I heard a rumor today that the JAL 787 that had the fire at Boston was declared a hull loss. I can't find anything on it on the internet. Has anyone else heard anything about that?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
KBOS 787 declared a hull loss?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by snydersnapshots View PostI heard a rumor today that the JAL 787 that had the fire at Boston was declared a hull loss. I can't find anything on it on the internet. Has anyone else heard anything about that?Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
-
If true, I'd think that a real 'wait a moment' issue for buyers. What about ground collissions and other relatively minor but not-that-uncommon sort of incidents during a fleet's service life? Unless there's something substantially more at play here than what's been reported thus far, I would be surprised that the write-off threshold would be so low.
Arrow
Comment
-
Originally posted by Arrow View PostIf true, I'd think that a real 'wait a moment' issue for buyers. What about ground collissions and other relatively minor but not-that-uncommon sort of incidents during a fleet's service life? Unless there's something substantially more at play here than what's been reported thus far, I would be surprised that the write-off threshold would be so low.
Arrow
Comment
-
At worst, they could remove the damaged sections and attach new ones. The 787 is assembled in sections, so replacing the tail section would be doable and I'm sure it's still under warranty.
Boeing once had to replace the entire nose section of a 707 which was blown up, in Beirut IIRC.
Comment
-
Lets think about this for a second...
The military have been using Carbon fibre and various CFRP and honeycomb materials in their aircraft for years. I would find it hard to believe given that military aircraft go places where being shot at is a real probability that it is impossible to economically repair these materials.
Boeing has been in business long enough to know aircraft are subject to minor damage from time to time and that the structure needs to be repairable.
If this is a write off then my guess is that there was one hell of a lot more involved than just damage to the airframe.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SYDCBRWOD View PostThe military have been using Carbon fibre and various CFRP and honeycomb materials in their aircraft for years. I would find it hard to believe given that military aircraft go places where being shot at is a real probability that it is impossible to economically repair these materials.
Boeing has been in business long enough to know aircraft are subject to minor damage from time to time and that the structure needs to be repairable.
If this is a write off then my guess is that there was one hell of a lot more involved than just damage to the airframe.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tsv View PostConsidering the frames QF has managed to repair in recent times (various incidents in BKK, MNL, SIN) then I'd have to say it's not credible that this could be a hull loss.
Could take a bloody long time to fix though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy C View Post
I have been involved with large aerospace structures, similar to those shown for the 787, and the subsequent barrel sections were assembled using bonding and mechanical fasteners.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Highkeas View PostThe link is a good desciption of the manufacturing technique but it misses out an important step. After layup the assembly is bagged and evacuated. After insertion into the autoclave it is subject to high pressure thus minimizing voids in the layup, and then it is heated under pressure to bond all the carbon layers together.
I have been involved with large aerospace structures, similar to those shown for the 787, and the subsequent barrel sections were assembled using bonding and mechanical fasteners.
i was trying to explain the difficulties in repair, the B787 (and the A350) are not the typical sheet alloy and rivet of the past. which is relatively easy to repair,
besides if it has damaged the wing box. then thats really a problem.
Comment
-
Probaly only Boeing knows the extent of damage to the KBOS 787 and knows if it can be returned toflight (I bet Boeing has a team working this issue).
Here is what Boeing says about 787 repairs:
In addition to using a robust structural design in damage-prone areas, such as passenger and cargo doors, the 787 has been designed from the start with the capability to be repaired in exactly the same manner that airlines would repair an airplane today — with bolted repairs. The ability to perform bolted repairs in composite structure is service-proven on the 777 and offers comparable repair times and skills as employed on metallic airplanes. (By design, bolted repairs in composite structure can be permanent and damage tolerant, just as they can be on a metal structure.)
Source: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer...icle_04_2.html
Comment
Comment