User avatar
n797mx
Topic Author
Posts: 360
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:40 pm

Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 4:07 pm

http://fr24.com/UAL94
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/U...4/history/20130623/1400Z/KIAH/KIAH

At the time of this post it has done 4-5 holds over I believe the Millsap VOR while maintaining 41,000ft. Tail number N27903.
Clear skies and strong tail winds.
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 4462
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 4:15 pm

It's now descending.
 
klwright69
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 4:57 pm

This flight is about to land in DEN. Its scheduled arrival is within minutes.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:06 pm

Not sure what is going on, FA shows a diversion to IAH, United.com shows arriving DEN
Clickable links only please!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13841
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:07 pm

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 2):
This flight is about to land in DEN.

Flight tracker shows the landing in IAH not DEN.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3081
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:08 pm

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 3):

??? is it in Denver or Houston?

weird...
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
kl911
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:10 pm

Flightradar24 has it coming back to IAH, and is based on real-time user data, users with transponder receivers. Above the US that is only the case if the symbol is yellow on the screen. When orange, it is based on FAA data.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:16 pm

It is definitely back in IAH, united.com is wrong. I just listened to the liveatc archive and UAL 94 arrived at IAH

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ki...-Twr-App-ZHU-Jun-23-2013-1630Z.mp3

First hear him about 21:40

Didn't hear the approach and landing but after landing, the pilot says We're OK

[Edited 2013-06-23 10:24:59]
Clickable links only please!
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:26 pm

They have now delayed the DEN-NRT flight, it will now operate with the aircraft that just came from NRT.
 
klwright69
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:32 pm

Yes, the website has said contradictory things over the last 15 minutes regarding this flight.
 
User avatar
Tigerguy
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:28 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:32 pm

I was on this flight. Currently standing in line in IAH to be rebooked. About halfway through, they did not know whether the brakes would work when we landed, so we turned back here. Emergency procedures were demonstrated, but the brakes worked and we did not have to brace. Excellent job by the crew and the pax for remaining calm.
Good night, and keep watching the skis. Uh, skies.
 
klwright69
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:40 pm

I hope this plane will be ready to do the expanded international flying in August: IAH-LOS and LAX-NRT. The LHR-IAH 787 flight has been late everyday, flights always delayed by several hours.

What a mess. I hope the issues get sorted out.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:45 pm

Quoting Tigerguy (Reply 10):

OK, thanks for the report.
Clickable links only please!
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting Tigerguy (Reply 10):
I was on this flight. Currently standing in line in IAH to be rebooked. About halfway through, they did not know whether the brakes would work when we landed, so we turned back here. Emergency procedures were demonstrated, but the brakes worked and we did not have to brace. Excellent job by the crew and the pax for remaining calm.

I'm curious. If the question is about how something might/might not work on landing, why the need to divert/turn back?

Is it because 787 maintenance is done in IAH that, if something went wrong, they could repair it easier?
The plural of Airbus is Airbuses. Airbii is not a word, and doesn't even make sense.
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:05 pm

Quoting HOmSaR (Reply 13):
I'm curious. If the question is about how something might/might not work on landing, why the need to divert/turn back?

Is it because 787 maintenance is done in IAH that, if something went wrong, they could repair it easier?

Yes. The 787 maintenance base is in IAH. Along with the Boeing tech reps that scratch their head each time something like this happens. The 787 is filled with mechanical abnormalities. I just find it hard to believe that Boeing put forth such a shoddy product. The airplanes are maintained according to the Boeing standards and requirements. It seems apart from the recent eng problems the big issue is the computer code. It is as buggy as something Microsoft would put out. Horrendously temperamental and it gives false failure warnings at outrageous rates.

Personally I don't think the big issues with this plane will be over for a long time to come . Worries me that UA has staked so much on the 787 going forward. Currently it is a mass of Carbon Fiber crap.
 
User avatar
Tigerguy
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:28 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:17 pm

Quoting HOmSaR (Reply 13):
Is it because 787 maintenance is done in IAH that, if something went wrong, they could repair it easier?

Yes. The captain did mention that IAH was preferred due to it being the base. His exact words about the problem were "we may or may not have brakes". I've since heard that it may have been a computer glitch, but it was just gossip from someone in line and I cannot confirm.
Good night, and keep watching the skis. Uh, skies.
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5005
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:37 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 14):
It seems apart from the recent eng problems the big issue is the computer code.

And despite the engineers' best efforts and intentions, bugs may still happen if the software is patched, and no matter how tight the QA on something, something will still slip through. Anyone remember the Mars lander accident a few years ago?

(Yes, folks, I'm agreeing with McDu here...)

Quoting Tigerguy (Reply 10):
Emergency procedures were demonstrated, but the brakes worked and we did not have to brace

Did they say what the primary issue was?
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm

Quoting Tigerguy (Reply 10):

I was on this flight. Currently standing in line in IAH to be rebooked. About halfway through, they did not know whether the brakes would work when we landed, so we turned back here.

Ok, I know you are all thinking it.. Electric brakes.. battery power..
BV
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:48 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 14):
Yes. The 787 maintenance base is in IAH. Along with the Boeing tech reps that scratch their head each time something like this happens. The 787 is filled with mechanical abnormalities. I just find it hard to believe that Boeing put forth such a shoddy product. The airplanes are maintained according to the Boeing standards and requirements. It seems apart from the recent eng problems the big issue is the computer code. It is as buggy as something Microsoft would put out. Horrendously temperamental and it gives false failure warnings at outrageous rates.

Personally I don't think the big issues with this plane will be over for a long time to come . Worries me that UA has staked so much on the 787 going forward. Currently it is a mass of Carbon Fiber crap.

It's a relatively brand new aircraft with a lot of new design features previously not seen in wide commercial use. I can't see how any of this can being something other than, "unfortunate, but to be expected given the totality of the circumstances."
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
aerobalance
Posts: 4308
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:35 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:57 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 17):
Ok, I know you are all thinking it.. Electric brakes.. battery power..

No, actually, I'm not thinking that. I'm thinking software issue.

The brakes worked

[Edited 2013-06-23 11:58:13]
"Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy..."
 
captainmeeerkat
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:13 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 7:01 pm

Quoting cjg225 (Reply 18):
It's a relatively brand new aircraft with a lot of new design features previously not seen in wide commercial use. I can't see how any of this can being something other than, "unfortunate, but to be expected given the totality of the circumstances."


If it were a new TV or a faulty iPhone, we would understand. It is not - it is a machine that defies the laws of nature and it had better do it well. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to do so very well - be it software, hardware, or something with United who seem to have no end to the trouble with their 787s.
my luggage is better travelled than me!
 
jayunited
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 7:26 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 14):
Yes. The 787 maintenance base is in IAH. Along with the Boeing tech reps that scratch their head each time something like this happens. The 787 is filled with mechanical abnormalities. I just find it hard to believe that Boeing put forth such a shoddy product. The airplanes are maintained according to the Boeing standards and requirements. It seems apart from the recent eng problems the big issue is the computer code. It is as buggy as something Microsoft would put out. Horrendously temperamental and it gives false failure warnings at outrageous rates.

You are absolutely correct. A few weeks ago a 788 from ORD-IAH was canceled due to computer glitches the plane remained in Chicago till the next afternoon waiting for engineers from IAH to show up because even after the pilots and ORD maintenance shut down the aircraft completely several times they could not clear out the error messages. It rare that you hear a sCO pilot getting pissed off but these guys were highly upset because they knew the error message was wrong and that the issue had been fixed but they could not clear the error message out of the computer and since they could not clear the message United had no choice but to cancel the flight. I know sCO pilots love flying the 787 but I have heard a few of them complain about the onboard computer system and if they can not clear out an error message while in flight then they have no choice but to follow procedure and get the plane on the ground as soon as possible because it could be the computer or it could actually be a real issue. You just don't know till you get the plane on the ground.

But Boeing needs to fix the computer system because in an situation like this the computer is saying one thing but the plane landed safely and the braking system is working just fine in fact the same plane 903 is schedule to leave IAH at 15:15 local time going to DEN.
 
AA94
Posts: 650
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 7:40 pm

Serious question here.

Does it seem to anyone else that UA seems to have the lion's share of 787 issues? It seems that every week or so, there's a reported problem with a UA aircraft that results in a diversion or cancellation. On the other hand, I haven't heard about any reported problems with JL/NH/AI/QR 787s since they reentered service.

Is this simply because our media is spinning every technical glitch into a "The 787 is a Flying Death Trap" story, or is UA actually having more problems with their aircraft than other operators? Or is every operator having similar problems, and the media in the US doesn't cover them as doggedly?
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
wjcandee
Posts: 5158
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:01 pm

Quoting AA94 (Reply 22):
Or is every operator having similar problems, and the media in the US doesn't cover them as doggedly?

The Japanese media are watching the 787 like a hawk, and trumpet every little issue. A.net thereafter picks up whatever story arises. So, no, for some reason the Nihon carriers aren't experiencing the same level of dispatch reliability issues, before or after the grounding. But then again, they are used to putting a lot of money and effort into maintaining reliability. Ever been on a Japanese subway? There's a clock onboard, with a "seconds" function. The subway has a schedule. It leaves and arrives on the second, or someone has to apologize. Different culture. Different proportion of resources tasked to reliability.

[Edited 2013-06-23 13:02:34]
 
Flighty
Posts: 7681
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:03 pm

People seem very impatient. It is a numbers game. The 787 has done very few departures in its short life. So many new components. It is still undergoing "user acceptance testing." A period of constant fine tuning and analysis. "Should" it be perfect right now? Who is to say? What other similar program has there been?

Oh well. By definition, we are getting ever closer to the time when 787 ops are reliable. People who expected more/sooner were simply wrong.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3081
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:15 pm

Its not a good sign that a plane that was delayed so many times enters service to have software/sensors/warning BUGS.

I have said it before, this plane will be flying under a microscope for a LONG TIME, Boeing better get their act together ASAP.

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
VC10er
Posts: 2196
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:38 pm

As for United, an airline where critizism is a national sport, they seem to come away totally unscathed by any 787 issues.

I have read many times that for all the customer service issues, that sUA ALWAYS had a great maintience record. Is that true? Is that reputation protecting them from any blame? As much as I fly United, one thing about the United brand I took comfort in was United's safety record. I applaud them to err on the side of safety - I would get on a United 787 today if I could.
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:51 pm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 24):
People seem very impatient. It is a numbers game. The 787 has done very few departures in its short life. So many new components. It is still undergoing "user acceptance testing." A period of constant fine tuning and analysis. "Should" it be perfect right now? Who is to say? What other similar program has there been?

Oh well. By definition, we are getting ever closer to the time when 787 ops are reliable. People who expected more/sooner were simply wrong.

If all this is acceptable shouldn't Boeing be putting this in print? The certified airplane is not user acceptance testing. The airplane was flown for months before it entered service to work out these flaws. However, each time Boeing sends a software update it creates 50 other bug anomalies. Perhaps it is Boeing that wasn't ready for prime time when they finally pushed this heap to market? They had a lot of egg on their face and needed to get the thing in the air. This is the result, a marginally acceptable airplane with software issues and a high component failure rate.

Perhaps this project will be an eye opener at BA to let them fix the -9 and -10 before entry. With a flop in the 748 and the issues of the 787 BA has painted themselves into a corner. An overhaul of the corporation may be required to fix what is poor execution and lack of market analysis.
 
777ord
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:57 pm

Quoting VC10er (Reply 26):
I have read many times that for all the customer service issues, that sUA ALWAYS had a great maintience record. Is that true? Is that reputation protecting them from any blame? As much as I fly United, one thing about the United brand I took comfort in was United's safety record. I applaud them to err on the side of safety - I would get on a United 787 today if I could.

Very well said! its something we here at United take great pride in!

The same can be said about the other US carriers as well.

At the end of the day our job is to get you to your destination safely, and as close to on time as possible. Everything is truly optional. United is making a lot of changes, and will be stronger when this merger ends.  
 
User avatar
Tigerguy
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:28 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:58 pm

Quoting jayunited (Reply 21):
 in fact the same plane 903 is schedule to leave IAH at 15:15 local time going to DEN.

They changed planes. Ship 902 is going to DEN. 903 was being tinkered with outside of Terminal D, last I saw.
Good night, and keep watching the skis. Uh, skies.
 
humanitarian
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:00 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:09 pm

I am able to observe the ANA operation at SJC up close. So far the flights have come and gone without a problem. In fact, lately they have been arriving early and leaving early.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:10 pm

Quoting Tigerguy (Reply 29):
They changed planes. Ship 902 is going to DEN. 903 was being tinkered with outside of Terminal D, last I saw.

Yeah they just canceled 94 and the replacement is flight number is 1757 on ship 902 now scheduled to leave IAH at 1615.
 
eastern747
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:34 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:13 pm

well, one more reason I won't fly UA. It's out of control both in pax svc, inflight svc, food service and MTX. Take the damn plane out of service for 3-4 days....put a mtx guy and boeing rep. on check flights, fly them around for 10 hours and check it out. But then again, I don't care....won't fly UA.
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3633
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Is UA experiencing issues across all the (small) fleet or just one or two aircraft? Every aircraft series has a hangar queen or two. Maybe United just drew the short stick already...

Quoting mcdu (Reply 27):
The airplane was flown for months before it entered service to work out these flaws.

The 787 test fleet flew for months. Most other aircraft sat on the ground without engines, and flew the same amount of hours any new aircraft does before customer acceptance.

With Boeing making so many changes during production and so much re-work, it is quite possible that the aircraft delivered to United do not have an exact match in the test fleet.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has no clothes.
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5005
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:14 pm

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 33):
Is UA experiencing issues across all the (small) fleet or just one or two aircraft? Every aircraft series has a hangar queen or two. Maybe United just drew the short stick already...

I'd say that it's closer to first batch jitters. Same with any other thing manufactured out there.
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
XEspecialist
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 7:04 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:24 pm

Quoting 777ord (Reply 28):
If all this is acceptable shouldn't Boeing be putting this in print? The certified airplane is not user acceptance testing. The airplane was flown for months before it entered service to work out these flaws. However, each time Boeing sends a software update it creates 50 other bug anomalies. Perhaps it is Boeing that wasn't ready for prime time when they finally pushed this heap to market? They had a lot of egg on their face and needed to get the thing in the air. This is the result, a marginally acceptable airplane with software issues and a high component failure rate.

If I didn't know any better I'd say someone is anti-Boeing for nay-sayer's sake. Any time there is a leap in technology in any field, there are going to be squawks to address. The Concorde had issues (one of which haunted its entire career, which tragically ended as a direct result of the flaw). The 747 (which I see you aren't a fan of either), was delayed on its inaugural flight for engine troubles, yet many more frames went on to have very long profitable careers. How many frames were lost when the Fly-by-Wire A320 came out? Haunting crash transcripts with gems like "what mode is it in?" and "what is it doing?" (see the Indian Airlines transcript). Using your logic, Airbus "wasn't ready for prime time when they finally pushed this heap to market? They had a lot of egg on their face and needed to get the thing in the air. This is the result, a marginally acceptable airplane with software issues, [and deaths]"
Ready. Set. Jet. XEspecialist
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:26 pm

I wonder how ANA with by far the most 787s appear to have the fewest problems.

tortugamon
 
mcdu
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:26 pm

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 32):

well, one more reason I won't fly UA. It's out of control both in pax svc, inflight svc, food service and MTX. Take the damn plane out of service for 3-4 days....put a mtx guy and boeing rep. on check flights, fly them around for 10 hours and check it out. But then again, I don't care....won't fly UA.


They did do what you are saying. The airplane breaks at an astronomical rate to other airplanes in the fleet. Take this issue today. You have high load factors and very little ability to rebook the passengers. This summer was supposed to be about operating ontime and reliable. Two things the 787 isn't and it creates ripples in the rest of the schedule.

Boeing should be held liable for damages from this shoddy airplane and its continuous faults.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:40 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 23):
So, no, for some reason the Nihon carriers aren't experiencing the same level of dispatch reliability issues, before or after the grounding
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 36):
I wonder how ANA with by far the most 787s appear to have the fewest problems.

Perhaps the 200+ test flights they conducted after the battery fixes (and that they were roundly criticized for by many) helped them identify / resolve / learn how to handle the 787's glitches, while UA is having to learn on revenue flights?
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 2359
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:52 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 36):
I wonder how ANA with by far the most 787s appear to have the fewest problems.

  

To put things in perspective, ANA has had 1200 flights between June 1st and June 20th with only 8 cancellations or delays in excess of 2 hours -- that's 99.33% reliable -- they must be doing something right. 19 airplanes, a little over 3 flights/day. Looks like flights to San Jose and Frankfurt are running like clockwork.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2768
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:53 pm

Quoting aerobalance (Reply 19):
No, actually, I'm not thinking that. I'm thinking software issue.

The brakes worked

Brake Warning Message, as said above.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 26):
Is that true? Is that reputation protecting them from any blame?

Blame for a warning message that comes on in flight ? Shirley, you can not be Sirius ?

These 787s are looking more and more like the A-320 and it's messages that we see on a daily basis. Too many spurious electrons floating around. Oh for the days of the 727s !
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:16 pm

Quoting captainmeeerkat (Reply 20):
If it were a new TV or a faulty iPhone, we would understand. It is not - it is a machine that defies the laws of nature and it had better do it well.

Time to ease up on the hyperbole boys. It was either a software or sensor issue.

Airplanes to not defy the laws of nature.

Take a deep breath.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:32 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 36):
I wonder how ANA with by far the most 787s appear to have the fewest problems.

tortugamon

Well for starters they have had their 787's much longer than United has had their's which gives them experience working on the aircraft and dealing with the computer systems on this plane. ANA pilots and maintenance staff have clocked many hours on 787 long before the grounding took place. United did not put the plane into service till mid fall of 2012 and a few months later the airplanes were grounded and although maintenance probably did get some hands on experience during the grounding there is only so much that can be replicated on the ground. For all intents and purposes United has only been flying revenue service on 787 for about 5 months although on paper United has had the aircraft in their possession much longer. ANA 787 should be operating better because they have had more time actually flying the aircraft than United which gives them more experience and knowledge on how to deal with the issues that arise.

It is easy to say United should have the 787 together by now but what many of you fail to realize is just how different the 787 aircraft is from any other aircraft that is flying today (except for the A350). It is going to take time for people to learn this aircraft and all the systems that are on this aircraft. Now the DEN-NRT flight that diverted due to the oil filter I'll give you guys that one and say United needs to check the oil filters on these aircraft probably more often than they originally planed. But most of the delays and cancellations that United is see with the 787 fleet is not due to a failure to properly maintain the aircraft it is due to the fact that people need more familiarization with the computer systems that are on board. If you can't clear out an error message the plane is not going anywhere.

So ANA should be better because they have had the planes much much longer than United and they have had more revenue flight than United so by now they should now almost everything there is to know about the 787 and its touchy computer system.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:02 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 42):
So ANA should be better because they have had the planes much much longer than United

I am not sure that ANA had this many problems when they first received this aircraft either though. Regardless, I think you have a valid point. Also, I believe ANA has a spare 787 at all times so if there is an issue there generally is not too long of a delay because it gets swapped out.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 39):
NA has had 1200 flights between June 1st and June 20th with only 8 cancellations or delays in excess of 2 hours -- that's 99.33% reliable

Very good point.

tortugamon
 
BN747DFWHNL
Posts: 83
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 6:32 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:10 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 31):
replacement is flight number is 1757 on ship 902


Those passengers are going to be ready to land in Denver. After circling/returning to IAH as 94, they also had to endure circling NW of Lamar, CO, as 1757, due to major thunderstorms south and east of DEN:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1757

1757 finally descending towards airport now from the SW (6:05 pm MST). Getting my binoculars and heading outside in a few minutes.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 2359
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:31 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 43):
I am not sure that ANA had this many problems when they first received this aircraft either though

If you look at the chart part way down the page they have been above 97% "On time operation results" from the beginning and after about 9 months of service continually above 99% prior to the grounding. So they had some issues to begin with -- maybe not as many as UAL.

http://www.ana.co.jp/wws/japan/e/local/common/share/boeing787info/
 
777ord
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:31 am

Quoting XEspecialist (Reply 35):
Quoting 777ord (Reply 28):
If all this is acceptable shouldn't Boeing be putting this in print? The certified airplane is not user acceptance testing. The airplane was flown for months before it entered service to work out these flaws. However, each time Boeing sends a software update it creates 50 other bug anomalies. Perhaps it is Boeing that wasn't ready for prime time when they finally pushed this heap to market? They had a lot of egg on their face and needed to get the thing in the air. This is the result, a marginally acceptable airplane with software issues and a high component failure rate.

If I didn't know any better I'd say someone is anti-Boeing for nay-sayer's sake. Any time there is a leap in technology in any field, there are going to be squawks to address. The Concorde had issues (one of which haunted its entire career, which tragically ended as a direct result of the flaw). The 747 (which I see you aren't a fan of either), was delayed on its inaugural flight for engine troubles, yet many more frames went on to have very long profitable careers. How many frames were lost when the Fly-by-Wire A320 came out? Haunting crash transcripts with gems like "what mode is it in?" and "what is it doing?" (see the Indian Airlines transcript). Using your logic, Airbus "wasn't ready for prime time when they finally pushed this heap to market? They had a lot of egg on their face and needed to get the thing in the air. This is the result, a marginally acceptable airplane with software issues, [and deaths]"

I never said that... that wasn't what I used in reference...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13841
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:51 am

Quoting captainmeeerkat (Reply 20):
it is a machine that defies the laws of nature

Actually I'm quite sure it obeys the laws of nature. Go for a glider flight some time. I assure you that you will not plummet to the earth like a brick.

Quoting AA94 (Reply 22):
Is this simply because our media is spinning every technical glitch into a "The 787 is a Flying Death Trap" story

Seems this story is just an a.net story, no?

Quoting BN747DFWHNL (Reply 44):
After circling/returning to IAH as 94, they also had to endure circling NW of Lamar, CO, as 1757, due to major thunderstorms south and east of DEN:

Looks like the crew did a good job dodging the thunderstorms.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12392
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:09 am

It is far better that the problems have been determined before they cause a crash with a loss of life or a/c.
This is a new a/c. They are still working out bugs that only come out in real daily use. It is one of the most complex aircraft made to date, with a very new structure, systems and so on. I just hope the problems work out and the 787 becomes the great a/c it was intended to be.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: Another 787 Diversion: UAL94 IAH-DEN

Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:16 am

You cant compare the software on the 787 with something microsoft puts out. If you have a new computer with a new version of windows (7/8), when was the last time you seen a blue screen of death? Probably been a long time... and it was probably a hardware failure, not Windows dying. That is software maturity. The 787 still has that new plane smell.


The 787 software is NEW... millions of lines of codes, it takes time to work bugs out of any software. Never has an airliner been so software controlled, there is a lot of systems and a lot of software. To find some of those bugs, you can stare at the code for years and it doesn't pop out... it will take a fair while for most of these bugs to show up, years most likely. The core software is most likely the same that is in 748 and 777, but so much new hardware has been added. Only way to find those flaws is to send 787s out and watch for things to crop up.

Look at the F-35... massively computer controlled, the software is probably one of its biggest problems, yet one of its biggest advantages. A lot of capacity is just a matter of writing new software... the F-22 is still getting new capacity from software upgrades, but it takes time.