BestWestern
Topic Author
Posts: 8336
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:28 pm

Though the airline officials termed it as a mere technical glitch, a crew on board the aircraft on condition of anonymity told Headlines Today that the navigation coordinates were not appearing on the cockpit and that things were not fine with the engine as well. He added that the same problem was faced a couple of days back in London and Paris, raising the issue yet again if the Dreamliners were a safe bet to fly. Air India refused to comment on this aspect.


http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/a...on-co-ordinates-dgca/1/313560.html




The delay in Paris is reported here...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome...ed-24-hours.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

The brand new Boeing 787 Dreamliner seems to have let down Air India (AI) again as scared passengers refused to board the plane at Charles De Gaulle Airport, Paris, after the Delhi-bound flight was delayed by 24 hours due to a technical snag on September 28.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:39 pm

Sounds like more overblown drama about the 787. Maybe it is a translation, but the article is a little strange. It is like they are saying yes the coordinates were missing, oh that didn't scare you? Well the engines weren't working either! Something tells me one of the crew hit the wrong button and deleted everything, and needed an excuse for the delay. That or Air India is trying to get something else from Boeing. I'm not one to blindly say there is nothing wrong with the 787 now or ever. But some of these things we hear are just what happens with airliners in service.
Pat
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4945
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:01 pm

It is fairly frequent for frightened air-scared passengers to get panicked at the idea of boarding an aircraft that has had a tech problem.

I'm pretty sure that kind of passenger couldn't tell the difference between a 787 and a DC-3 if he knew what they were.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6387
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:23 pm

This reminds me of when I was trained on the brand new A320 in the early 1990s. There were three very high profile crashes, as well as some (incorrect) pilot statements that the "computers took over control". Every time we had a maintenance glitch, it was all we could do to keep the passengers on the airplane!

Just like the A320 became a reliable workhorse in the thousands, so too will the B787.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:45 pm

As usual with the Daily Fail, every technical snag turns into a harrowing, life-threatening experience.

The most revealing quote in either of these articles is that "the 787 requires specially trained engineers." That won't be true forever. As more and more maintenance personnel learn how to deal with 787 issues, they will stop causing such major problems.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 12012
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:46 pm

Quoting francoflier (Reply 2):
It is fairly frequent for frightened air-scared passengers to get panicked at the idea of boarding an aircraft that has had a tech problem.

But usually it's on charter or little known companies, often with dilapidated aircraft.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:05 pm

Seems like a bunch of hype. I wish people would listen to engineers more often.
If that plane was sent back to India empty and I was booked on that flight, I'd have taken it to India and sat up in biz class   

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 1):
Sounds like more overblown drama about the 787

Either that, or they read that drawn out debate between me and some members about AI and Japan   
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2507
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:02 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 5):

But usually it's on charter or little known companies, often with dilapidated aircraft.

  

Thomas Cook:
http://metro.co.uk/2009/06/23/terrif...to-board-nose-heavy-flight-219668/

Air Berlin:
http://www.thelocal.de/society/20080915-14313.html

AA:
http://www.voice-online.co.uk/articl...cared-aa-passengers-abandon-flight

Just a sampling

A person is intelligent
A crowd is dumb. One person over reacts and acts terrified, others follow suit as they think "No smoke without fire".
Before you know it, you have a mass panic on your hands.

I hope AI do not compensate these people. In my book, if you refuse to board of your own free will, you waive any right to reimbursement or compensation. Except in the unlikely even, the aircraft does suffer a mishap (read: crashes)
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 5:11 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 7):
I hope AI do not compensate these people. In my book, if you refuse to board of your own free will, you waive any right to reimbursement or compensation. Except in the unlikely even, the aircraft does suffer a mishap (read: crashes)

There come a point in any situation where common sense might tell you to follow the masses. If you are flying with your family and people are feeling unsafe about the aircraft, you might feel compelled to wait for another flight/aircraft. While in a newspaper it sounds like they are crazy or over-reacting, it might very well be that the staff at the airline have done little to instill confidence in the situation.

While I don't necessarily think they deserve some sort of special compensation, I don't think people should be ridiculed for reacting to how they feel. As you say above, "Except in the unlikely event...." - well, a helluva lot of good the compensation will do them then.  

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
SR380
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:57 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 6:35 pm

I doesn't seems so crazy to me for a lambda passenger to refuse to board a B787 after all we heard in newspapers or on the internet. After all even if it is "normal" for an brand new aircraft to suffer technical issues, the 787 have gone through serious one. After a worldwide grounding, another one catching fire in LHR, and all the small incidents that the media report, I would honestly not fly a 787 myself. And I am in the airport industry...
 
747megatop
Posts: 1732
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:54 pm

Quoting SR380 (Reply 9):
, I would honestly not fly a 787 myself. And I am in the airport industry...

But if you go with facts then probably you would? An ordinary passenger not knowleadgeable with aviation falling for media frenzy is understandeable. Please read slide 11 of this - http://www.boeing.com/787-media-reso...docs/787-battery-certification.pdf

--------------
777 787
Customers (in service) 8 8
Airplanes Delivered 35 50
Flights 19,000 18,000
Hours Flown 67,000 50,000
Dispatch Reliability +95% +95%
------------

From the above facts; would would not fly a B 777 also? The impression one gets from reading the above fact is that B 787 is a good as B 777 OR B777 is as bad as B 787 (whichever way you look at it) in terms of dispatch reliability; unless of course someone can prove with facts that Boeing's numbers that we see above are wrong.
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2314
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:59 pm

I wouldn't have any problem getting off and aircraft if I felt the situation were unsafe. Also, I'd expect and work with the airline to rebook me.

Quoting garpd (Reply 7):
In my book, if you refuse to board of your own free will, you waive any right to reimbursement or compensation. Except in the unlikely even, the aircraft does suffer a mishap (read: crashes)

So if I am reading your opinion correctly....a pax only deserves compensation after they are (by some high percentage) dead?
oh boy, here we go!!!
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:03 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
I'd have taken it to India and sat up in biz class

I don't think pilots want to die so if they are OK flying so am I. If for some reason I'll end up with a pilot who wants to die I'm sure the plane will not stop him.
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
User avatar
SR380
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:57 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:23 pm

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 11):

Wellto be honest I don't like flying the 777 neither  .

I guess coming from Boeing, you can't expect them to pretend it's not safe. But I never heard of an airlines get rid of a 777 because of reliability, but DY ground there all 787 fleet last month and seems to want to get ride of a least one of those.
 
jetsetter1969
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 12:06 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:06 pm

did the dc10 suffer a similar reaction when the cargo door locks had issues early in its career? i think the AA one over windsor was about 2 years old at the time.

quoting cmf " I don't think pilots want to die so if they are OK flying so am I. If for some reason I'll end up with a pilot who wants to die I'm sure the plane will not stop him."

my concern would be if the pilot had pushonitis. there are incidents and accidents here crews took planes when they were tired or had tech issues or time pressures and it ended in tears. (Tenerife disaster comes to mind as i read the KLM crew had time constraints or i may have seen it in the mayday/ airdisaster series}.

i am not saying vrews are to blame in fact operational culture is a factor to be investigated in my experience in rail investigations. i personally would fly the aircraft in the belief that if they were "not safe" the authorities would ground the aircraft or airline. the previous grounding of the fleet shows if they have a serious concern then the authorities take action.

cheers
Dave
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:17 pm

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 10):
--------------
777 787
Customers (in service) 8 8
Airplanes Delivered 35 50
Flights 19,000 18,000
Hours Flown 67,000 50,000
Dispatch Reliability +95% +95%
------------

These stats are meaningless without more info. Specifically:

1. Is the standard definition of dispatch reliability being used for both (off blocks within 15 minutes of schedule)? We know ANA is using within 2 hours for their measure, for instance,

2. It says +85% for both; is one 95.01% and the other 99.5%?

3. How much is the average delay for the remaining 5% or 1%?

4. How many of the 5% or 1% end up cancelled?

5. How long does an aircraft that goes tech, remain AOG?

6. How does the use of spares impact the numbers? Were there equal number of spares in both cases?

You get the drift. The fact is you did not have multiple airline CEOs publicly taking Boeing to task for the 777 like you have for the 787. JAL did not open the door for Airbus to be able to compete on merit after their 777 EIS experience. And so on.
 
ImperialEagle
Posts: 2372
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 10:53 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:26 pm

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 1):
overblown drama about the 787.

  

Quoting francoflier (Reply 2):
couldn't tell the difference between a 787 and a DC-3

Well, that is usually the case BUT, if the media has been drumming away for a while people will begin to remember the model number or name of the aircraft. As soon as the noise stops they forget pretty quickly.

Quoting francoflier (Reply 2):
fairly frequent for frightened air-scared passengers to get panicked at the idea of boarding an aircraft that has had a tech problem.

Yeah. There are always a few who are scared to fly to begin with that will freak-out over anything tech.

Quoting jetsetter1969 (Reply 14):
id the dc10 suffer a similar reaction

Yes. Even more so after the ORD crash and grounding. Also the L188. There was so much negative publicity that some companies forbade their employees from flying on those aircraft and the travel depts. would not book them.
Even in the mid-60's many people could recall the L188 "crisis" and I recall right after the grounding was lifted on the -10's you could get on a NW -10 between TPA and MIA for $29.00 OW or something stupidly low and the plane was still nearly empty. ATL-ORD or MIA was just as bad. It took a long time for the public to forget that one.
"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:32 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 15):
You get the drift. The fact is you did not have multiple airline CEOs publicly taking Boeing to task for the 777 like you have for the 787.

Really?

http://community.seattletimes.nwsour...rchive/?date=19960306&slug=2317518
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/earning-its-upkeep-11562/

United and British Airways, at least, had no problem taking Boeing to task... to a much greater degree than they have done with the 787.
 
comorin
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 5:52 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 2:16 am

Quoting sankaps (Reply 15):

   Good post and systematically lays bare the use of misleading statistics.
 
silentbob
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:02 am

Quoting comorin (Reply 18):
Good post and systematically lays bare the use of misleading statistics.

There are three kinds of lies; Lies, damn lies and statistics. -Benjamin Disraeli
 
Max Q
Posts: 7858
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 4:47 am

I'm as big a Boeing Fan as you get but this Aircraft has some real issues. Maybe it will always be a maintenance hog.
The L1011 was from day one, much as I liked it, you can't assume that, at this point things will improve.


It makes you wonder when JAL orders Airbus.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14180
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:49 am

Nav databases are supplied by 3rd parties, it is not unusual for waypoints to be missing or in the wrong spot on a new aircraft type. It just comes down to he translator that is used to generate the 787 FMC database from the master database and how the 787 loads this.

Pilots check these waypoints against published charts and the flight plan.

Inconvienient however not unworkable. It is leaving the door open for more errors to creep in.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2595
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 8:21 am

Well, I'm an airline enthusiast, and very happy to be on a Boeing any day of the week, and the 787 is destined to be a great aircraft, but there is enough evidence to give me cause for pause in taking a 787 until I see another year of operations without a fire or major incidents. We are in close to DC-10 territory with the launch of this aircraft and for similar reasons: it was rushed into service for commercial reasons whilst accompanied by multiple complex design and fabrication challenges.

It will eventually be a reliable workhorse and will be around for a long time to come. Just not with me as a passenger in the next 12 months.

[Edited 2013-10-12 01:42:20]
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2507
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:40 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 8):
"Except in the unlikely event...." - well, a helluva lot of good the compensation will do them then.
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 11):
So if I am reading your opinion correctly....a pax only deserves compensation after they are (by some high percentage) dead?

No, I meant if they refuse to board a plane and it goes on to fly without them and ends up a lawn dart, especially if the cause is determined to be what the PAX were refusing to board for. A kind of justification in a way.

Anyhow. Refusing to board a flight out of your own free will (whatever the reason) should disqualify you from compensation, etc.
In my mind, If you refuse to fly you break the terms of carriage and therefore forfeit all claims.

Perhaps I have too much trust in the pilot's and crew's sense of self preservation? I'd refuse to board if the pilots and crew do also.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:13 am

Quoting garpd (Reply 23):
Perhaps I have too much trust in the pilot's and crew's sense of self preservation?

However garpd, it is undeniable that pilots sometimes get pressure from dispatch and management to fly, even if they themselves may not want to. In some parts of the world they are less able to resist that pressure. Or they learn to take glitches in their stride, ignore or turn off warning messages, etc, in order to not slow things down.

See the remarks attributed to Air India pilots in the links in the opening post of this thread:

“According to a senior pilot, "It was the 'usual' technical problem that has been recurring in the Dreamliners." "

"Senior pilots said that it has not been easy for the Maharaja to maintain the "troublesome" Dreamliners. "

"There are repeated technical glitches of different kinds. The airline will have to live with it forever," a pilot said. "

These kinds of remarks suggest some airlines and pilots may already be down the slippery slope of ignoring warning messages and glitches, which is not a good sign at all.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 17):
Quoting sankaps (Reply 15):You get the drift. The fact is you did not have multiple airline CEOs publicly taking Boeing to task for the 777 like you have for the 787.
Really?

http://community.seattletimes.nwsour...rchive/?date=19960306&slug=2317518
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/earning-its-upkeep-11562/

United and British Airways, at least, had no problem taking Boeing to task... to a much greater degree than they have done with the 787.

So we're now in a race to the bottom, trying to make the 777 look bad so that the 787 does not look so bad?

There are at least three times as many airline CEOs who have spoken out about the 787s continuing reliability issues, demanding compensation, threatening to cancel orders, turning away from long-term Boeing relationships, returning aircraft for thorough nose-to-tail QA / inspection, etc. In addition to one lengthy grounding and one 787 frame that has been sitting waiting to be repaired months after an ELT incident, and may yet be written off.

Do we really want to try to suggest the 777 was anywhere close to this, 2 years after EIS and 4 years after first flight?

[Edited 2013-10-12 03:17:37]
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3941
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:19 am

Quoting 747megatop (Reply 10):
From the above facts; would would not fly a B 777 also?

Is this the third thread where you post this?
In any case, I don't understand why you would compare a new frame like the 787 to a 17 year old airframe like the 777. Those 17 year shave been used very wisely by Boeing making the 777 better and better, more reliable and thus also very safe. It seems that on the 787 Boeing has been playing catch-up mostly. Perhaps you should wait 10-15 years to allow the 787 the same level of maturity as the 777, before making these kind of comparisons . . .

PW100
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:22 am

Quoting PW100 (Reply 25):
In any case, I don't understand why you would compare a new frame like the 787 to a 17 year old airframe like the 777.

To be fair, he is comparing the 787 to the period when the 777 was also new to service.

However the stats are meaningless without more information, as I pointed out in Reply 15 above.
 
nzrich
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:51 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:34 am

Quoting sankaps (Reply 24):
These kinds of remarks suggest some airlines and pilots may already be down the slippery slope of ignoring warning messages and glitches, which is not a good sign at all.

The quotes do not say the Airline / Flight Deck / Maintenance are ignoring the messages / glitches . They are just saying they are common , A major difference to what you are implying .
"Pride of the pacific"
 
Unflug
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:25 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:47 am

I must admit that I didn't feel too comfortable 15 years ago when boarding an aircraft that had been serviced by technicians for a couple of hours in Bangkok, causing a significant delay; at least while waiting we could watch the work  

As an engineer I know that the risk on that flight was not higher than on any other flight. But the feeling was strangely something different.

Adding the Spanair accident I wouldn't really blame passengers for getting nervous, no matter how stupid that looks.

That being said, I take the 787 any time.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3941
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 11:43 am

Quoting sankaps (Reply 26):
To be fair, he is comparing the 787 to the period when the 777 was also new to service.

Sure, but those goal post have moved considerably since 1995. So still by no means a fair comparison.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 22):
It will eventually be a reliable workhorse and will be around for a long time to come. Just not with me as a passenger in the next 12 months

I'd wager that even if you have a 787 flight every month, your changes of getting seriously hurt (or worse) in a car accident during your daily commuting, are a factor of 5 – 25 bigger. Heck, the most dangerous part of a Tu-154 flight, is probably that very commute to/from the airport

Even with all the 787 problems, the changes you will be hurt in one are so small, that many human minds are unable to comprehend and understand that information.
. . . emotions winning from rationale . . .

I have been pointed out to be a 787 basher**, but for the record, I'd would have no hesitation whatsoever to board one today (if it actually dispatches    ). Actually I'm looking forward to that, as I have not enjoyed that pleasure yet. I'm very curious if it will be better than my 2 SQ 380 flights!

PW100

** Strangely, when you’re an A-fanboy (especially 380), somehow that makes you automatically a B-hater, and especially a 787 basher . . . .         
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:23 pm

Quoting nzrich (Reply 27):
The quotes do not say the Airline / Flight Deck / Maintenance are ignoring the messages / glitches . They are just saying they are common , A major difference to what you are implying .

I know. Which is why I refer to the situation as a "slippery slope". There have been too many incidents in aviation history where turning off or ignoring warnings because they are deemed to be false warnings, have led to disasters. Hopefully that weariness or complacency does not set in here.
 
aeroflop
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 7:12 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:26 pm

I don't blame them. I would never get on an Air India flight.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:35 pm

Quoting aeroflop (Reply 31):
I don't blame them. I would never get on an Air India flight.

That is not the issue here. These passengers were booked on Air India, and had no issues with flying Air India per se it would seem.
 
Gr8Circle
Posts: 2614
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 2:12 pm

Quoting aeroflop (Reply 31):
I would never get on an Air India flight.

I guess AI would be better off without pax like you 
 
BestWestern
Topic Author
Posts: 8336
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 2:23 pm

The Air India long haul service was always quite good - it was the delays and older fleet that were the issue.

However, management has managed to turn around the delay situation over the past 24 months, to an extent now that the airline runs quite smoothly from a punctuality perspective.

Shorthaul, AI is excellent value for money.

I just hope that the 787 issues don't rekindle the now unjustified position of a delay prone airline.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1732
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:13 pm

Quoting PW100 (Reply 25):
Quoting 747megatop (Reply 10):
From the above facts; would would not fly a B 777 also?


Is this the third thread where you post this?

If you are referring to the stats, yes, since i could not figure out how to link a particular post in other threads. If you are referring to the question of would not fly a B 777 also?; i posted that only in this thread.

Quoting PW100 (Reply 25):

In any case, I don't understand why you would compare a new frame like the 787 to a 17 year old airframe like the 777. Those 17 year shave been used very wisely by Boeing making the 777 better and better, more reliable and thus also very safe. It seems that on the 787 Boeing has been playing catch-up mostly. Perhaps you should wait 10-15 years to allow the 787 the same level of maturity as the 777, before making these kind of comparisons . . .

I am not doing that comparison; Boeing is. But, sankaps has raised valid questions and so have others about the stats. Then if someone were able to post recalculated stats then it would help. And like sankaps has pointed out, the comparison is for the 2 types when they were both new in service, not too difficult to understand.

[Edited 2013-10-12 10:15:49]
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:24 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 24):
So we're now in a race to the bottom, trying to make the 777 look bad so that the 787 does not look so bad?

No, pointing out that EIS of an all-new type is never perfectly smooth. Similar issues happened with the A380 as well (Tim Clark at one point was rather upset, and said so publicly). Similar issues will happen with the A350. In the distant past, similar issues happened with the 757 and 767.

The operators with experience with brand-new type EIS have taken a more conservative approach than some of the others, and it is paying off. BA and UA, the airlines who were upset about the 777, have had some issues with the 787 but have not suffered significant operational disruptions as a result.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 24):
turning away from long-term Boeing relationships

Hyperbole.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 24):
one 787 frame that has been sitting waiting to be repaired months after an ELT incident, and may yet be written off

Like I said, holding this one against the 787 is really not fair and is in bashing territory. The frame will not be written off. Repairs will just take longer because this type of repair is entirely new in the airline world.

[Edited 2013-10-12 10:25:44]
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:35 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 36):
No, pointing out that EIS of an all-new type is never perfectly smooth. Similar issues happened with the A380 as well (Tim Clark at one point was rather upset, and said so publicly). Similar issues will happen with the A350. In the distant past, similar issues happened with the 757 and 767.

You are comparing the 777 in its first few months of service, almost 20 years ago, to the 787 which is almost 2 years into EIS 20 years later. And trying to infer that comments from United and BA at that time are somehow comparable to the issues and kinds of comments and public rebuke from multiple customers on the 787 today.

If you think that makes the 787 look better, good for you!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 36):
Hyperbole.

Tell Boeing that, after the JAL relationship breakdown.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 36):
Like I said, holding this one against the 787 is really not fair and is in bashing territory. The frame will not be written off. Repairs will just take longer because this type of repair is entirely new in the airline world.

Sure, even though that particular ELT model has worked without issues on 6,000 other aircraft, and what should be a routine repair (the kind the 787 was supposed to have made easier) has grounded the aircraft for months now. The cost of repair to "save face" may well exceed the cost of a write-off.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:08 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 37):
Tell Boeing that, after the JAL relationship breakdown.

There is no evidence of a "relationship breakdown." JAL didn't go straight to Airbus for A350s, it held a fair, competitive RFP which both manufacturers worked hard to win. There are obvious reasons why the A350 is the better aircraft for JAL than the larger 777-9X, so it is no surprise the A350 won the RFP. At worst, the issues have caused JAL to rethink a single-supplier strategy -- something it should have been doing anyway.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 37):
Sure, even though that particular ELT model has worked without issues on 6,000 other aircraft

At this point, the most likely cause seems to be a reassembly error by Boeing personnel when replacing the battery after storage. That can absolutely be held against Boeing. That cannot be held against the 787 as a product.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 37):
and what should be a routine repair (the kind the 787 was supposed to have made easier) has grounded the aircraft for months now. The cost of repair to "save face" may well exceed the cost of a write-off.

This would not have been a routine repair on an aluminum aircraft, although it probably would have been complete by now. Major surgery would have been required.

It's hard to imagine how the cost of repair could exceed the cost of a write-off this early in the aircraft's life, even if "repair" means an entirely new aft section.

None of this is meant to exonerate Boeing or say the 787 doesn't need a lot of improvement. It's just meant to bring some of your hyperbole back into the realm of reality.

[Edited 2013-10-12 11:10:22]
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:15 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 38):
There is no evidence of a "relationship breakdown." JAL didn't go straight to Airbus for A350s, it held a fair, competitive RFP which both manufacturers worked hard to win.

Right. Except in the past the RFP exercise was a formality, as they would simply buy the best Boeing had to offer, never mind Airbus's offerings.

If you really still think the 787 experience had nothing to do with Airbus getting a fair shot for the first time and that Airbus always had a level playing field with JAL, despite all of the comments from senior execs over time and mountains of press on this and the firing of Mike Bair, then there is nothing anyone can do to convince you otherwise.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 38):
That cannot be held against the 787 as a product.

Perhaps, but...

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 38):
This would not have been a routine repair on an aluminum aircraft, although it probably would have been complete by now. Major surgery would have been required.

Exactly! The 787 was meant to be EASIER to repair, not harder!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 38):
It's hard to imagine how the cost of repair could exceed the cost of a write-off this early in the aircraft's life, even if "repair" means an entirely new aft section.

It is actually quite easy how the cost of repair can exceed the part-out value of the aircraft.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:40 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 39):
It is actually quite easy how the cost of repair can exceed the part-out value of the aircraft.

The part-out value of the aircraft is not what the cost of repair would have to exceed. It would have to exceed the real-world value of a similar aircraft without damage minus the part-out value. Because this aircraft is so new, it hasn't depreciated much. The value of the aircraft is somewhere between $50 and $100 million (probably toward the lower end), and it's safe to say the part-out value isn't anywhere near that. If multiple sections of the fuselage had suffered structural damage, then perhaps I could still believe repair would be more expensive than write-off. But here, we are talking about one structurally damaged section, and probably some damage to easily replaceable interior components outside that section. Even assuming the very worst case -- a full replacement of Section 48 and a bunch of interior fittings -- it's impossible for me to see how this would be a write-off.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:48 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 40):
The part-out value of the aircraft is not what the cost of repair would have to exceed. It would have to exceed the real-world value of a similar aircraft without damage minus the part-out value.

Apologies, my error, I was typing faster than I was thinking. Though I believe part out value may in fact exceed the market value of the aircraft less repair cost.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 30050
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Pax Refuse To Board Air India 787

Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:55 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
I wish people would listen to engineers more often

Exactly....trust the experts....

Quoting garpd (Reply 7):
A person is intelligent
A crowd is dumb.

Unfortunately in such situations the unintelligent are the loudest....
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)

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