787, some really good information

mpenguin1

Well-Known Member
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_25/b3938037_mz011.htm

So Boeing is able to guarantee customers that maintenance costs will be 30% lower than for aluminum planes.

After just six years in service, a normal plane undergoes a meticulous and costly check for corrosion. The composite 787, in contrast, may remain in service for 12 years before its first structural test, resulting in 113 additional flights.

One metal barrel requires some 1,500 sheets of aluminum held together by nearly 50,000 rivets. With plastics, the number of fasteners drops by 80%.

Once the Dreamliner's barrels, wings, and other parts are ready, Boeing hopes to assemble each 787 in just three days, down from 11 days for the 737.

Improvement on passenger comfort, the passenger cabin to withstand higher pressurization -- equal to the air pressure at an altitude of 6,000 feet instead of the usual 8,000 feet. So it's easier to control cabin temperature, humidity, and ventilation.
 
Man, this baby looks good on paper, or more accurately on a computer. Now let's see if they can pull it off!
 
I just want to see plenty of durability tests in turbulence. When I first started flying the ERJ, when we'd get in moderate turbulence I'd "pucker up" a bit not sure how it would handle up. Just something about old, metal, tough airplanes that make me confident...
 
[ QUOTE ]
I just want to see plenty of durability tests in turbulence. When I first started flying the ERJ, when we'd get in moderate turbulence I'd "pucker up" a bit not sure how it would handle up. Just something about old, metal, tough airplanes that make me confident...

[/ QUOTE ]


Actually composites are just as strong as the metal structures they replace. Also they don't have any "memory" like metal, no "metal fatigue". They will not deform under excessive loads like metal.


Has anyone seen drawings of the 747s that are going to be modified to carry the 787 major sections. The fuselage will be greatly expanded, and not be pressurized. The whole tail will fold 90 deg for loading. That should be a sight.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I just want to see plenty of durability tests in turbulence. When I first started flying the ERJ, when we'd get in moderate turbulence I'd "pucker up" a bit not sure how it would handle up. Just something about old, metal, tough airplanes that make me confident...

[/ QUOTE ]

Until recently I would have said that any airplane that had a tail come off would be finished in commercial aviation. Airbus is showing that's not the case. But I'm hoping, like you, that Boeing puts it through the ringer.
 
Don't forget about the recent rudder falling off also...I'm like others...give me a metal airplane and I'm happy and comfortable. There are still DC-3's flying around, so we know metal works. I will never trust the composites with as much stuff as has happened recently.

Just my thoughts.

TX
 
Also, there is really no long term data on composits. What about UV damage? I know a flight school that had to get rid of its Kitana because they could not hangar it and the sun was damaging it. Composits look good now, but will we still see thes "plastic" airplanes in the air for 60+ years like the DC-3s, etc, etc, etc?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Also, there is really no long term data on composits. What about UV damage?

[/ QUOTE ]

No long term data on composites?!?! Boeing has plenty of research, though this is the first time that are building somethng this big..

Here are some samples of composite research

C22-461-94.jpg


DVD-251-4.jpg
 
Like I said, LONG term. Give the the F-15 and B-2 30 years of moth-balled status at Mojave or China Lake, then compare then to an all aluminum plane. I know this is extreme, but we'll see...
 
A maintenance manager at Northwest mentioned they're real hip on the 787. He said Boeing brought a fuselage section or something made of the composites and gave the airline reps axes and hammers and said "have at it!"

Another interesting thing he said was about the computer system and maintenance diagnostics. He said it's going to be wi-fi so when the airplane pulls into the gate at JFK, the maintenance guys can pull up everything in Minneapolis. They've got "virtual CB panels." The mechanic calls up the breaker page on his laptop and 'pulls and collars' them right there... cool stuff- until some computer geek figures out how to hack into the airplanes...
 
[ QUOTE ]
Give the the F-15 and B-2...

[/ QUOTE ]

Bzzzzt....that's a Hornet, not an Eagle. Move back two spaces.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget about the recent rudder falling off also...I'm like others...give me a metal airplane and I'm happy and comfortable. There are still DC-3's flying around, so we know metal works. I will never trust the composites with as much stuff as has happened recently.

Just my thoughts.

TX

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I'm trying to be positive about composites, because they offer so many advantages. I think they'll work OK. I love the old DC-3 but it wouldn't have accumulated the hours and years it has if it was a pressurized, high-altitude machine. That's the real test, pressurization cycles plus extreme temperature cycles.
 
Veddy interesting. Some guy at an airline I know about was talking about going all 737-600/700/800/900, 787-3/8/9 and 777-200 in the long-term forecast from some 'higher up' dude at a LCA roadshow, but he'll believe it when he sees it.

(LCA = Line Check Airman)
 
[ QUOTE ]
Veddy interesting. Some guy at an airline I know about was talking about going all 737-600/700/800/900, 787-3/8/9 and 777-200 in the long-term forecast from some 'higher up' dude at a LCA roadshow, but he'll believe it when he sees it.

(LCA = Line Check Airman)

[/ QUOTE ]

Thought the 600 series went the way of the 717. Because no one was interested in them and thus wasn't buying them.

-Matthew
 
[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, LONG term. Give the the F-15 and B-2 30 years of moth-balled status at Mojave or China Lake, then compare then to an all aluminum plane. I know this is extreme, but we'll see...

[/ QUOTE ]

Very extreme dude, the F18 has been flying since the early 80's, figure testing was in the late 70's, that is around 20-30 years of composite research, for just the F18 program.

As far as aluminum & UV rays, yes, pilots are prone to skin cancer when they get older.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why don't they make some type of protection on the cockpit windows?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure if that is possible? The only sure way for the pilots to protect themselves is the same thing that life guards do, sun block or some sort of sun tan lotion.

If there was a way, it would be cheaper than paying for the removal of skin cancer when the pilots get older, for which the insurance company/airlines would appreciate.
 
Back
Top