Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:40 pm

Quoting garynor (Reply 144):
That is actually also in the article I quoted

Thank you. Silver lining on a dark problem.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:23 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 143):
I just received a tweet from a not-always-reliable source saying that Kjos also said that the 787 is "better on performance than anticipated, the fuel burn is lower."

An aircraft than doesn't fly burns exactly 0 Fuel.

    

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:27 pm

What he means is, the aircraft exceeds the performance as promised in the contract.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:38 pm

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 151):

You got me there!   The guy is pot committed and needs to instill confidence from his shareholders so he needs to defray some negative messages with positive ones. Enough to motivate vendors while keeping shareholders' image of him and his decisions as high as possible. Still, its at least some good information.

tortugamon
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:01 am

Quoting kanban (Reply 148):
From what I heard

Kanban, several posters have assumed that when DY signed up for the Gold Care, that they provided Boeing with their planned schedule, and Boeing signed off on that schedule. Is it possible for you to find out whether there's any truth in this?

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 149):
Usually this skew is caused by one or more of three reasons:

1) Customer incompetence
2) Customer is pushing the product harder than others
3) Random chance

In this case there's no evidence of 1) or 2),

With 18 hours per day schedules, I'd say that there's evidence of 2).

According to the Wikipedia EK fleet page, EK has one of the highest fleet utilization numbers with 13.7 hours per day. That's a quote from an EK report which is no longer available on the net.

Now, if EK -- which has a large fleet, a single hub, a lot of long-haul-experience, and virtually no weather delays at their hub -- can "only" get 13.7 hours from their fleet, I don't see how DY --- which has a tiny fleet, two hubs (soon three), no long-haul experience, and hubs with potential weather problems during six months of the year -- should get 18 hours from their planes.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5902
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:11 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 154):
With 18 hours per day schedules, I'd say that there's evidence of 2).

According to the Wikipedia EK fleet page, EK has one of the highest fleet utilization numbers with 13.7 hours per day. That's a quote from an EK report which is no longer available on the net.

Now, if EK -- which has a large fleet, a single hub, a lot of long-haul-experience, and virtually no weather delays at their hub -- can "only" get 13.7 hours from their fleet, I don't see how DY --- which has a tiny fleet, two hubs (soon three), no long-haul experience, and hubs with potential weather problems during six months of the year -- should get 18 hours from their planes.

The 18 hours operation was approved and given an acceptance by Boeing.
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 923
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:24 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 154):
With 18 hours per day schedules, I'd say that there's evidence of 2).


Its a machine, not a person. It does not need to sleep, as sit in a parking stand for certain hours per day.
As long as maintenance is perfectly performed, it can literarily run the rest of the time.
Its a question of scheduling and how efficient you can operate the network.
 
User avatar
Navigator
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 2:31 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:42 am

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 149):
Anyone who has worked supporting technical products will tell you that there always seem to be some customers who encounter disproportionately large numbers of problems. Usually this skew is caused by one or more of three reasons:

1) Customer incompetence
2) Customer is pushing the product harder than others
3) Random chance

Sure enough but technical line maintenance is outsourced to Boeing!! And I dont think you can call one of europes largest airlines incompetent. And they dont push the product hard, they just expect more than 50 % dispatch reliability.
747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:32 am

Something odd is happening - lots of press stories about Norwegian grounding its 787s, but according to Boeing's 787 Flight Tracker one of them is halfway across the Atlantic on its way from New York to Oslo?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:06 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 158):
lots of press stories about Norwegian grounding its 787s

They've grounded one 787, EI-LNB, which had multiple problems. The other, LNA, is still flying.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:13 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 154):
With 18 hours per day schedules

But is that so much for a LH plane in the end? AY uses their A340s and A330s a lot as well - they fly the plane HEL-Asia turn it around and fly it back - just to make the repeat the same thing again. Almost all of the Asian flights depart from HEL around 17:00 and return around 14:00. When they will get their A350s, it'll be interesting to see how they'll hold up in this schedule...
 
bx737
Posts: 630
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:47 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:22 am

Eighteen hours is only one long haul round trip, that is not excessive scheduling.The 787 is allegedly a long haul aircraft so a OSL-JFK should not tax the aircraft. If an airline spends $200million on an aircraft for long haul routes it should be able to do long haul trips. From what is being said I believe Norweigan have one day down time per aircraft per week. To me that doesn't sound excessive. My own airline schedules its long haul aircraft to operate 7 days a week.

The 787 is a fine aircraft that has been beset by bad tech snags. This needs to be looked at by Boeing and I am sure they are doing so. I do think that having spare parts in LHR for an airline based in OSL was not the cleverest idea and compounded problems. How frequent were flights to OSL to get the parts to Norweigan? This could only increase delays being experienced.
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:26 am

NAV20, you need to check my reply above (# 137). EI-LNA is right now flying DY7002 and expected to land 10 minutes before time at OSL. November Alpha will then have had two flights to OSL within the last 24 hours with landings on time.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:07 am

Thanks for the clarifications, RedChili, LN-KGL.  
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:18 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 154):
With 18 hours per day schedules, I'd say that there's evidence of 2).

According to the Wikipedia EK fleet page, EK has one of the highest fleet utilization numbers with 13.7 hours per day. That's a quote from an EK report which is no longer available on the net.

Now, if EK -- which has a large fleet, a single hub, a lot of long-haul-experience, and virtually no weather delays at their hub -- can "only" get 13.7 hours from their fleet, I don't see how DY --- which has a tiny fleet, two hubs (soon three), no long-haul experience, and hubs with potential weather problems during six months of the year -- should get 18 hours from their planes.

It seems you can not distinguish between average use and use on the day there are used.

ARN-BKK is about 10 hours, that makes it 20 hours 3 days in the week.
ARN-JFK is about 8 hours, that makes it 16 hours 3 days a week.
1 day rest. That gives 15,4 hours average utilization per day..

If the B 787 can not do that than it is a lemon and not fit for long haul use.
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:43 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 164):
It seems you can not distinguish between average use and use on the day there are used.

ARN-BKK is about 10 hours, that makes it 20 hours 3 days in the week.
ARN-JFK is about 8 hours, that makes it 16 hours 3 days a week.
1 day rest. That gives 15,4 hours average utilization per day..

You're working with the wrong numbers. Here are the correct numbers, taken from Norwegian.se:

ARN-BKK 10:10
BKK-ARN 11:15
ARN-JFK 8:25
JFK-ARN 7:45

That's a total of 112.74 hours per week. That's an average of 16.1 hours per day, which would not be so bad if the plane would fly the same number of hours every single day. But since they're flying only six days a week, it means that utilization on those days is 18.79 hours, or 18 hours and 47 minutes.

When you've got such a small fleet, you can't use the average number for the whole week. You have to look at what the actual situation is from day to day. The ARN plane has a day off from Sunday afternoon to Monday afternoon. That's no consolation if the plane is 5 hours delayed on Tuesday's BKK-ARN flight, because the plane still has 10 flights to make before you get to that 24 hour rest period. And with turn-around times that average two hours, you won't be able to catch up with that delay until Sunday. That tight schedule means that a single significant delay early in the week means that the plane will probably not be able to catch up at all until the week is finished on Sunday, even if they have no additional problems later in the week.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:04 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 165):
You're working with the wrong numbers. Here are the correct numbers, taken from Norwegian.se:

ARN-BKK 10:10
BKK-ARN 11:15
ARN-JFK 8:25
JFK-ARN 7:45

You want to tell me that this are real numbers? Or are this numbers block time numbers, taking in account also the slower flying A 340 and taking in account the worst condition you encounter regarding head wind and so on.
You can run those numbers yourself through a planing tool.
If this are real average numbers on the flights, Norwegian is flying very slow.

Regarding the small number of air frames, Norwegian has two spanking new B 787. The big service stops coming a little bit later in the lifetime of a frame have jet to occur and several weeks of downtime cuts average daily use considerable.
So two new frames should show a far better utilization than a bigger mature fleet having come into the major service stops.
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:08 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 165):
That's an average of 16.1 hours per day, which would not be so bad if the plane would fly the same number of hours every single day. But since they're flying only six days a week, it means that utilization on those days is 18.79 hours, or 18 hours and 47 minutes.

I think both are valid metrics, to be honest - average utilisation taking rest days into account, as well as average utilisation on days with flights.
If you just focus on the amount of time in the air on days with flights, you could even have the plane do only two flights a week on a single day and still go "Whoah - you're overutilising the plane - it's doing 18:45 a day!", which isn't the full picture, as in that scenario it's only doing 18:45 a week, as well.

Overall, I don't don't think it's unreasonable to expect to be able to get ~16hrs/day as a weekly average out of a long haul plane. That's still a net 56 hours of rest a week - more than two days.

In any case, the curious thing about all this debate about Norwegian's 787's utilisation is that Boeing has never suggested that Norwegian are over-utilising their planes. DY have been flying the same schedule with A340s for a while, and didn't run into the same level of issues, despite only having two A340s as well. As has been pointed out, A340 operations weren't 100% smooth, either, but they were at least less prone to delays than 787 operations, and Norwegian had no hesitation in replacing the grounded 787 with an A340 again.

DY have been working very closely with Boeing in introducing the planes, and it does not seem like Boeing ever told them "look, your schedule is too aggressive, getting 16 or 19 hours out of each plane on a daily average)". If they had, they wouldn't be as apologetic as they are now.
42
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:16 am

Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 160):
When they will get their A350s, it'll be interesting to see how they'll hold up in this schedule...

Most propably there will be some type specific and operator specific problems that AY will prepare themselves for. Just as they experienced with E-jets (they were very unreliable in winter ops in the beginning).

AY has stated that it gladly gave away the "first operator" -title of the A350 in order to receive more reliable and established type. However, I assume that once the type arrives, A330/A340 frames will not be phased out until A350 has reached a reliable operational level. This assumption I base on how AY has done prior transitions from old to new in a/c fleet.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 157):
Sure enough but technical line maintenance is outsourced to Boeing!!

After long dissertations on the nature of the contract, I guess I need to repeat Gold Care as a management tool. They do no work on the planes. Norwegian selected the contractor and Being provides tasks to the contractor and records the results. Boeing provided Norwegian with a recommended spares list and deployment.. What Norwegian bought for spares and how they deploy it is a separate issue.. Boeing merely manages it for the airline.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:17 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 169):
After long dissertations on the nature of the contract, I guess I need to repeat Gold Care as a management tool. They do no work on the planes. Norwegian selected the contractor and Being provides tasks to the contractor and records the results. Boeing provided Norwegian with a recommended spares list and deployment.. What Norwegian bought for spares and how they deploy it is a separate issue.. Boeing merely manages it for the airline.

I thing you are tap dancing around the issue. It may be that the only thing Boeing is doing is managing the service for DY. But the question is IMO what Boeing is selling DY. And that is to my information the all singing and dancing service pack. What is than subcontracted or outsourced is a second question.
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5902
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:27 pm

Boeing is well aware of Norwegian's business model and their needs. The manufacturar has no good excuse for recomending and selling a product that is not providing the resources needed for the task.
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:45 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 157):
And I dont think you can call one of europes largest airlines incompetent.

Size has no correlation to competence.
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:04 pm

Quoting okAY (Reply 172):
Size has no correlation to competence.

Well it's certainly a factor. You don't become large without a certain degree of competence. That's not the same as infallibility.

Quoting RedChili (Reply 154):
With 18 hours per day schedules, I'd say that there's evidence of 2).

As others have said though, what gains are made by having the planes on the ground longer? Are there checks or maintenance that Norwegian are not doing to maintain those schedules? If that's not the case, then whether the plane sits idle for 4 hours or 8 hours doesn't make a difference, does it?

I don't think an 18 hour schedule in and of itself is sufficient evidence that they are driving the product harder than others.
Four Granavox Turbines!
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:09 pm

Quoting bx737 (Reply 161):
If an airline spends $200million on an aircraft for long haul routes it should be able to do long haul trips.

DY did not buy these aircraft. They are leased from ILFC. ILFC bought them in 2005 when the list price was ~$120 Million before discounts. These early customers got significant discounts as compensation for early aircraft that may not have all of the stated performance characteristics of mature aircraft. For those that will pay $200 million (most likely none) they should expect a more immediately reliable aircraft. This is true for all aircraft programs.

That being said, these are LN100+ aircraft so they should be more free of problems than super early builds and regardless Boeing needs to be committed to making sure that all aircraft are reliable and not the late model ones. These problems will work themselves out and fixes will be made but early customers should have more patience or precautions built in than they would with a mature A330/A340/B777 etc.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:30 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 170):
I thing you are tap dancing around the issue. It may be that the only thing Boeing is doing is managing the service for DY. But the question is IMO what Boeing is selling DY. And that is to my information the all singing and dancing service pack. What is than subcontracted or outsourced is a second question.

The detail you seek is contractual and confidential.. I can do my best to explain the processes, but if you want the contract detail go talk to the airline corporate management..
 
blrsea
Posts: 1950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:22 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:52 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 174):
These problems will work themselves out and fixes will be made but early customers should have more patience or precautions built in than they would with a mature A330/A340/B777 etc.

I think the question many people are asking is, is a customer buying LN 100+ and two years after EIS of the type considered an "early customer"?

Regardless of who is maintaining the aircraft, so many issues cropping up does indicate that Boeing goofed up in QA oversight.
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:59 pm

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 173):
Well it's certainly a factor. You don't become large without a certain degree of competence. That's not the same as infallibility.

It might be a factor, but no "=" should be put in between. The bigger you get, the bigger the risks and the better understanding of your business you need to have. Look what happened to Nokia. It tripped over due to its size, thinking it is unbeatable. I can only repeat that though Boeing is to blame in regards to all the problems the a/c is experiencing, DY, as an airline did not do enough risk analysis but rushed into LH business head first, trying to have it all in one go. Now they pay the price. Now the milk is spilled and they are left with no plan B other than ad-hocing expensive planes. I hope some Business Analysts have cleared their desks at DY. Boeing is doing their best with this ill-fated type, but DY should not be surprised if they are not on top of the list with two frames. And no, I don't think the fact that they have another Boeing type in the fleet with greater numbers makes any difference.

No company, big or small is infallible, I guess anything that has something to do with humans isn't. And companies are run by humans.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:08 pm

Quoting blrsea (Reply 176):
Regardless of who is maintaining the aircraft, so many issues cropping up does indicate that Boeing goofed up in QA oversight.

Historically speaking there have been worse introductions of new models.. What is different is the instant media and all the "experts"..
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 7:38 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 178):
Historically speaking there have been worse introductions of new models.. What is different is the instant media and all the "experts"..

I agree, that media exposure and instant communications pose a PR problem from small glitches that in bygone days would not even register.

We now have photos of accidents IN THE CABIN, every angle of crashes and such.

Nevertheless I think Boeing PR n this have been poor, and specially after the grounding they should have doubled their efforts to ensure as smooth service as possible. DY was very patient ad finally gave up, and involved the media ,also after paying the best service Boeing offers.

I hope the 787 becomes the promise in service and costs that was sold years ago, but I can't help but think that some aircraft are lemons and will be hangar queens for a long time, if they can't find the QC glitches that may have found during the build-grounding-manefacturing process.

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:13 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 174):
DY did not buy these aircraft. They are leased from ILFC. ILFC bought them in 2005 when the list price was ~$120 Million before discounts

Fail to see how the customer decide to finance is relevant.

Discount for dealing with early problems certainly is valid but it doesn't mean any amount of problems is acceptable. What is acceptable is of course in the contract. I suspect the amount we have seen with DY is higher but...
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:28 pm

It doesn't matter if you have paid $50, $100 or $200 million, the plane has to meet the performance and reliability numbers as promised in the contract.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15104
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:43 pm

Quoting RedChili (Reply 165):
That's a total of 112.74 hours per week. That's an average of 16.1 hours per day, which would not be so bad if the plane would fly the same number of hours every single day. But since they're flying only six days a week, it means that utilization on those days is 18.79 hours, or 18 hours and 47 minutes.

Exactly. This is very high utilization. You have turn time at both ends of 2 hours minimum for long-haul flights. There is no room for error. It's a sign of inexperience, poor planning or something else.

And it's not like the "day off" is that valuable. It's needed for maintenance. And it can't be used on a "day on" to fix the aircraft and magically transfer those 24 hours to the day you need it.

Should the 787 be more reliable. YES.

Does this excuse DY for their poor planning? No. Even with a reliable aircraft, this schedule is ridiculous.

If you want to use a new aircraft without spares 6 days a week, you can't expect average utilization over 12-14 hours. You need to interweave the schedule with a regional route of 4 hours each way. ARN-BKK-ARN-MAD-ARN for example. You need to put it regionally on a route where you have more than one flight daily, so you can swap it in a delay.

And you would be better served by running both aircraft from the same hub.

ARN-BKK-ARN-MAD-ARN
ARN-IST-ARN-JFK-ARN
for example (assuming DY has twice daily IST and MAD flights)

Your delays will not cascade and escalate much this way unless both aircraft are out more than 24 hours in the same 3 day period.

But the way DY is running things, they are simply asking for non-stop drama.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:52 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 182):
Does this excuse DY for their poor planning? No. Even with a reliable aircraft, this schedule is ridiculous.

I'm not sure if I would call it ridiculous, but IMO it was very naive from DY management to expect everything would work smoothly. Everyone knows a new aircraft comes with teething issues and it doesn't matter how many maintenance contracts you have, things will go wrong in the real world. They should have waited for a 3rd aircraft. And yes, having a spare aircraft is expensive too and not the way it should be, but the current situation isn't good either.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:57 pm

It is interesting that Kayak is getting a lot of stick here as long as they only doing the maintenance at only one of the four destinations and that is at OSL (this according to the correspondence headlines given in the public correspondence journal of the Norwegian CAA). As I recall it, OSL isn't the top destination for technical problems - so it looks like we have to look for other sub-contractors in the list of Boeing approved maintenance companies that isn't the best problem solver for the 787. All in all, it seems like there many companies with good references (and a Boeing approval) that have contributed to the situation that DY ended up in - all managed by Boeing Commercial Aircraft Services.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 10:10 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 180):
Fail to see how the customer decide to finance is relevant.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 181):
It doesn't matter if you have paid $50, $100 or $200 million, the plane has to meet the performance and reliability numbers as promised in the contract.

The comment to which I was responding made it out to be a $200 million aircraft when in fact it was a lot less. Its relevant because cheaper/early aircraft would have lower performance metrics in the contract than a mature platform would. Clearly the reliability is below expectations on at least one of these aircraft and it is Boeing's responsibility to figure out why and get them up to spec; whatever that is.

tortugamon
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 10:17 pm

ikramerica, why does Boeing in their "787 Airplane Charcteristics for Airport Planning" specify a turnaround time of 41 minutes for a 787 with 274 passengers? The Norwegian edition has space for 17 more passengers, and with good measure that gives 45 minutes turnaround time - and NLH has planned for minimum 90 minute turnarounds.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15104
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 10:44 pm

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 186):
ikramerica, why does Boeing in their "787 Airplane Charcteristics for Airport Planning" specify a turnaround time of 41 minutes for a 787 with 274 passengers? The Norwegian edition has space for 17 more passengers, and with good measure that gives 45 minutes turnaround time - and NLH has planned for minimum 90 minute turnarounds.

I assume that's a regional route with no cargo, and without any required checks during that turn.

It wouldn't be legal to turn a 787 in that time at both ends in a 24 hour period after two 10 hour flights. You would be neglecting required daily checks.

If you can point me to any long-haul carrier who turns 10 hour flights in 41 minutes, I'd like to know. 2 hours is generally the minimum. You can find instances of less than 2 hours in situations where another aircraft from the same carrier is on the ground at the same time for a longer turn, in case a swap is needed (either at a hub or a focus city). AA does this at NRT (or did last time I was there). There are (were) turns of 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 or something like that, with the ability to swap aircraft if necessary.

DY is operating one aircraft from each hub. Their schedule has no spares and no slack. It's not smart.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 02, 2013 11:29 pm

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 186):
why does Boeing in their "787 Airplane Charcteristics for Airport Planning" specify a turnaround time of 41 minutes for a 787 with 274 passengers?
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 187):
If you can point me to any long-haul carrier who turns 10 hour flights in 41 minutes, I'd like to know. 2 hours is generally the minimum.

So you're saying this is just BS from Boeing? Doesn't really help their case, does it?
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:08 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 166):
You want to tell me that this are real numbers? Or are this numbers block time numbers, taking in account also the slower flying A 340 and taking in account the worst condition you encounter regarding head wind and so on.

These are the numbers given when you book through Norwegian's own web site on the 787. Naturally, they're block numbers, which is the same as utilization. You can't do maintenance etc. once the plane has left the gate.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 167):
If you just focus on the amount of time in the air on days with flights, you could even have the plane do only two flights a week on a single day and still go "Whoah - you're overutilising the plane - it's doing 18:45 a day!", which isn't the full picture, as in that scenario it's only doing 18:45 a week, as well.

Sure, but the problem with the DY schedule is that they've got it going six days in a row, which is putting a lot of domino pieces in a row.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 167):
In any case, the curious thing about all this debate about Norwegian's 787's utilisation is that Boeing has never suggested that Norwegian are over-utilising their planes.

I have no idea whether they have ever suggested this in private. They would certainly never criticise their own customer in public.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 167):
DY have been flying the same schedule with A340s for a while, and didn't run into the same level of issues, despite only having two A340s as well. As has been pointed out, A340 operations weren't 100% smooth, either, but they were at least less prone to delays than 787 operations, and Norwegian had no hesitation in replacing the grounded 787 with an A340 again.

The A340 schedule was only slightly better. See the information I gave in reply 128. The figures from June, July and August are for the A340.

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 173):
As others have said though, what gains are made by having the planes on the ground longer? Are there checks or maintenance that Norwegian are not doing to maintain those schedules? If that's not the case, then whether the plane sits idle for 4 hours or 8 hours doesn't make a difference, does it?

The gain is padding, so that a delay of a single flight does not automatically mean that the next flight will also be delayed. It's like putting up domino pieces. If you put them too close together, and one of them falls, it will bring the rest of the pieces down. If you give them more space, then one piece can fall without bringing all other pieces down. The way the DY schedule is set up, they've got 12 flights with no padding, which means that if the first flight of the week is delayed for whatever reason, the remaining 11 flights will probably also be delayed.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:44 am

Quoting zckls04 (Reply 173):
Well it's certainly a factor. You don't become large without a certain degree of competence. That's not the same as infallibility.

One reason why I'm so critical of DY is a series of strange quotes that I read from their CEO and others in the company before they started their long-haul adventure. In several places I read that they were planning to start flights between Bangkok and London, and other European cities, and that was one reason why they chose to launch a crew base in Bangkok. I also read a quote where Kjos said that he in the future would like to start flights between HKG and SIN.

They would never get a permission to fly on many of these flights, as a Norwegian or Irish airline isn't qualified to fly on these routes. Which has given me the impression that the DY management has no clue what they are talking about when they speak long-haul.

The most recent article I could find where DY spoke about flights between BKK and England:

http://www.dn.no/forsiden/borsMarked/article2631192.ece
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:28 am

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 179):
Nevertheless I think Boeing PR n this have been poor, and specially after the grounding they should have doubled their efforts to ensure as smooth service as possible.

please remember that some issue can not be identified when the plane if late emerging form the FAL , or grounded for battery problems.. Some things simply need flying time on both short and long routes..
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:08 am

So airlines are not allowed to speculate in what destinations they may fly to in the future RedChili? As I recall it a neighbouring airline said for years they wanted to fly to San Francisco. Is this airline also on your "critical" list? We need to add to this that the airline finally started up their San Francisco flights in April this year.

I'm more interested in what an airline do than what their PR representatives say. One question I want an answer on is why Norwegian Long Haul have a maintenance company in Helsinki on their approved list (according to Norwegian CAA). Will this company perform line maintenance or will they perform heavier maintenance? I don't think it will be the latter since on the same approved list are the engineering units of two large European airlines. Now some of you may start speculate, I will not.

With NLH moving their AOC to Ireland, the small window in to the communication between the airline and the authorities will be closed (Irish authorities aren't as transparent as the Norwegian authorities). Sad, but so it will.
 
factsonly
Posts: 3054
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:27 pm

Quoting RedChili (Reply 190):
They would never get a permission to fly on many of these flights, as a Norwegian or Irish airline isn't qualified to fly on these routes. Which has given me the impression that the DY management has no clue what they are talking about when they speak long-haul.

May I humbly suggest you spent a little time studying Air Asia and all the various national identities this airline operates to meet bilateral requirements:

- Air Asia
- Indonesia Air Asia
- Thai Air Asia
- Air Asia X

So why no:

- 'Norwegian Thailand' to fly all the routes mentioned............


http://www.airasia.com/ot/en/home.page
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3477
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 3:58 pm

Boeing is accepting and admitting responsibility for the 787 teething troubles,

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/avd_10_02_2013_p01-02-622707.xml

Boeing Admits 787 Falling Short Of Expectations As Norwegian Pushes To Resume Service
You are here.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 4:10 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 194):
Boeing is accepting and admitting responsibility for the 787 teething troubles,

As they have all along, and as any company resolving customer problems would.. I would not read "great capitulation to A.net wisdom" in the article
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 4:46 pm

ts in the four places DY is flying from

Quoting kanban (Reply 195):
uoting CALTECH (Reply 194):
Boeing is accepting and admitting responsibility for the 787 teething troubles,

As they have all along, and as any company resolving customer problems would.. I would not read "great capitulation to A.net wisdom" in the article

But it does not fit your version that Boeing's only responsibility regarding the service for DY's B 787 is managing only.

it says: "The airline, which has eight 787-8s on order, “has contracted with Boeing to provide engineering, spare parts and maintenance services for its 787s. ..."
That tells me what Boeing sold.
It goes on: "...These services are managed by Boeing, working with qualified maintenance, repair and overhaul providers,”
That tells me how Boeing is doing it. Nothing wrong with that if it is working.

Boeing never said that they were not responsible and trying to do better.
It is here on a.net where Boeing fans decline the responsibility of Being and bash DY.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 4:57 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 196):
Boeing never said that they were not responsible and trying to do better.
It is here on a.net where Boeing fans decline the responsibility of Being and bash DY.

Well stated, my thoughts exactly.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 5:41 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 196):
But it does not fit your version that Boeing's only responsibility regarding the service for DY's B 787 is managing only.

Oh come off it..
have you ever called a customer service agent or a supplier representative with a complaint where they didn't profusely apologize even though you or a third party may have caused the malfunction.. This is about "face".. not about process.

Can you imagine the press if Boeing said "not our fault' even if true?
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4123
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:03 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 134):
On present evidence, at any one time, up to 50 787s are flying in service, out of 83 delivered so far. With no evident problems?

No evident problems? Harsh statement . . . how many of those are delayed more than say 60 minutes, at any one time . . . .   
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos