777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:50 am

Link to thread 12 FAA Grounds 787 Part #12 (by 777er Mar 1 2013 in Civil Aviation)

As the majority of the replys in the last thread were off tech/ops nature, please keep this thread for any news/updates on the progress for getting the Dreamliner back flying again. If you wish to discuss the battery issues/fire/APU etc then discuss them in B787 Grounding: Tech/ops Thread Part 2 which can be found here B787 Grounding: Tech/ops Thread Part 2 (by 777ER Mar 9 2013 in Tech Ops)


WARNING: Due to thread 9 going off topic quickly and turning into a 'battle ground', the moderators will be watching this thread frequently and ANY offending/rule breaking posts will be removed. Please respect each others right to have their opinion.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:03 am

One thing that I'm conscious of over the last three threads is that the Boeing PR communication spinning machine seems to have gone into overdrive, with ready to start testing in the morning rumors spreading like wildfire.

When we look through the PR spin, do we have any idea when this aircraft will be back flying passengers. I really fear that we are going to miss a large portion of the IATA summer peak that runs from June 1 to October 28.

[Edited 2013-03-09 01:13:27]
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:30 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
When we look through the PR spin, do we have any idea when this aircraft will be back flying passengers. I really fear that we are going to miss a large portion of the IATA summer peak that runs from June 1 to October 28.

As the grounding gets ever longer, the problems become more than just a simple case of getting the aircraft flying again.

If we take BA as possibly an indicator, I would say summer is written off for carriers who have not yet taken delivery of any Flatliners yet. Their conversion course for April, May and June have all been cancelled with no new dates provisionally assigned yet.

Thomson's use of Jetairfly 763s to help cover their 787 schedule is also until October.

For those reasons, I believe carriers have started resigning themselves to the fact they won't be flying their 787s before the northern winter 2013.

Would be delighted to be proved wrong though.

Rgds
So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:39 am

Looks increasingly likely that further flight tests will start next week:-

"The federal approvals are expected late this week or early next week, even though some battery specialists remain concerned that investigators have not found the precise cause of two incidents in which the jetliner’s new lithium-ion batteries emitted smoke or fire."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/bu...rs-approval.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
777ER
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 9853
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:09 am

As the majority of the replys in the last thread were off tech/ops nature, please keep this thread for any news/updates on the progress for getting the Dreamliner back flying again. If you wish to discuss the battery issues/fire/APU etc then discuss them in B787 Grounding: Tech/ops Thread Part 2 which can be found here B787 Grounding: Tech/ops Thread Part 2 (by 777ER Mar 9 2013 in Tech Ops)
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:55 am

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 2):
If we take BA as possibly an indicator, I would say summer is written off for carriers who have not yet taken delivery of any Flatliners yet. Their conversion course for April, May and June have all been cancelled with no new dates provisionally assigned yet.

I don't think there is any reason to use derogatory terms.
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:21 pm

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 5):
I don't think there is any reason to use derogatory terms.

Funny, I heard far worse at a fleet planning discussion only last week, but each to their own. It was more a reflection of the situation than a derogatory term. If you want to get hung up about it, that's your prerogative.  

Rgds
So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6661
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:57 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
When we look through the PR spin, do we have any idea when this aircraft will be back flying passengers.

Well since it is PR spin no one has any idea, since before the a/c can commence flying pax again test flights verifying the corrections to the battery issue have to be performed (whatever they are), the FAA has to be satisfied that the a/c is now safe, the review of the certification has to be concluded and deficience if any corrected.
Boeing has a "fix" that they have or are recommending to the FAA, they have a pretty good idea of how long it takes to implement through to production frames, but it is all dependent on the regulators who Boeing have lost control off, they can only sit and wait for approval, unfortunately / fortunately, they are still responsible for keeping their shareholders and current customers of the a/c updated on the progress of getting their frames, the grounding has not absolved them of that responsibility, so PR spin is the name of the game.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:04 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 9):
unfortunately / fortunately, they are still responsible for keeping their shareholders and current customers of the a/c updated on the progress of getting their frames,

But are they doing that? The spin does not seem grounded in reality - it is all fluff - they need to be more honest and give real updates - rather than the spin of we will be flying last week.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:30 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 10):
But are they doing that? The spin does not seem grounded in reality - it is all fluff - they need to be more honest and give real updates - rather than the spin of we will be flying last week.

Maybe they just don't have any "real" updates to give until they get ZA005 back into the air and start testing?

The FAA seems to be giving the impression that while they are willing to allow Boeing to fly ZA005 to gather information and test their proposed solution, they intend to be very conservative in the testing and certification of that proposed solution and will not approve it until they are totally convinced it will protect the plane completely against a battery fire or leaking electrolyte. And that they have no intention of lifting the AD grounding the plane until then.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6661
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:39 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 10):
But are they doing that? The spin does not seem grounded in reality - it is all fluff - they need to be more honest and give real updates - rather than the spin of we will be flying last week.

Boeing wants to do test flights, Boeing has shown its proposals to the FAA, folks on this site have bashed them before having the full details, the FAA has not responded as yet, so what exactly is Boeing supposed to say?
Imagine if Boeing came out and said that they are going to redesign the a/c, remove much of the electric components, go back to bleed air, used Nicad batteries and the a/c will commence test flying in 2014, is that reasonable and not PR spin?
If they were to do that it would be better to simply cancel the 8, get rid of all the orders, delay the 9 to incorporate all the changes and then give the 10 a go for offer, is this reasonable or also PR spin?
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:49 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 12):
Boeing wants to do test flights, Boeing has shown its proposals to the FAA, folks on this site have bashed them before having the full details

I frankly have not seen much Boeing bashing. Any attempt to state a position that the grounding is a justified precaution is seen as Boeing-bashing, and that is simply not a mature position to take.

Just as it is not a mature position to take that the grounding is unjustified because "nothing catastrophic happened" in the two battery fire episodes, as if only a catastrophic crash justifies a grounding.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:03 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Maybe they just don't have any "real" updates to give until they get ZA005 back into the air and start testing?

So, why the spin that has plagued this aircraft since the days of home depot fasteners.

Why then is Ray Conner stating he expects approval of 787 fix in 'weeks, not months' , and how he looking forward to a vacation - bless.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:01 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 14):
So, why the spin that has plagued this aircraft since the days of home depot fasteners.

Maybe because it works? The program is entering it's second decade as a basket-case and yet it still has a tremendous order-book and Boeing's stock is at a 52-week high.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:56 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
Maybe because it works?

In the world of bubble gum style news that loses its flavor in seconds, perhaps.

What a sad world we live in where rolling out a plane made with home depot fasteners for an auspicious date is deemed more important than getting it right.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:58 pm

what a bunch of rubbish.. Bash the PR Dept. for doing their job, bash the company for not being beholding to the A.net expurts, bash the FAA/NTSB for the same..

Again it is time to put up the keyboard and wait patiently for officially released news (not some reporters slant). This may take a week or so.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:06 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 17):
Again it is time to put up the keyboard and wait patiently for officially released news (not some reporters slant). This may take a week or so.

That, to be fair is what i am saying. I'm asking for Boeing to state facts. I don't care about the CEO wanting a vacation, or up there on the first flight spin.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:34 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 16):
What a sad world we live in where rolling out a plane made with home depot fasteners for an auspicious date is deemed more important than getting it right.

As much stick as Boeing gets for the rollout, the fact is even if they'd cancelled it, it would not have materially impacted first flight. ZA001 would still have been a completely empty shell whether they did a "test fitting" or not . And while the use of improper fasteners did make the actual assembly more difficult then if they had not, Boeing was still so far behind in that assembly process that they had more than sufficient time to make the repairs while they waited for Alcoa to provide them with the necessary number of proper fasteners.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6661
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:53 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 13):
I frankly have not seen much Boeing bashing

Boeings proposal

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 18):
I'm asking for Boeing to state facts.

Which is all dependent on when the FAA approve their proposal and allows testing, we already know this and are waiting on the regulators, so those are the facts that count.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:04 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
As much stick as Boeing gets for the rollout, the fact is even if they'd cancelled it, it would not have materially impacted first flight. ZA001 would still have been a completely empty shell whether they did a "test fitting" or not . And while the use of improper fasteners did make the actual assembly more difficult then if they had not, Boeing was still so far behind in that assembly process that they had more than sufficient time to make the repairs while they waited for Alcoa to provide them with the necessary number of proper fasteners.

Isn't hindsight a great thing - Boeing never said any of that at the time. The PR hyper spin machine kept-a-turning that week, with no delay announced at that time.

Quoting par13del (Reply 20):
Which is all dependent on when the FAA approve their proposal and allows testing, we already know this and are waiting on the regulators, so those are the facts that count.

So, why are Boeing out spinning like crazy?

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-has-some-figuring-out-to-explain/

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...ported-ready-to-fly-with-fire-box/
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:21 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 20):
Quoting sankaps (Reply 13):
I frankly have not seen much Boeing bashing

Boeings proposal

Not agreeing with Boeing's proposal is not the same as Boeing-bashing, it is having a difference of opinion. And I am certain there are multiple opinions within Boeing too, it is required for a healthy debate and to avoid group-think. It is immature to equate"not agreeing with Boeing's proposal" with "Boeing bashing".
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:44 pm

You say you're waiting for official releases yet quote some blog as an authentic release when in fact it's just another outsider with a big ego's opinion.

There seems to be a belief that Boeing owes you information... it doesn't. We have developed a society that believes everything should be instant public knowledge.. and go so far as to quote opinions as facts to fill the void. As I said before time to set aside the keyboards and wait.. go do something useful..
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:49 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 23):
We have developed a society that believes everything should be instant public knowledge..
I AGREE WITH YOU.


I want Boeing to stop the spin.



Quoting kanban (Reply 23):
yet quote some blog as an authentic release when in fact it's just another outsider with a big ego's opinion.

Where did I state that what I linked to was an 'authentic release'?

It was someone else picking up on the spin machine in Boeing.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:02 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 24):
It was someone else picking up on the spin machine in Boeing.

I'll grant Sandland's first link, but color me confused how unnamed social media and unnamed news media reports about ZA005 preparing to take to the skies with a new containment system is official Boeing spin.  
 
User avatar
lollomz
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:21 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:04 pm

Well, at least we will have a summer full of good old B767s !!!  
[url="http://www.diecastmodelaircraft.com/collection/Lollomz"]Image[/url]
 
LJ
Posts: 4103
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 8:44 pm

Quoting lollomz (Reply 26):
Well, at least we will have a summer full of good old B767s !!!

And HiFlys A340s flying to JFK and BKK.....

Anyway some leasing companies of these 767s (or anything which was going to be replaced) will be gratefull to Boeing that they can make some additional cash for an airplane which will probably be difficult to place in the current market.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:39 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 21):
So, why are Boeing out spinning like crazy?

All large companies have professional 'communications' sections that decide exactly what is said and when. Rolls Royce after QF32 was completely non responsive after it's engine blew up.
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:49 pm

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
I really fear that we are going to miss a large portion of the IATA summer peak that runs from June 1 to October 28.

I think that's pretty much a given at this point. There are so many things that have to be done prior to peak summer travel. You have to test the solution, train staff, modifiy existing frames, re-design schedules potentially. Its a lot of work.
 
art
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:54 pm

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 2):
If we take BA as possibly an indicator, I would say summer is written off for carriers who have not yet taken delivery of any Flatliners yet. Their conversion course for April, May and June have all been cancelled with no new dates provisionally assigned yet.

Not easy to run a business when there is insufficient certainty to schedule procedures necessary to introduce new equipment. I wonder how much this will cost the airlines. I imagine that when the problems leading to the aircraft's grounding are solved and airlines have quantified the cost of rescheduling disruption, the bill will be large.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 16):
What a sad world we live in where rolling out a plane made with home depot fasteners for an auspicious date is deemed more important than getting it right.

As much stick as Boeing gets for the rollout, the fact is even if they'd cancelled it, it would not have materially impacted first flight. ZA001 would still have been a completely empty shell whether they did a "test fitting" or not . And while the use of improper fasteners did make the actual assembly more difficult then if they had not, Boeing was still so far behind in that assembly process that they had more than sufficient time to make the repairs while they waited for Alcoa to provide them with the necessary number of proper fasteners.

Installing fasteners knowing that they will have to be removed then replaced = 3 processes instead of 1. This was done in aid of what? To create the illusion that the project was more advanced than was the case (ie than was true). If the PR gurus in all their wisdom thought this was a great idea, so be it. In fact this pantomime rollout attempt to conceal project delay delayed it somewhat more.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7474
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:17 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
Looks increasingly likely that further flight tests will start next week:-

Last week it was already "next week".
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
F9Animal
Posts: 3642
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:23 pm

I am hearing 6 months to a year before this bird gets close to flying again. I think it is time for some big wigs in Chicago to start packing up their offices, and make way for an executive team that can bring a fresh breath of air to this company. Starting with McNerney.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
Wisdom
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 5:43 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:28 pm

If the discussion is guided in the direction of the financials, I'll chip in another round.
(by the way, interesting to know that the same APU logic is on the 777, very weird).

The dream lives on.... but when is the B787 going to become reality?
At this rate, the A350XWB will be hauling passengers before the B787.

Airlines are currently burning a lot of the money that this aircraft was supposed to save them.
Each day that a B767 is flying instead of a B787, it is making airlines lose money (although I'm of the opinion that this is less true than the Boeing marketing wants us to believe).

At what point will airlines be fed up? Is the B787 worth all the trouble the airlines have to go through?

From an airline's stand point, an aircraft fleet grounded after delivery is a true nightmare:
-They have to pay monthly leasing costs for the delivered B787's, regardless of the grounding.
-A lot of the maintenance intervals keep running, regardless of the storage.
-Parking fees, insurance, crew salaries, crew training costs, engineering resources, yearly reg fees, keep stacking up while there are no revenues to compensate for them.
-They have to ACMI or dry lease short term lift and extend it every so many months at a huge cost, making profitable operations impossible on such routes where they're deployed.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19442
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:41 pm

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 33):
Each day that a B767 is flying instead of a B787, it is making airlines lose money (although I'm of the opinion that this is less true than the Boeing marketing wants us to believe).

I'm pretty sure you can fly the 767 profitable. The airlines are currently losing more money with the 787 because they have to pay the lease rates, and the birds - being on the ground - are not generating any revenue.

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 31):
Is the B787 worth all the trouble the airlines have to go through?

That's the risk of being an early adopter and I'm pretty sure airlines know this.

[Edited 2013-03-09 15:57:43]
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sat Mar 09, 2013 11:54 pm

Quoting Wisdom (Reply 31):
Each day that a B767 is flying instead of a B787, it is making airlines lose money...

Don't forget those airlines like QR, AI and the Chinese carriers losing money flying the A330 instead of their 787s.   

I'd like to think airlines are smart enough that if they have a route that consistently lost money for years with a 767, 777, A330 or A340, they'd have suspended / up-gauaged / down-gauged it rather then keep racking up losses while they waited even more years for 787s or A350s.

[Edited 2013-03-09 16:05:47]
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:08 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 33):
Don't forget those airlines like QR, AI and the Chinese carriers losing money flying the A330 instead of their 787s.

I think a differentiation has to be made between those airlines purchasing the Dreamliner as an addition to their current fleet, as route expansion can more affordably put on hold, and those, like TOM and LOT for example, whose Dreamliners were replacing ageing B767s coming to the end of lease arrangements or their legislated life.

In both cases, the Dreamliner is causing significant pain.

Rgds
So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19593
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:15 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 32):
I'm pretty sure you can fly the 767 profitable. The airlines are currently losing more money with the 787 because they have to pay the lease rates, and the birds - being on the ground - are not generating any revenue.

Are the airlines paying the leases at this point? With a grounding like this, as an airline CEO, I would make it clear to Boeing that they can either start paying the lease while the fleet is grounded or they can settle it in court AND cheese off their customers at the same time.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3642
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:31 am

All a/c delivered were sold not leased.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:33 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 35):
Are the airlines paying the leases at this point?

I would imagine so, especially if it's a lease extension.



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 35):
With a grounding like this, as an airline CEO, I would make it clear to Boeing that they can either start paying the lease while the fleet is grounded or they can settle it in court AND cheese off their customers at the same time.

It stands to reason Boeing is working to accommodate affected customers. Plus, an airliner is not a car so it's not like airlines can head over to TLS and pick up a new or used A330 off the lot. Not to mention a lawsuit costs times and money in and of itself.
 
art
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:38 am

Is this the first time the certificate of airworthiness has been withdrawn for a Boeing jet aircraft (rather than a directive to undertake certain actions before flight is permitted again)?

When a type's certificate of airworthiness is withdrawn, is the manufacturer generally held liable for all losses stemming from the grounding?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:40 am

Quoting art (Reply 38):
Is this the first time the certificate of airworthiness has been withdrawn for a Boeing jet aircraft (rather than a directive to undertake certain actions before flight is permitted again)?

To my knowledge, the 787's Type Certificate has not been withdrawn, at least by the FAA (as was done with the DC-10 in 1979). The grounding is being administered via Emergency Airworthiness Directives.



Quoting art (Reply 38):
When a type's certificate of airworthiness is withdrawn, is the manufacturer generally held liable for all losses stemming from the grounding?

I would guess so, though it will probably be the insurance companies that pay (who will recover the costs by raising everyone's rates).

[Edited 2013-03-09 18:43:48]
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19593
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:51 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
It stands to reason Boeing is working to accommodate affected customers. Plus, an airliner is not a car so it's not like airlines can head over to TLS and pick up a new or used A330 off the lot. Not to mention a lawsuit costs times and money in and of itself.

It does, which is why it benefits Boeing to settle the matter without a lawsuit.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
It stands to reason Boeing is working to accommodate affected customers. Plus, an airliner is not a car so it's not like airlines can head over to TLS and pick up a new or used A330 off the lot.

No, but when it comes time for airlines to place their next order with Boeing, the more Boeing has cheesed off their customers, the more stringent the offers from the airlines will be. They will insist on very punitive measures in their order contracts for delays and groundings and if Boeing won't play, they won't get orders.

Quoting kanban (Reply 36):
All a/c delivered were sold not leased.

Were they fully owned by the airlines? In most cases, the airline may or may not directly purchase the aircraft, but if they do they typically immediately sell it to a leasing company and lease it back.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
phxa340
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:55 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 40):
They will insist on very punitive measures in their order contracts for delays and groundings and if Boeing won't play, they won't get orders.

And go where ? There is only one other player in town and their track record, while better than Boeing, isn't too rosy when it comes to new recent models. As an airline you can't be too pissed off at both manufactures or you will run out of options quickly.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:03 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 40):
No, but when it comes time for airlines to place their next order with Boeing, the more Boeing has cheesed off their customers, the more stringent the offers from the airlines will be. They will insist on very punitive measures in their order contracts for delays and groundings and if Boeing won't play, they won't get orders.

And what, they're going to go to Airbus and say "yeah, we know you were late on the A380 and the A350, but hey, we're honked off at Boeing so if you run late with our order, well, we won't ask for anything more and will quietly just wait our turn. Oh, and since we won't order Boeing, whatever you're willing to knock off list price is fine by us - assuming you want to knock anything off list price, of course."

Uh-huh...  Wink
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 40):
Were they fully owned by the airlines? In most cases, the airline may or may not directly purchase the aircraft, but if they do they typically immediately sell it to a leasing company and lease it back.

To my knowledge all of the 787s are currently directly owned. AI does have at least two planes with bridge financing provided by a finance company, but they do not own the planes. AI is also seeking to sell and lease-back their fleet, however to date they have not signed such a deal.

[Edited 2013-03-09 19:16:28]
 
thorntot
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:31 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:11 am

While I could be mistaken, I swear I saw one of the 787s in Boeing house-colors departing/landing at IAD this afternoon just after 1400L.

Appeared to be the livery worn by N787ZA or perhaps it was wearing the LOT tail with forward fuselage titles removed and an all white scheme forward of the wings.

For those who know the area, I was at Reston Town Center and it flew directly overhead, low and slow, headed North-northeast.

I could find nothing on flightaware or flightradar24. Is this possible? Are they making test flights?
Work Hard. Fly Right. Fly United.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:11 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 40):
Were they fully owned by the airlines? In most cases, the airline may or may not directly purchase the aircraft, but if they do they typically immediately sell it to a leasing company and lease it back.

And these payments to a third party you wouldn't authorize if you were an airline which purchased a now-grounded 787? Seems illogical.
International Homo of Mystery
 
servantleader
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:17 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:41 am

[quote=F9animal,reply=30]
I am hearing 6 months to a year before this bird gets close to flying again. I think it is time for some big wigs in Chicago to start packing up their offices, and make way for an executive team that can bring a fresh breath of air to this company. Starting with McNerney.

Strangely enough very few people understand / purposely choose to ignore the fact that the bulk of the 787 problems are self induced by an overmatched CEO and/or dysfunctional corporate governance system.
 
cornutt
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:57 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:53 am

Some of the stuff I'm seeing written about this is getting really, really stupid.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 11):
I frankly have not seen much Boeing bashing. Any attempt to state a position that the grounding is a justified precaution is seen as Boeing-bashing, and that is simply not a mature position to take.

You must not have read some of the previous threads. I've said before and I will say again that I understand why the FAA did what it did, although this action has raised the bar in terms of airworthiness standards. However, some of the stuff I've read recently about it has been really, really ignorant, and some of the commenters (including one who has been frequent on these threads) are people that I suspect are working for short-sellers, using social media to try to drive down the stock price. I read a blogger, whom I won't dignify with a link, who wrote this yesterday: "The 787 will not fly again for many years, if ever." Nothing whatsoever to back that statement, but if you can get institutional stockholders to start panic-selling, you can make a killing.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1669
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:42 am

Quoting art (Reply 38):
Is this the first time the certificate of airworthiness has been withdrawn for a Boeing jet aircraft (rather than a directive to undertake certain actions before flight is permitted again)?

AFAIK the 787 type certificate has not been withdrawn, their was discussion in articles and thread 12 of whether that would have been the correct course of action for the FAA to take but as of now it has not been withdrawn
BV
 
maxter
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 2:23 am

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:11 am

Quoting cornutt (Reply 46):
However, some of the stuff I've read recently about it has been really, really ignorant, and some of the commenters (including one who has been frequent on these threads) are people that I suspect are working for short-sellers, using social media to try to drive down the stock price.

...and that would have to be one of the most extreme case of tinfoilism that I have read on these 13 parts of this way too long thread if you don't mind me saying... unbelievable.

[Edited 2013-03-09 23:12:17]
maxter
 
BestWestern
Posts: 6998
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: FAA Grounds B787: Part 13

Sun Mar 10, 2013 7:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Boeing's stock is at a 52-week high.

Its actually a three year high.

Quoting cornutt (Reply 46):
people that I suspect are working for short-sellers, using social media to try to drive down the stock price.

Amazing the power these guy's don't have.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: agrflyer, Baidu [Spider], BreninTW, cesarv777, CONTACREW, D328, daninovandri, Google [Bot], KTPAFlyer, MGA86, tcaeyx, xjet, yendig, Yflyer, Ytraveller and 249 guests