Your're up early. What happened - have your crapped the bed?
Or did you get chucked out?
General Aviation Thread
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
Or did you get chucked out?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
On the way to the airport for an early morning flight.Your're up early. What happened - have your crapped the bed?
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Short video from Cirium, an airline industry consultancy firm. Basically they also think that MAX line will be open for at least 7 years before being replace by a New Clean sheet design. Eventough they think FSA still on consideration but their chart shown one project will replace MAX by 2027-30. This in my opinion also show potential of merging NMA with some aspects of FSA, since Cirium also think that NMA concept will be adjusted due to this MAX debacle.
Other consultancy firm (sorry don't have link, just read some hard copy), saying that NMA will have to cater both Asia-Pacific Airlines and North American-Euro Airlines which have slightly different needs.
AsPac seems envisions 170-240 pax market, while NorthAm-Euro on 220-270 pax market.
Thus they envisaged 2-3 types of NMA with based design of 2-3-2 double Aisle but with cargo infrastructure at the range of MAX and A320/321 family (to reduce weight). In short small double aisle with weight ratio still comparable to big single aisle.
For me, with Embrear E2 tied up is getting in reality, Boeing single aisle seems more and more going to be at the hand of E series.
Last edited:
Lawsuit in US against Boeing alleges 'dirty little secret' on flight: Contaminated air
It would appear that Boeing has a dirty little secret which according to the article they have known about for 30 years. I am not a aircraft tech in anyway shape or form, although my misses reckons my waist line resembles a Super Guppy, its the bleed air system they use for cabin air. It would appear there is potential for the system to contaminate the cabin air and a Delta flight had to divert as all the passengers became ill. Now three of the cabin crew have filed law suits against Boeing.
It would appear that Boeing has a dirty little secret which according to the article they have known about for 30 years. I am not a aircraft tech in anyway shape or form, although my misses reckons my waist line resembles a Super Guppy, its the bleed air system they use for cabin air. It would appear there is potential for the system to contaminate the cabin air and a Delta flight had to divert as all the passengers became ill. Now three of the cabin crew have filed law suits against Boeing.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I wonder what system the 787 uses as it apparently does not have this potential problem. Does Airbus use a bleed air approach for their aircraft? Personally, I would be more worried about the viral status of fellow passengers at the moment.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Many aircrafts use bleed air from the engines and APU for pressurization and air conditioning, and there is often a recirculation system. That means you can become sick because of chemical fumes from engine, APU and hydraulic systems and viruses at the same time!
The 787 doesn't use bleed air from APU or engines, it has electrically powered compressors using ambient air.
The 757 nickname was "the electric jet", but the 787 should have that nickname. For example pneumatics and hydraulics are completely eliminated from some subsystems, like engine starters and brakes. Boeing claims that this system extracts 35% less power from the engines, allowing increased thrust and improved fuel efficiency.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Interesting information about the 787 air supply. Just another reason a Boeing should have started a clean sheet design prior to the MAX debacle which could have incorporated the 787 solution.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
This article discusses Boeing’s outsourcing for parts and software. Although there is no indication the software outsourcing was behind the MAX incidents, the reported 30% outsourcing compared to Airbus’s 10% shows how vulnerable Boeing is to potential 3rd party screw-ups. Time for Boeing senior management to move out of Chicago and back to Seattle so they can better interface with people that actually know what they are doing. The bean counters can stay in Chicago with a single phone line and dial-up internet connection.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
The shortage of experienced AI developers is a big issue at the moment. We are in a time when industry wants to automate just about everything and there is a real shortage of talented developers to work on these things. There is also an inordinate rush to get products onto the market. This, of course, can lead to many serious problems.This article discusses Boeing’s outsourcing for parts and software. Although there is no indication the software outsourcing was behind the MAX incidents, the reported 30% outsourcing compared to Airbus’s 10% shows how vulnerable Boeing is to potential 3rd party screw-ups. Time for Boeing senior management to move out of Chicago and back to Seattle so they can better interface with people that actually know what they are doing. The bean counters can stay in Chicago with a single phone line and dial-up internet connection.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
That Boeing is at the stage now where it is developing sophisticated AI products offshore (Loyal Wingman for example) is an indication that there is a shortage of local talent.
Last edited:
Not only Boeing having a bad time. Airbus has been sprung for bribery. It's already been hit with a €3.6 billion fine for bribery. Airbus put potential damage from bribery conviction at €200bn, Airbus fraud investigation ‘remains active’ as penalty details emerge. Ghana has instituted an investigation Ghanaian president orders probe into C295 acquisition. So it's not a small number of incidences.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I disagree that Boeings development of Loyal Wingman offshore is a sign of a shortage of local talent in the US.
I think it's more to do with the fact that if Loyal Wingman is successful it will be able to be marketed, produced and sold by Boeing Australia thereby avoiding various US Government ITAR export restrictions.
Just my opinion of course too.
"Airbus stood accused of failing to prevent bribery in a number of countries following an extensive investigation. The probe covered over 1,750 entities which were engaged by Airbus as business partners, third parties used to increase the airframer’s international reach and assist in winning sales contracts. Of these, 110 were the subject of particular concerns. ...
. . .
She referred to Airbus’s “exemplary” co-operation in the matter, noting its voluntary submission to the UK Serious Fraud Office regarding overseas conduct and highlighting 24 individual areas in which it subsequently provided full assistance to the subsequent investigation – a factor which helped to halve the penalty portion of the UK fine to €398 million, resulting in a total sanction of €991 million.
This co-operation included providing access to over 30 million documents relevant to the probe. Independent investigation did not identify any additional documents not already brought up by Airbus’s own efforts.
“Airbus has, to use a colloquial phrase, truly turned out its pockets and is now a changed company to that which existed when the wrongdoing occurred,” added Sharp."
So . . . no accusation of Airbus itself bribing directly that I see. It stood by while local agents & representatives (some of who look to have been hired as money conduits) bribed to get contracts, either negligently or knowingly allowing them to do so (bad, either way, & the Ghanaian case definitely looks like "sign a contract with this senior person's relative so he can pay bribes), but has since fully 'fessed up, including handing over everything relevant, as far as anyone can discover.
I wonder what that level of disclosure would turn up in other firms. Anyone willing to venture opinions on who's clean & who isn't?
Last edited:
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
If it is an overseas division or subsidiary of a US company, it might still run into ITARS restrictions. It would likely take an attorney familiar with ITARS and/or a defence import/export agent familiar with the same to really know one way or the other.
Technically a subsidiary company such as Boeing Australia is its own identity and not subject to US laws and regulations.
However the US would still have the right to regulate the sales of any US developed components on ITARs restricted list. So unless any product that eventuates from the Loyal Wingman program is completely free of any of these components the US could still impose restrictions on the sales of those components.
At least that is my understanding.
Well it's going to be fully subject to ITARS because it's a joint venture between Boeing Australia, ADF & USN. I posted on it in the USN thread yesterday.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Unless the overseas subsidiary was a completely independent entity (which it would not be, being a subsidiary...) it is fairly easy for me to see some routes where the US gov't could apply pressure to the US-based parent company to achieve desired outcomes from the overseas branch.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
This link may belong on the Space technology thread but it is another example of Boeing’s serious QA problems, especially with regards to software. A serious software bug (related to thruster operation) that could have been a disaster was prevented by another error that prevented the capsule from reaching its proper orbit for meeting the International Space Station.
Boeing's botched Starliner test flirted with 'catastrophic' failure: NASA panel
Boeing's botched Starliner test flirted with 'catastrophic' failure: NASA panel
Airbus has released some details of a Blended Wing Body (BWB) demonstrator at the Singapore Airshow. Airbus Unveils Blended Wing Body Demonstrator | Aviation Week Network. It's quite intriguing and although such a design has been looked at previously and discarded, being put in the to hard basket, it doesn't mean that it is a bad concept. Airbus argue that materials and computing technologies have advanced far enough now to warrant another serious consideration, plus the necessity to reduce aviation related emmissions into the atmosphere make such a consideration necessary. Time will tell, but I do like the BWB both as a possible military and civil platform if it works.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Seems if I remember besides the question on customers experience on not having windows as articles stated, there's also problem of:
1. Changes on Airport facilities to accept this kind of Aircraft. Thus means more cost that will be charged,
2. The questions on how fast the passanger can evacuate in case of emergency, relative to conventional design.
In the end it will be back how much the design can save Airlines on operating cost, compared to conventional design. Despite problems they are facing, Boeing seems got more better understanding on how future market. Look what Airbus got with A380, that being drop by most Airlines before two decades (which's short for an commercial plane type life time) after billions that Airbus spend on developing and produce them.
Boeing seems think this blended wing body designs more suitable for Freighters. Considering Freighters will not create changes on Airport facilties, and no concern on how paying customers problem..perhaps thet got points on that.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Blended wing designs may be an option for military transports in addition to commercial freighters. Agree, evacuation and air terminal changes are obstacles for passenger versions.