Uh, oh . . . Boeing Halts 737 Max Flights; After Engine Fault

Lol. I estimate 12-15 press releases later refining the term "manufacturing flaw".

Something like "it was erroneously reported..."
 
Not a lot is being said about how far they are pushing the technology here. I started out on the P/WJT8-D-9 and 11 on the DC-9. These engines were designed in the 50's and had a compression ratio of about 15 and a bypass ratio of less than 1. The LEAP engine has a bypass ratio of 11.1 and an overall compression ratio of 22.1, which is huge. Consider that this 22.1 ratio is accomplished only with aerodynamic means. The internal airflow aerodynamics must be very complex and this engine will most likely require FADEC that flies the engine like the flight control computers on a stealth airplane.

The CFM-56 is reliable and works just fine. Put oil and gas in it and away you go. I hope they get this one worked out. They are really stretching the technology here.
 
ChasenSFO said:
I mean, this is the same company that rolled out a shell of a 787 before one was ready to fly just to have the "roll out" by a certain date...even though it wasn't a roll out by definition.
Click to expand...
That was a hideous structure.

In the end, it all got worked out.
 
ChasenSFO said:
I mean, this is the same company that rolled out a shell of a 787 before one was ready to fly just to have the "roll out" by a certain date...even though it wasn't a roll out by definition.
Click to expand...

Huh, turns out we have to rebuild the whole airplane, skin out.
 
Roger Roger said:
Wasn't that the one where they didn't have the special fasteners to put the airplane together so they essentially built it with hardware store bolts so they could roll it out?
Click to expand...
I believe the landing gear were 757 parts.

I don't think any airplane has "rolled out" and flown the same day.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
 
Zapphod Beblebrox said:
Not a lot is being said about how far they are pushing the technology here. I started out on the P/WJT8-D-9 and 11 on the DC-9. These engines were designed in the 50's and had a compression ratio of about 15 and a bypass ratio of less than 1. The LEAP engine has a bypass ratio of 11.1 and an overall compression ratio of 22.1, which is huge. Consider that this 22.1 ratio is accomplished only with aerodynamic means. The internal airflow aerodynamics must be very complex and this engine will most likely require FADEC that flies the engine like the flight control computers on a stealth airplane.

The CFM-56 is reliable and works just fine. Put oil and gas in it and away you go. I hope they get this one worked out. They are really stretching the technology here.
Click to expand...

The thing that I find interesting is that the LEAP works (simplistically) by allowing the engine to run hotter. There is a limit to how far you can push heat technology. On the other hand the PW GTF works by allowing the engine to run cooler, which is pretty much the beginning of the technology slope for the engine.
 
RDoug said:
"Boeing Co. is temporarily suspending flights of its new 737 Max jetliner because of a potential manufacturing flaw in the engines, marring the commercial debut for the fastest-selling plane in company history."

Boeing Halts 737 Max Flights on Cusp of Debut After Engine Fault
Click to expand...

The C-Series and A320 NEO are still having quite a few teething issues with their Pratt and Whitney's as well. I don't think you can blame this on Boeing too much

http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2017/03/dgca-brief-details-issues-pw1100-gtf-engine-a320neo.html

This airline is reducing their altitude on the A320 Neo to 30,000 until the kinks get sorted out and they will, same as the problems with Boeing's CFMs which are also an option on the A320 NEO.
http://www.livemint.com/Companies/6...eet-altitude-limit-for-Airbus-A320neo-pl.html
 
trafficinsight said:
I believe the landing gear were 757 parts.

I don't think any airplane has "rolled out" and flown the same day.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
That I am not sure of...but I think the vast majority were at least air worthy, close to air worthy...or you know, the actual plane with real parts intended to fly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top