bench like fitting. Gives you a bit more room to spread out. Especially nice if you're using a laptop and such. Woohoo! Economy is so stingy it's not often you get a little give...

[PeterRS]

Looks like more trouble for the Dreamliner. The head of Qatar, one of the best of the new airlines, today said Boeing had "very clearly failed" in getting the airplane into production. He added his airline is now considering buying more Airbus A380s