Max Q wrote:
Interesting, this will be the first widebody freighter that will be totally "reversed engineered" , without any major input of the OEM (Boeing).
For exact measurements and the produce a digital "point zero" data base, the lead aircraft has been send to SBD.
The OEM (Boeing) will not be amused.
On top of that, the operating weights will be increased beyond the operating weights of the 777-300ER and even the 777F.
What will happen with the OEM support, if an original (not modified during the P-F conversion) part fails, operating at these increased weights ?
Question : Or, is there perhaps a secret deal between Boeing, GE and IAI about these future warranty/support issues ?
That’s very unusual and appears unprecedented.
I don’t understand how an aftermarket MRO can increase operating weights that are limitations in Boeing’s design without invalidating the airworthiness certificate
Weights allowed are based on stresses. If you can show a mitigation of the stress (more material, making an aircraft more flexible, active control to reduce forces into control systems) it can be done. Every freight conversion must show that forces are not increased into the airframe. For example, the window belt can be replaced which changes the dynamics.
Boeing will naturally say any failure is because of increased stresses due to the conversion.
The FAA has tables for various materials on their allowed life (hours, cycles) versus stress (KSI or MPa, pick your units, I've seen tables for both). As long as the reinforcement keeps stress below the threshold, you can keep increasing. There will need to be flight testing to allow for example landing. But there is a reason the system allows modifications.
This is somewhat new. There have been modifications to aircraft Boeing refused to support, including for Bedek where IAI (was Bedek) had to go on their own. So ironically, they were trained in the process. Every since Boeing launched their own 767 conversion, they haven't played nice with others (withheld more than basic support and all support at a cost+ basis). The same with the 737 conversions. Boeing wants freight airlines to work with them. But notice conversions thrive?
I really like this conversion link. Now it is missing the 777 offering and some other similar conversions (e.g., length variations of airframes), otherwise, it is a good summary of who does what in the pax to freight market:https://cargofacts.com/allposts/equipme ... y-arrived/
The above makes me wonder if we'll see a 787 SF or an A319SF one day... But I digress.
I'm personally excited about IAI's plan. They seem to have a plan.
The question is when their conversion will be ready. There are obstacles to overcome.
WIth the ability to carry 9 more tons than the 744F (I assume it wasn't mentioning 744SF) and 18t to 20t more than the current 777F, this isn't a package freighter plane. This is a plane for serious freight:https://www.aviationreportglobal.com/2020/06/09/4730/
Now, obviously the range at maximum payload will be low. Probably just TATL capable. But for flights ME3 hub to the EU, India, or quite a decent distance, perfect.
I've had dinners with senior structural engineers involved with the 777 (years ago). They are happy to know the plane's structural capability is being used.
Winter is coming.