787 DREAMLINER DELAY TO BA
Back to Forum- This topic has 145 replies, 50 voices, and was last updated 12 Jul 2013
at 20:19 by LuganoPirate.
-
- Author
- Posts
- Skip to last reply Create Topic
-
MartynSinclairParticipantHi Craig
Many thanks for the link. Not entirely true, as budget airline does not necerssarily mean, lowest fare. Look forward to this discussion further on a more appropriate thread.
Interested to read that you would have serious reservations if rostered to fly (currently). I would have thought that no airline would put pilots in that position. …..
20 Mar 2013
at 13:36
HarryMonkParticipantInteresting that the 787 cargo variant is still flying.
For those with more technical knowledge, with or without the modiifcations do cargo aircraft generally have better fire suppression systems than a passenger variant anyway?
What would a crew’s position be on refusing to fly on / operate a certified but “modified/contained” aircraft?
20 Mar 2013
at 14:44
craigwatsonParticipantcargo aircraft do have a better fire suppresion system, but only in the holds, not in the equipment/avionics bays.
As to crew’s position on refusing to fly…. it would highly depend on the airline, but if the aircraft was certified, I can’ see how you would have much to stand on in refusing to fly.
20 Mar 2013
at 16:43
flyingcanadianParticipantHi, BA319131, Thanks for your comment. I had not heard of a 787 Cargo, but as someone had said there was, and no-one contradicted it, I thought that perhaps there was.Hi craigwatson..You are right, and if a Pilot did refuse, he would ALWAYS have his union to back him up. Pilot unions in the USA are pretty strong, and I am sure that not many airlines would want to tangle with a Union, in already tough times for the airlines.(there is not a day goes by without some airline offering special fares to somewhere in the world). Pax are not flying like the 60s/70s & 80s! I see on another thread, BA have raised their C & F fares ex EU, but will they sustain? With the A380 & the 787, is there a surplus of seats in an already fragile economy?
20 Mar 2013
at 17:16
BigDog.ParticipantYou may be referring to my post at 7.51
I had a cursory conversation more out of politeness than genuine interest. As RyanAir and the 787 batteries were the only appropriate/current subjects that came to mind I asked a couple of general questions and received the response posted.
When I bump into the person again I will try to get a little bit more background information.20 Mar 2013
at 17:44
flyingcanadianParticipantHi BigDog,
Thanks for the reply. I never questioned it when you said there was a 787 Cargo a/c. However, all through these threads, no-one previously had mentioned that a 787 Cargo a/c was still flying, so IF THAT 787 WAS “certified” to fly, why not the “Dreamliner” Pax version?? Pls give us the follow up when you hear.20 Mar 2013
at 21:01
BigDog.ParticipantHi Flyingcanadian, I doubt if he’ll be able to answer that as from my basic understanding their role is to purely to inspect, they are not involved as to what does or does not get certified or recertified in the first place.
The snippets are interesting at the time but my understanding is fairly superficial.
Edit – If Shanwick (below) is correct I apologise for sowing confusion, it was not my intent. Maybe 787-8 but just certified to carry cargo in the normal holds with no passengers in order to fully live stress test the battery “fix”?
20 Mar 2013
at 21:40
Shanwick1249ParticipantI think you chaps are all at 6s and 7s on your 787s.
There is no such thing as a cargo 787 – not flying, not planned – no 787 freighter ever.
There is a freighter version of the new 747-8, the 747-8F – and that appears to be what the BigDog was referring to when he mistakenly called it the 787-8.
The 747-8 does not use batteries nor have an electrical power system that functions like a 787, so it is immune to the 787-specific problems that have caused a bit of a fuss.
Now please carry on.
20 Mar 2013
at 22:05
BusinessTravellerKeymasterNorwegian has confirmed it has wet leased two A340 aircraft to cover the launch of its first long-haul flights to New York from Oslo and Stockholm from the end of May.
These flights were originally scheduled to be served by new Boeing Dreamliner aircraft.
http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/norwegian-plans-for-dreamliner-delay
22 Mar 2013
at 14:43
HarryMonkParticipantHave Boeing stopped the 787 production line or are they continuing to produce aircraft with a “known unknown” fault? If they are still producing, it would be interesting to know how many 787’s in addition to those already delivered are stuck on the ground
22 Mar 2013
at 16:10
flyingcanadianParticipantBT.
In reply to your comment, Thomson are wet leasing 767s to cover their 787s. (Thomson had actually only SOLD the same number of seats as a 767, so no oversale problem. Only to refund some money for special seating which does not exist on a 767). The other problem is that the crew for the 787s had new uniforms, so these will be seen on a 767 this summer!!
HarryMonk.
No, if you read some of the previous comments, you will see that Boeing are still building the 787. “Martyn” wrote on the 09/03 that there were over 50 787s sitting parked at A/P in USA. If production stops, it has spin-offs around the world where parts are made and then flown in. If there were over 50 on 9th, how many today? I know that Boeing are looking for more storage space!
Thanks BA319131.
I was writing my reply when you wrote yours!22 Mar 2013
at 17:49 -
AuthorPosts
