Tümü
← Back to Squawk list
787 Could Face Temporary ETOPS Ban
As Boeing works to regain permission for its 787 Dreamliner to resume flights, the company faces what could be a costly new challenge: a temporary ban on some of the long-distance, trans-ocean journeys that the jet was intended to fly. (news.yahoo.com) Daha Fazlası...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
This is total BS.
Faulty thinking "The APU battery (which is the problem battery) doesn't even get used in flight," presumes safe when not in use.......
I wonder if they are looking at the composite material's ability to store static electricity and compromise electrical systems on the787. Such materials do not dissipate static as metals do. What if thos contributes to something not analyzed as yet. At 600mph therr is lots of static generated. Is the fuel not properly injected with dissipator additive..,
Check this folks
Check this folks
Federal government retaliates with 787 limitations. That ought to be the headline. "The 787 was conceived and planned over much of the past decade, and the decision to add capacity in South Carolina (a “right to work” state) drew anger from unionized workers at Boeing’s main commercial jet manufacturing complex, in Everett, Wash. The International Association of Machinists sued Boeing over the opening of the South Carolina plant, and the federal National Labor Relations Board charged Boeing with retaliation against the union on the same point."
The Obama administration and the federal government along with its minions in unions have Boeing right where they want them due to the above story. Unions both in the "free market" and in the federal government are huge contributers to the left. When a company goes up against this gang, they better have deep pockets!!!
The Obama administration and the federal government along with its minions in unions have Boeing right where they want them due to the above story. Unions both in the "free market" and in the federal government are huge contributers to the left. When a company goes up against this gang, they better have deep pockets!!!
Its really about payback. If you recall Boeing had issues with the government regarding right to work laws. Now that the feds have something to hang their hat on, i.e. the potential for future problems regarding batteries, they have Boeing in their cross hairs. Never, I repeat, never cross the feds because if you do, payback is just around the corner!!! The Airbus fleet has far greater problems with its composite tails cracking and even breaking off. Imagine the feds grounding all Airbuses. AA's crash involving an A300 was swept under the table. Too big a problem for the airline industry if all Airbuses were grounded.
What does "thin" mean in the phrase, "long, thin intercontinental routes"? Is it the opposite of "wide", referring to a route that doesn't have the demand to support wide-body craft?
What does "thin" mean in the phrase, "long, thin intercontinental routes"? Is it the opposite of "wide", referring to a route that doesn't have the demand to support wide-body craft?