[EasternPedlar]

@AMcWhirter
Air India have been reporting a huge number of issues with their Dreamliners. What about other carriers who are using the 787? Qatar for example have said very little, is this because of a lack of transparency ?

[Goldcardsaplenty]

I fly regularly on Qatar 787, in fact will be tomorrow, never had a problem. Great aircraft. Comfortable and amazingly quiet.

[AMcWhirter]

AjayPuri – Most if not all B787 operators have experienced issues of one sort or another. But Air India and Norwegian appear to have had the most problems.

Previous problems with Qatar Air’s B787s have been reported:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2379183/Dreamliner-nightmare-continues-Boeing-Qatar-Airways-pulls-plane-service-smoke-reported-near-electrical-compartment.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/al-baker-fires-off-warning-to-boeing-about-continuing-787-390629/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/13/uk-qatarairways-idUSLNE8BC01M20121213

http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/dreamliners-growing-pains-continue-after-another-grounding-20130729-2qtmg.html

[AMcWhirter]

JAL B787 makes emergency landing in Honolulu yesterday owing to drop in oil pressure in one of its engines.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/09/uk-japan-airlines-idUKBREA2809K20140309

[HarryMonk]

Wing cracks on the 787-9 according the Daily Mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576158/Boeing-hit-headaches-Dreamliner-jets-wing-cracks-discovered-new-fleet.html

[travelworld2]

If only someone would conduct a piece of research comparing the frequency and severity of faults with the B787 as opposed to other new aircraft introduced in the last 20 years. The impression given by these postings are that problems with it are a constant concern. Have other aircraft suffered similar issues? Or is the B787 much worse than different aircraft types? Business Traveller, please provide some context…!

[cbroo79]

I agree with Travelworld2! Boeing is claiming that the incident rate is similar to that of the 777 at that time in its product lifecycle (of course implying that the 787 thus will be as reliable as the 777 is now!). It would be great if BT could research this issue and have an article on it.

[retread]

Agree travelworld2…

Do we really need to know about every drop in engine pressure incident! How many other ’emergency landings’ happened world wide on the same day due to other mechanical incidents on other aircraft types?

Is it just me, or does anyone else also remember a lot of ‘hysteria’ surrounding the introduction of the ‘fly by wire’ ‘untested’ A320 when it was introduced? I seem remember lots of similar newspaper articles from ‘experts’ who doomed that aircraft type as a failure, waste of money and a danger to fly on.

So yes, I agree, it would be very interesting to see to actual facts about the introduction of various aircraft types and compare.

[IanFromHKG]

While I agree that the comparison would be most interesting, retread, my answer to you is YES, I do want to hear about issues on the 787 that cause emergency landings, not least because I want to wait until the point where these become sufficiently rare that I am able to revise my current rule of not flying on this aircraft. Although the statistics may prove me wrong, it does seem that the B787 has an unusually high failure rate. The only sensible recent comparator I can think of (and I think “recent” is sensible given rapid advances in technology – I think the twenty-year timeframe suggested by travelworld2 is far too long) is the A380 which certainly had its fair share of early, and significant, problems. However, those were (IIRC) resolved relatively swiftly and did not continually recur. The same does not seem to be true of the rather inaptly named Dreamliner, which seems to have had more than its fair share, and where I must say the battery problem still hasn’t been resolved to a level where I feel comfortable.

I hope this thread dies a natural death when incidents become too rare to be worthy of mention. Until then, let’s keep hearing about what is going on with this aircraft, thank you.

[retread]

I agree Ian… I too would like to hear about issues that cause ’emergency landings’ or incidents that bring into call the safety and reliability of any aircraft type. New or old. But I would question the use of ’emergency landings’ every time it involves a 787.

My main issue is, was this an ’emergency landing’ or a standard precautionary diversion for a twin engined aircraft operating this sector? Would the captain of a 330 or 777 operating this service (assuming they had the range) made a similar decision?

[JohnHarper]

I certainly want to know about 787 issues as I fly regularly with QR and at the moment I’m avoiding the 787.

Of course other new aircraft have had issues but I can’t remember anything like the scale of 787 incidents with other new aircraft of the current generation.

[nmh1204]

I’d also be interested in a comparison between the 787’s issues and other newly launched aircraft. I tried to search for a380 issues, but only got a couple, nowhere near the dozens, if not more, the 787 has had. I don’t see how people can say that the 787s issues are because “it’s new technology”. It should have been fit for use before it left Boeing to be honest.

I wonder if manufacturers test the new aircraft types as if it were a real flight – I mean, full 300-odd passengers, excess baggage, trolly service, cargo etc., to get a ‘real’ view of how the aircraft performs and if any issues appear, as the 787’s issues appear to have started shortly after entering live service with passengers and weight.

[Edski777]

nmh1204: yes, both Boeing and Airbus test their new aircraft with a full passenger load. Airbus will start testing the A350 shortly with a full complement of “passengers”, be it that they will invite Airbus personnel to act as “passengers”. They will receive the whole service range from boarding, meals and disembarking. This is also used as an indication to cabin crew trainers for the launch customer on what to expect.
This is all above and beyond ground based mock ups.

I am quite sure that the tests and procedures at both manufacturers are the same as they have the same customers and have to comply with both FAA and European rules.

[nmh1204]

I never knew that, I thought it was just a few people in orange jump suits and testing equipment, not a full service

I wasn’t doubting any manufacturer in terms of their testing complying, I just didn’t know they tested that fully to be honest

[IanFromHKG]

Edski777 – 12/03/2014 22:09 GMT : Airbus will start testing the A350 shortly with a full complement of “passengers”, be it that they will invite Airbus personnel to act as “passengers”. They will receive the whole service range from boarding, meals and disembarking. This is also used as an indication to cabin crew trainers for the launch customer on what to expect. This is all above and beyond ground based mock ups.

And you can read a report about one of the ground-based mock-ups here: http://www.ausbt.com.au/airbus-a350-makes-its-first-virtual-flight

For in-flight mock-ups, they simulate full plane loads as described here: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-chemtrail-plane-interior-ballast-barrels.661/

Ahd here is a set of photos of the interior of test planes, which even includes videos of the B787 and A380

I recall reading abiout a later A380 test flight which had all the seats, IFE etc but where the passengers were “represented” by sacks of water strapped to the seats – couldn’t find the article, though

[Author]

Posts