Any updates on the Airbus lost in the Atlantic?

I've recently switched all my air travel over to Continental from UAL and Air Canada for that exact reason. They have a 100% Boeing fleet.....if I am lucky I'll never fly on an Airbus again. Gotta say though........I won't fly on the new composite fuselage Boeing 787 until many, many years have passed by......if at all.

"Former Boeing senior engineer Vince Weldon (Bob do you know this guy ?) has suggested that the risks of having a composite fuselage have not been fully assessed and should not be attempted, adding that carbon fiber, unlike metal, does not visibly show cracks and fatigue."

 

That's not necessarily true on airliners. Both Airbus and Boeing limit rudder travel over ~165 or so KTS.

They do it differently (see below for a discussion of their systems) but both must limit deflection at flight speeds otherwise they'd break the airframe

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/57329/

 

I think that would be extreme. What they should do is not allow additional A330s service to or within the US. Whatever there is currently allowed in the US, grandfather them in and don't allow new ones til they figure out what happened.

 

Wait until they find out about the result of long term incursion of water to the internal surfaces (read bilge) of the composite and resulting mold growth in the organic components.

 

If you get any jetliner out of attitude at high speed you'll likely get structural failure. It happened to a BOAC 707 caught by a violent "mountain wave" gust near Mt. Fuji, and it happened to the Lauda 767 that had an uncommanded thrust reverser event. Heck, that's what really caused the shuttle orbiter Challenger to break up - it wasn't the fuel tank explosion, it was the result of that explosion knocking the orbiter out of attitude.

 

No, I don't know the gentle to whom you referred. I have been out of the outfit for too long now and I'm not the one to go to. Spasso, my son, is of the generation that is in the know now.

 

I know nothing.................................
I just write about stuff on the airplane.

 

I dropped some letters in the above post and should have said, " gentleman". I have heard of concerns about water insinuating itself into the fiber layers of earlier composites but I think that problem has been solved. To be honest with you, In the past several years I have not been allowed physical access into my old group or the design areas anymore. Even an old long term employee like me is prohibited from visiting. 911 and ,believe it or not, " competitor's activities" has closed the place up as far the design areas. You can read what you will into that. I have heard that there are some concerns and unknowns that they are investigating. I doubt that there is anything affecting the structures that we should be wary of such as vertical fins. Manufacturing R&D is alive and well at Boeing and they are very serious about the safe longevity of the airplane.

 

No need to add the other letters. Gentle works. Sure, it may be archaic, but it's rather nice.

Plus, when you have Shakespeare on your side (grammatically speaking), you can't go wrong.

If we shadows have offended, / Think but this, and all is mended, / That you have but slumber'd here / While these visions did appear. / And this weak and idle theme, / No more yielding but a dream, / Gentles, do not reprehend: / If you pardon we will mend. / Else the Puck a liar call. / Give me your hands, if we be friends, / And Robin shall restore amends.

 

Shakespeare or Roger Bacon. What a beautiful way to speake(sic). So many expressions we use today that are attributed to the bard. And how many durable and long lived axioms do we live by? " He who lives and runs away can fight again another day". Fallstaff? I will have to dig further into my studies of literature long since past for I have forgotten too much. The old head is filled with an amalgam techno-aero jibbirish, history, literature, and art. I don't really know who the hell I am but I'm still having fun even if the masculine fires have dimmed and the mind goes back to what has been instead what mischief can be wrought.

 

A composite fuselage does not bother me because Boeing did it the right way and built an autoclave that would hold the entire fuselage. Airbus' competitor, the A350 IIRC, however, has the fuselage glued together from three or four sections. That would worry me.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

From what composite I have personally examined, I can not imagine any water or other substances infusing themselves into the core material. It is incredibly hard, light, and impervious. Connections are typical Boeing style with ample dispersal of the loads with forged fittings and deeply inserted stiffeners,beams and stout bulkheads. Fasteners tolerance was a problem in some of the first vendor items and Boeing since has purchased the vendor to get control of the production. It seems to be a never ending problem with the supplier companies that they cannot operate to the standards that the Boeing company uses. In 1962-64 I spent all of my time in programs to train companies like Northrop, Goodyear, and Grumman in the processes that we used. Some were good and some were not. And now we are bumping into the recurring problem of training folks off the street in the use of manufacturing tools and techniques. Believe it or not, kids that used to build the hotrods and knew all about tools (like crescent wrenches and different screwdrivers) are no longer around. They are " into other stuff".
Snohomish County has set up a school to train aerospace workers to build a workforce here. I was instrumental in the same thing 48 years ago in the build up for the 727 production. It's getting worse and it makes me feel pretty good that every one of my boys is a good mechanic as well as doing their professional jobs.

 

My problem isn't so much with what Boeing or Airbus knows about composites........it's what they don't know.......yet. And I don't want to be one of those "yet" BETA testers.

I have no doubt that some of the best brains in America work for Boeing and what they build will be the best that they can..........but even two space shuttles have gone up in flames and lot's of Airbus product have gone down in mysterious circumstances (not Boeing products, but used to make my point about best intentions).

 

Kds- The Shuttle losses had nothing to do with composites failure and the airframes are conventional aluminum, so bad example. In one case, an RSRB blew up, and in the other the thermal protection system was breached by a large piece of ice and the reentry heat got to the aluminum wing structure, causing structural failure. Incidentally, we now have TPS orders of magnitude more durable than that used on the STS leading edges.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Terry......

Sorry, should have explained better, I was not referring to composites by using the two shuttle incidents as examples, but rather to point out that it was in regards to the best intentions of "engineering excellence" unfortunately, and unintentionally, gone awry. Especially in the case of #1 and the errant O-ring design.

 

Sorry dude gonna have to call BS on that one, the O-ring design WAS faulty but the shuttle launch committees ignored memos from Thiokol detailing this issues with o-ring erosion at temps below freezing....

 

Remember when the brilliant physicist Richard Feynman made it real simple for everyone at one of the committee hearings? He dropped a small rubber o-ring in a glass of ice water, then showed how it had lost its pliability.

 

Blue@Heart......

No disagreement here...........I just don't wanna see "excrement occurs" on my tombstone as a result.

You really should change your handle to "Blueballs" though........sorry, couldn't resist.

 

The Challenger was stunning example of managment not listening to the technical experts who stated flatly that launching under those conditions was a recipe for disaster. Then we have the Gulf Incident where the guys doing the drilling didn't want to replace the mud with water and it blew up in their faces (literally) because the guy in charge said "that's the way it's gonna be". It is unfortunate that we often highly prize "management" skills and it gets to the point where some managers think they have the power of God and don't have to listen to people who actually KNOW what they are talking about. Management is all about UNDERSTANDING the risk and making sound decisions, not just bullying people below you to get the answer you want and that makes the bottom line fatter.

 

Doesn't seem as if there's been any updates.

CW

 

It's deep water, it'd take a miracle to find those boxes......

Although I read Ballard's book last weekend, on finding the (mostly) wooden remains of PT109.

 

Enough desire, time and money, and it can be done.

CW

 

Seems the search will be resuming...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/11/26/france.air.crash.search/index.html?hpt=T2

"A new operation will begin next year to find the debris of Air France Flight 447, which mysteriously crashed into the southern Atlantic Ocean last year, French officials said.

The search will begin in February and will be the fourth search for debris from the Airbus A330-200, which crashed while flying from Rio de Janeiro to Paris on June 1, 2009. All 228 people on board were killed.

Investigators have not yet established what caused the crash, and large parts of the plane -- including both flight recorders -- have never been found, despite an extensive search operation that included a French navy submarine."

CW

 

They must have some clue as to where to look. It seems like only a miracle could find that needle in a haystack now.