Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:12 pm

Problems will be solved and mjoelnir will have to find a new area to excel at? We are lucky to have such experts here  
 
LJ
Posts: 5460
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:32 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 193):
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:

Moreover, some aviation treaties will be EU/EEA wide thus any EU/EEA airline can start flights between a foreign country and any EU/EEA country.

As far as scheduling is concerned, wait till the 787s of TUI are operating next Summer. I expect ArkeFly and the other airlines in th TUI group to use their 787s to the max (that is long haul followed by a Canaries or Turkey flight), and that seven days a week.
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:25 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 198):
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.

Yes, I have. On both the receiving and the giving end.
Personally, I actually prefer suppliers that don't send a ton of "Oh, we're so sorry" down my ear canals before even listening to my description of the problem.
A lot of customer support is actually not just about face, but about a) setting the right expectations, b) clear communications and c) instilling trust.

Over the years, I was involved in quite a few drawn-out high profile cases with enterprise customers. Not once did we say it was our fault when it wasn't. Not towards the customer, and certainly not towards the press.
There is a very, very simple reason for this: When you say "this is our fault", you set the expectation that you're going to (be able to) fix it. But if the problem is on the customer's side, that is going to be impossible, which means you're setting yourself up for a really frustrating relationship with your customer who constantly expects you to fix something you can't fix. Hence, you don't say it's your fault unless it actually is.
By the way, when the issue lay on our side, we never had any hesitations about saying so as soon as we knew. Especially when there's money on the line for every hour a piece of equipment is not operational, customers demand very frequent updates and are really not appreciative if they get the feeling you are just trying to give them the runaround.
As I said - it all comes down to trust.

Which by the way means that if Boeing deal with this unpleasant situation right, they can actually gain from it if they manage to establish themselves as a trustworthy supplier.

It's worth noting that what many on this thread think Boeing is doing (admitting that they're at fault while really it's DY's) would not make Boeing a trustworthy supplier to work with and would make it less likely (or at least more difficult/expensive) for Boeing to get repeat business from DY.

Quoting kanban (Reply 198):
Can you imagine the press if Boeing said "not our fault' even if true?

See my comment above: If Boeing accept responsibility in press statements, it means they accept responsibility towards the customer. Which means that they are going to come up with a remedy plan, some sort of compensation, etc.
They would not do that if they didn't accept that the problem is for them to fix, not for the customer.
42
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:38 pm

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 192):
So airlines are not allowed to speculate in what destinations they may fly to in the future RedChili?

Sure, but when several executives and/or spokespeople of a new long-haul airline go public and state that they are going to start flights between destinations where they have no traffic rights, then my impression is that they don't know what they're talking about.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 193):
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............

The ASEAN countries (which include Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia) are working to set up a single aviation market. That's why Air Asia can start branches in Indonesia and Thailand. Norway is in Europe, not in South East Asia, so you won't see "Norwegian Thailand."
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:20 am

I am shocked this was not picked up here.....

The airline’s chief executive Bjorn Kjos said the 787 was a better aircraft than advertised but Boeing was unprepared to cope with its teething problems. Other budget airlines will flock to it once the jet’s reliability is improved because it has performed so well the business case for long haul flights is better than expected, he said.

“I believe that the 787 is an incredibly good aircraft,” Kjos said in an interview. “It’s even better on performance than we anticipated, the fuel burn is lower.” ”I feel we have been extra unlucky,” he said.

http://airguideonline.com/2013/10/02...hort-haul-service-later-this-week/
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:06 am

Quoting mham001 (Reply 204):
I am shocked this was not picked up here.....

It was, check the previous thread.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
vfw614
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:12 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 182):

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

...not for some knackered Airbus A340-300s that did the job before the 787s were delivered. There were some issues with them as well, but they did much better than the 787s.

Anyway, I still fail to understand what exactly an hour or two more downtime each day would change. As someone else so eloquently put, we are talking about machines that do not have to take a nap to be up to the job again. As long as all maintenance is carried out, what is the gain from keeping the aircraft on the ground longer instead of letting it do what it is designed for - flying? If a pump breaks after, say 1.000 hours, it only means that this event will occur sooner than later because of the high utilization. But it still breaks after 1.000 hours.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8358
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:22 am

Are all 787s flying again, or is one still in maintenance?
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:23 am

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 206):
Anyway, I still fail to understand what exactly an hour or two more downtime each day would change. As someone else so eloquently put, we are talking about machines that do not have to take a nap to be up to the job again

Mostly too tight schedule will hit you back in case of irregularities in operations, ie. flight is delayed for any of the various possible reasons, thus having a knock on affect on the following flights.. Tight schedules do not allow such irregularities. Also, though the plane does not need a nap, it does need maintenance which can only be done when the aircraft is on the ground. I don't mean now heavy maintenance, but aircraft is serviced all the time (maintenance log book is checked every time a/c is in it's base). In case of very tight schedule a/c will fly unserviced as long as none of the maintenance needs logged in the book result in grounding of the a/c.

Add: in a/c utilisation, especially in long haul ops optimisation does not directly mean maximization. In short haul ops the a/c can fly the rotations planned for it and have maintenance during the night. In this case, the plane can be used to its maximum capacity. A long haul a/c is a different animal as the plane's utilisation does not occur only during day time, but is indeed utilised 24 hrs. In this case, the maintenance of the aircraft need to be scheduled during the times the a/c is on the ground, usually in its base. In such a case, optimization of the a/c utilisation has to tolerate possible irregularities in ops, by having some buffer time in ground time. If not, problems will occur.

[Edited 2013-10-07 02:26:05]
 
vfw614
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:27 am

Which then leaves the question why Boeing sold its Gold programme to DY if the schedule was prone to maintenance disaster. Common sense dictates that Boeing would have avoided the Gold contract like a hot potatoe after looking at DY's plans with the aircraft, wouldn't it?
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 4086
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:55 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 207):
Are all 787s flying again, or is one still in maintenance?

EI-LNB still not flying. I believe the A340 lease is until October 11th after which EI-LNB will resume service.
A
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:26 am

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 207):
Are all 787s flying again, or is one still in maintenance?

The lemon (EI-LNB) is still being sweetened, but rumours has it the aircraft will start to fly again coming Saturday (12th).

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 206):
But it still breaks after 1.000 hours.

The problem is more, they (Boeing) haven't got a clue of how many hours it take for a component/unit to break down. A planned/preventive maintenance programme is not possible without this type of information, and they (Norwegian) are now stuck with the much more expensive corrective/irregular maintenance, bad punctuality, short time leases and angry passengers - and after a time maybe also fewer passengers will want to fly with them because of irregularity.
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:51 am

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 206):
I still fail to understand what exactly an hour or two more downtime each day would change.

Recovery time.

Whenever something happens you need time to deal with it. If you have every connection scheduled tight then it is very difficult to do the unplanned maintenance without causing delay not only to the next scheduled flight but also many flights after it.

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 206):
If a pump breaks after, say 1.000 hours, it only means that this event will occur sooner than later because of the high utilization. But it still breaks after 1.000 hours.

Parts do not care about schedule   The 1,000 hours isn't a guarantee the pump will last that long. A better way to look at it is to say that after 1,000 hours it is very likely the pump will break soon. Reality is that some pumps will break much earlier and some would break much later than the 1,000 hours if we let them stay on.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:36 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 212):
The 1,000 hours isn't a guarantee the pump will last that long. A better way to look at it is to say that after 1,000 hours it is very likely the pump will break soon. Reality is that some pumps will break much earlier and some would break much later than the 1,000 hours if we let them stay on.

the other question is what part of the pump "broke".. a housing failure, impeller, bearing, an "O-ring"?.. all have different service lives. Was it a mis-seated bearing or "o-ring"..

Years ago we had a 737 slat actuator that failed way too soon, when we opened it up, nothing stood out, then we found a piece of "o-ring" about the size of a pin head had blocked relief port. it didn't come from any "o-rings" in the actuator, but from a hydraulic system component 20 feet away. The component continued to function normally.

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 211):
The problem is more, they (Boeing) haven't got a clue of how many hours it take for a component/unit to break down.

See above. We're making assumptions about details that are not public. Boeing knows exactly how long the pump will operate before maintenance.. The also know the service life of the components under normal operating conditions. A couple years ago there was a fuel pump that failed early.. we found debris in the tank from a customer maintenance action had become entangled in the impeller.. not saying this is the case however it is too easy to cast dispersions on incomplete data and assumptions.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15104
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:30 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 188):

No, you are just quoting a regional out station turn time (little cargo and no required checks/maintenance other than preflight walk around) and implying that it would be wise and/or legal to do this all day every day.

WN turns 737s in under 30 minutes all day. They also don't fly over night and give themselves more time per 24 hour period per 737, a 50 year old model they have been flying for 40, than DY gives for a brand new long haul aircraft they have no experience with. While a delay on a WN aircraft may cascade throughout the day depending on the circumstances, its rare it bleeds into the next day.
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

Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:47 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 214):

No, you are just quoting a regional out station turn time (little cargo and no required checks/maintenance other than preflight walk around) and implying that it would be wise and/or legal to do this all day every day

Actually I am quoting LN-KGL, who is quoting Boeing. I don't think Norwegian is scheduling its 787s to turn in 41 minutes at their home base (or anywhere else) anyway.

[Edited 2013-10-07 10:22:36]
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:55 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 213):

Every time you start hinting that the problem is DY or DY's service or that DY does not have the right spare parts on stock.

DY contracted Boeing for the whole service package. If Boeing does know exactly how long the pump will operate before maintenance were does the trouble come from?

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 214):

Usually the shoe is on the other foot, you run old equipment and have to do a lot of service or you run new equipment and it should be rather trouble free.

Were does the Idea come from that it is OK that new equipment breaks down a few weeks into its service life?
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:18 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 216):
Usually the shoe is on the other foot, you run old equipment and have to do a lot of service or you run new equipment and it should be rather trouble free.

Were does the Idea come from that it is OK that new equipment breaks down a few weeks into its service life?

It sound rather far-fetched, I agree about that, but it's common knowledge in the airline industry that new airplanes have a lot of irritating problems that will be ironed out within the first few months or the first few years. That's a reason why launch airlines generally demand -- and why OEMs are willing to give -- launch discounts.

And such teething problems appear to become worse with more technologically advanced airplanes. The 787 was such a huge leap that it's not surprising that these problems are worse on the first 787 version than on, say, the 748, which is a derivative of a well-proven model. The -9 and -10 will in all probability have a smoother EIS than the -8.
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

Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:21 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 216):
Every time you start hinting that the problem is DY or DY's service or that DY does not have the right spare parts on stock.

In no way do I suggest the failure was the carrier's.. I suggest that there are multiple components in a hydraulic pump.. and filters, bearings, O-rings, orifices that can lead to failure. debris in the fluid can lead to failure. The need to remove a non functioning or sub functioning part does not always mean the whole part failed, it may only mean that it needs a clean room and certified techs to open and see what the heck happened and repair.

Note: we do not have an analysis of the part and what caused it to be removed. Give us those details if you have them... otherwise it's all conjecture.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:25 pm

Quoting RedChili (Reply 217):
it's common knowledge in the airline industry that new airplanes have a lot of irritating problems that will be ironed out within the first few months or the first few years

Sure, but these should have been ironed out by this time. I doubt Norwegian got launch airline discounts given they are receiving line numbers 100+.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3684
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:59 pm

Lot of learned talk here about hydraulic pump failures, but does anyone know if the pump failed?
Back in mid August we had a status message C2 HYD PUMP on a B787. It didn't want to reset so we put it on the MEL and sent it home. But it has major performance penalties which was OK for a two hour flight.
Back at main base they changed an electronic motor controller and that fixed the pump.
So the defect was in the MEL and could be dispatched, but only for short flights because the take off weights are severly restricted (in case the other pump fails and you can't raise the undercarriage).

by the way I saw LNB this morning looking abandoned in the TUI hangar at ARN. Lets hope it gets back in the air soon.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 6:12 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 219):
Sure, but these should have been ironed out by this time.

As I have said before, many items do not surface when the fleet is grounded or when there is a delay in certifying.. some things just take flying and landing frequently..
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 6:56 pm

It must be those darn VA pilots causing all the trouble!
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 7:01 pm

To clear away the claim and guesswork about tight turnarounds - during one week the DY 787 is scheduled to stay on ground at OSL for 3 x 2 h 5 min (westbound) + 2 x 4 h 30 min (eastbound) + 1 x 28 h 30 min (eastbound). The turn around time at JFK is 90 minutes and at BKK 130 minutes.
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Mon Oct 07, 2013 8:18 pm

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 223):

Such a schedule with only a few frames divided between two bases does not leave a lot of space to move in case of disturbance. it is like joggling with balls, you drop one, and they all come falling down.
 
CX747
Posts: 6503
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:40 am

Right now, it seems that the 787 for both Boeing and Norwegian is a problem. One can get very caught up in the HERE and NOW and forget about TOMORROW. Boeing is going to have some issues with the lack of QC on the 787, to what extent over time remains to be seen. One thing that have been glossed over though is;

Norwegian is overall quite happy with the performance of the aircraft (Aside from the issues) and has stated that it will be their crown jewel. They have also stated that fuel burn is better than expected. Boeing will find a fix to the issue or issues that currently plague the 787. Whether or not they use this experience to build a better product in the future remains to be seen.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:48 am

Quoting AY" class="quote" target="_blank">okAY (Reply 224):
Such a schedule with only a few frames divided between two bases does not leave a lot of space to move in case of disturbance. it is like joggling with balls, you drop one, and they all come falling down.

Since you probably know, I'd like to ask you - doesn't AY have pretty much similar utilization for their A330/A340 fleet?
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4026
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:50 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 225):
Boeing is going to have some issues with the lack of QC on the 787,

I'm having trouble seeing that the issues occurring currently (other than the wiring and filter issues) could have been caught with anything less than 100% destructive testing..
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:37 am

Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 226):

First of all AY has only one home base. This makes it easier to find a replacement aircraft. Utilization-wise I do not have detailed information how many hours AY LH fleet has ground time nor how the planes are rotated between routes.

AY had similar problems in MD11 era, when the utilization was stretched too far and long haul ops was a mess. It was even discussed here. Since then the schedule has been loosened to accept more disturbances. In addition, also the A330/340 fleet has proven to be rather reliable.

As a ground rule, the smaller your fleet is, the more vulnreable you are in case of disturbance in ops. Add to this multi-base, and the risks rise.

Edit: grammar

[Edited 2013-10-07 23:50:49]
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 8:46 am

Quoting kanban (Reply 227):
I'm having trouble seeing that the issues occurring currently (other than the wiring and filter issues) could have been caught with anything less than 100% destructive testing..

I do not thing you get it;
There is no excuse for an OEM to sell a defective product.
When the product you are producing breaks down in the first few weeks of usage than something is wrong.
It may be quality control, sub standard parts, bad design and that includes how you have to service it, it does not matter what. The OEM has to find some way to get rid of this problems.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 10:16 am

Quoting kanban (Reply 227):

I'm having trouble seeing that the issues occurring currently (other than the wiring and filter issues) could have been caught with anything less than 100% destructive testing..

Aren't wiring and filter issues bad enough on their own?
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 10:37 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 229):
I do not thing you get it;
There is no excuse for an OEM to sell a defective product.
When the product you are producing breaks down in the first few weeks of usage than something is wrong.
It may be quality control, sub standard parts, bad design and that includes how you have to service it, it does not matter what. The OEM has to find some way to get rid of this problems.

There is theory and there is reality. When you have a product consisting of this many items reality is that some of them will always have issues. Anything else will be too costly in production cost and/or utilisation and maintenance.

It is clear that in the case of DY it has been too much but that something breaks in the first weeks isn't a sign something is wrong.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:45 am

Quoting cmf (Reply 231):
There is theory and there is reality.

I agree, everyone who delivers complex product (and a modern aircraft is a mega complex product) knows that there is the famous bath tube curve. Things break directly after delivery (those are the parts that passed the quality inspection and tests but had non detectable weaknesses) and then then when it's systems gets old. Between these two extremes things turn to normal.

I am not saying that what happened to Norwegian is normal, just that it shows that one has not worked in a industry similar to the aircraft industry when one is insisting on a low failure rate from day one of a delivery. It is just not best knowledge that this is the case. There is one industry where the natural bathtube curve is not good enough, space systems. Therefore they use real old and tried technology and each part cost a fortune, this is the consequence of the demand no faults after delivery. All normal industries (including civil aviation) are not prepared to accept these consequences.

[Edited 2013-10-08 04:51:23]
Non French in France
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:50 am

Quoting cmf (Reply 231):
that something breaks in the first weeks isn't a sign something is wrong.

Agree entirely, cmf. Can't access any details, but it looks as if Norwegian's problems have mainly occurred with one of their two 787s, not both of them?

Maybe it was just a 'Friday afternoon' aeroplane?   That sort of thing happens in all areas of manufacturing. And, therefore, Boeing might be well advised to give Norwegian a different aeroplane - for free?
"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

Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:54 pm

Quoting okAY (Reply 228):
In addition, also the A330/340 fleet has proven to be rather reliable.
Quoting ferpe (Reply 232):
I agree, everyone who delivers complex product (and a modern aircraft is a mega complex product) knows that there is the famous bath tube curve. Things break directly after delivery (those are the parts that passed the quality inspection and tests but had non detectable weaknesses) and then then when it's systems gets old. Between these two extremes things turn to normal.

I do not say that new complex products never break,
but I am tiered hearing about "teething problems" on an airplane that is LN 112 of its type.
I am also tired about " I do not say anything about if this is normal, but..."
That is accurately what we are talking about: is the failure rate on the DY B 787´s acceptable or not.

Norwegian is not one of the first buyers and no "launch customer".
And when a new complex product breaks things other than usual serviceable items more than once, and I include different things, than I expect an army of engineers and service guys from the OEM to descend on the culprit.
If it is to costly in the production to get rid of the problems, you have to throw in the effort in after sales.
In worst cases you have to exchange the lemon frame for a non lemon frame.

I think that the main problem of Boeing in this case is ramping up the production to fast before the reliability of the B 787-8 was stabilized.

[Edited 2013-10-08 06:00:25]
 
JHwk
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:25 pm

Quoting kanban (Reply 213):

We had a problem with a diesel generator like that; the fuel pump was what actually failed, but the damage always appeared in other parts first. Went through 5-6 rounds before we demanded the whole engine be torn down and inspected. These things happen all the time on new equipment, where new failure modes are discovered and it takes time for consistent or conclusive information to get back to the OEM in order to investigate and take action. The OEMs will tend to assume the component just has higher than anticipated infant mortality or that it is customer error the first few times around.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:27 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 234):

I think that the main problem of Boeing in this case is ramping up the production to fast before the reliability of the B 787-8 was stabilized.

Agreed, that has just compounded the risks inherent in an aircraft with so much new technology, materials, supplier management, and manufacturing processes.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 1:33 pm

Quoting JHwk (Reply 235):

will we get now a list of dismal failures of OEMs around the globe and say it is okay because others have failed too?.

Were you satisfied with the reaction of the OEM? Will your company buy the same type of diesel generator again?
It seems to me that in the end you put the foot down and demanded action.
 
flood
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:05 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:13 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 233):
And, therefore, Boeing might be well advised to give Norwegian a different aeroplane - for free?

UA may want a handful of those free aeroplanes too while you're at it  
.

Quoting cmf (Reply 231):
that something breaks in the first weeks isn't a sign something is wrong.

Indeed, but there may be a sign something's wrong when the manufacturer's CEO has to travel halfway across the world to personally address a customer's dissatisfaction.

No doubt DY made a problematic situation worse through their aggressive scheduling with little to no downtime and their resulting vulnerability to cascading delays. Yet the crux of the matter remains an unreliable aircraft.

United took delivery of their first frame over a year ago and are still having issues. The last aircraft change was on Sunday, with another just three days prior. Separately on Sunday, UA32 LAX-NRT departed 2.5 hours late to "fix some control surface", according to a pax via twitter. On Monday, ship 901 LAX-PVG was already some 4 hours late due to the late inbound, but got hit with an additional delay and ended up departing 8 hours late. Similarly, the inbound on ship 907 UA142 was 'only' running around 2 hours behind schedule, yet it took on another delay as well and left 4 hours late.

Quoting JHwk (Reply 235):
These things happen all the time on new equipment

They do, but not to this extent on new, modern aircraft.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15104
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 3:07 pm

Quoting LN-KGL (Reply 223):
To clear away the claim and guesswork about tight turnarounds - during one week the DY 787 is scheduled to stay on ground at OSL for 3 x 2 h 5 min (westbound) + 2 x 4 h 30 min (eastbound) + 1 x 28 h 30 min (eastbound). The turn around time at JFK is 90 minutes and at BKK 130 minutes.

Recipe for disaster.

Without spares delays will cascade.

Not just mechanical but weather and traffic at JFK.
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

Tue Oct 08, 2013 3:29 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 239):
Recipe for disaster.
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 239):
Not just mechanical but weather and traffic at JFK.

Apparently the recipe for disaster did not impact the leased and aging A340s flying this schedule.
 
okay
Posts: 642
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:11 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:04 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 240):
Apparently the recipe for disaster did not impact the leased and aging A340s flying this schedule.

90 mins at JFK can work, if everything runs smoothly. Also, it is an outstation turnaround where, in case of no tech problem, the turnaround can be cut short as long as the plane gets refueled.

The 2h5min turnaround at OSL sounds really tight, and IMO runs a high risk to disturb following flights. Of course, one can again cut short the turnaround but then one cannot talk about normal ops if corners are cut every time the a/c is on the ground.

Turnaround times are surely something DY will adjust once they have more experience on normally running ops with the right equipment.

Quoting flood (Reply 238):
Indeed, but there may be a sign something's wrong when the manufacturer's CEO has to travel halfway across the world to personally address a customer's dissatisfaction.

I see this very much as a PR act from Boeing's side.
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:56 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 240):
Apparently the recipe for disaster did not impact the leased and aging A340s flying this schedule.

I suggest you read my reply 128 above. I can give you a summary: Between June-August, when A340s were operating these routes, 52 out of 72 arrivals into OSL were delayed. That's 72 percent of flights delayed. When the 787 took over in September, 21 out of 25 arrivals into OSL were delayed. That's 84 percent of flights delayed.

The 787 had more delays than the A340, yes, but an on-time record of 28 percent isn't exactly stellar either.
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

Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:19 pm

Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 226):
Since you probably know, I'd like to ask you - doesn't AY have pretty much similar utilization for their A330/A340 fleet?

I just checked the Oneworld PDF timetable. According to that timetable, for next week, AY's 330s are flying a total of 860 hours and 35 minutes. Their 340s are flying a total of 724 hours and 30 minutes. That's block time. According to Airfleets, they have 8 330s and 7 340s.

If these numbers are correct, it means that their 330s are being used 15:22 per day, and their 340s 14:47 per day.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:06 pm

Quoting flood (Reply 238):
Indeed, but there may be a sign something's wrong when the manufacturer's CEO has to travel halfway across the world to personally address a customer's dissatisfaction.

No idea why you comment on the part of my paragraph you didn't quote. My comment was on the statement that there should not be any problems in the first weeks. While I said it is an unrealistic expectation I also said the amount of problems at DY was too high. There is your explanation for why Boeing sent people to Norway and why DY is unhappy. So, the issue is the high number of problems, not the existence of problems.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:10 pm

Quoting RedChili (Reply 242):
The 787 had more delays than the A340, yes, but an on-time record of 28 percent isn't exactly stellar either.

Do you have any data on average delay and how many cancellations there were? That would provide a much clearer picture.

After all it is the A340 still being called in to sub for the 787, not the other way round.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 6:12 pm

Quoting cmf (Reply 244):
Quoting flood (Reply 238):
Indeed, but there may be a sign something's wrong when the manufacturer's CEO has to travel halfway across the world to personally address a customer's dissatisfaction.

No idea why you comment on the part of my paragraph you didn't quote. My comment was on the statement that there should not be any problems in the first weeks. While I said it is an unrealistic expectation I also said the amount of problems at DY was too high. There is your explanation for why Boeing sent people to Norway and why DY is unhappy. So, the issue is the high number of problems, not the existence of problems.

What do we talk about here on this thread? The HIGH number of problems on the B 787 at DY.
If there would have been a few problems, this thread would not exist.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8358
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:47 pm

Again, the A340 flies slower, and takes longer to turn than the 787 - so when you sub onto the 787 sechedule, the A340 will be late.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15104
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:57 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 240):
Apparently the recipe for disaster did not impact the leased and aging A340s flying this schedule.

I'm not dismissing the 787 here. It has problems. DY KNOWS it has problems and has known it. The A343 is a mature aircraft, flying for 20 years in commercial service. It was not without issues when DY used it either, but there are 20 years of spare parts out there, far more access to maintenance, etc. It's not the same animal.

My point is and has been that DY is showing it's inexperience or lack of planning by putting a new type with known teething problems, with known limited caches of spares around the world, under such a schedule so early in their use of the aircraft without more aircraft in their fleet.

And BTW, it was a very risky move to even use the A340 in that way. Being risky but successful does not prove you were right in doing something, only that you didn't face the consequences of what could happen.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Norwegian Has Had Enough Of Dreamliner Nightmare 2

Wed Oct 09, 2013 1:08 am

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 246):
What do we talk about here on this thread? The HIGH number of problems on the B 787 at DY.
If there would have been a few problems, this thread would not exist.

The problem is that you stated there can't be any breakdowns in the first weeks. An unrealistic expectation.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.

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