Lets hope Boeing never has a "Hindenburg" moment with the Dreamliner.
From the link above: "The material burns in a manner similar to a charring material, in that the carbon fibers comprise most of its mass. The composite burns primarily from the vaporization of its resin. It can ignite with a pilot flame after preheating at a low heat flux. When it burns, the resin vapor is forced out of the fiber pores, and pressure causes the material to swell to over twice its volume. In most all cases studied, the composite maintained its rigidity, but its structural strength was not examined after degradation. The material appears to maintain homogeneity in swelling. The fibers create an insulating, char-like structure that causes a reduction in the internal heating and consequently the burning rate drops in time. As the burning rate drops, extinction can naturally occur due to insufficient heating. As is common of charring materials, external heat flux is required to sustain burning and flame spread. It should be noted that the carbon fiber can also oxidize under high-temperature conditions, and this was observed even at low heat fluxes. Furthermore, the properties in this report pertain primarily to the characteristics of the resin material, as the carbon fibers are essentially inert. The data in this report can be used for modeling and explaining the fire behavior of the composite in fire scenarios associated with aircraft operations"
You are correct to a degree. Carbon fibre etc can be made/laid up to add any kind of crash/crush protection desired. Watching video's of the FAA's crash testing on F1 cars shows this as evidence. saw one where the rear impact structure ended up looking like a beer can that had been stood on. Of course to what level and degree Boeing has engineered "impact/crash" resistance into the 787 assembly and where it has been applied only they know or Bob.... Just heard the same thing. News said he was certified as a check airman in June of this year. Not so good
Aviation Herald just added this update "On Jul 9th 2013 the NTSB reported in their third press conference based on pilot interviews, that at 500 feet AGL the PAPIs were showing three red one white and the pilot began to pull back on the yoke to reduce rate of descent assuming the autothrottles would maintain the speed set to 137 knots. A lateral deviation developed taking the attention of the crew. Descending through 200 feet all PAPIs were red and the speed had decayed into the red/black marked range, the crew realised the autothrottles were not maintaining the target speed, at that point the autothrottles started to move the levers forward. There were three pilots in the cockpit, the captain under supervision was pilot flying, the training captain was pilot monitoring, the relief first officer was occupying the observer seat, the relief captain was in the cabin at the time of the landing. The captain under supervision had flown 10 legs for a total of 35 hours on the Boeing 777-200 so far and was about half way through his supervision. The autothrottle switches were found in the armed position post accident, it is not yet clear in what mode the autothrottles were and whether autothrottles were engaged or not."
I don't know the crash characteristics of the fuselage design but I can say that the CF lay-up is done in a longitudinal spiral, reversing directions on each pass.
No, if you see the plane in build, it will have sections of fuselage in different colours of green. Each of those sections is made in a separate plant. The wraps put on at each plant are slightly different in colour. Not too visible in this pic, but it's there. Google Image Result for http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Boeing+Everett+Plant+Continues+Assembly+777+JmNDK1ZYIDQl.jpg
Geez, seriously? So this is good piloting? Talking to a reporter while landing your airplane? See textbook landing at SFO from cockpit - CNN.com Video
Yeah, that's nothing abnormal for a well seasoned pilot with lots of hours on that plane in good weather. Cessnas are very easy to fly and land. For someone with lots of time in the plane, it's like second nature. Simple magnetic compass. Mark
Oh, I was being a little over dramatic - just because I think the whole segment is ridiculous - that CNN feels the need to recreate the landing for its viewers. Some guy up in a Cessna, showing the big boys how it is done.
Crickets and Mice. It was a horrible case of pilot error. This guy should at least never fly again - if not doing some actual jail time. The law suits will be biblical in stature.
Not really. They airline will pay out, but they won't pay out nearly as much as some other airline crash cases where many, many more people died. Mark
Looks like they realized they were too low 30+ seconds before impact. They were already too slow at this point too, but it took them another 20+ seconds to react. Seems like an eternity, especially since all you need to do is look out the front window to see that things aren't getting any better. Too much faith in technology to do the work for you, methinks.
I don't get it. It was gross incompetence, and both guys are likely headed to jail in South Korea. Are you still defending them? They flew a perfectly good airplane into the sea wall on a beautiful day, with perfect conditions. How can you defend that?
Lots of spinal injuries... Potential lifelong health complications. I imagine the potential is there for staggering damage demands
The Autothrottle is there to assist the pilots in maintaining the target speed. Just like any system, and especially in an airplane, you have to monitor what the computer is doing to make sure it is doing it properly. In this case, apparently, nobody noticed the speed wasn't being maintained. The throttle levers in the plane can be moved manually and have a servo that is commanded by the autothrottle system to move them automatically. On the 777, I have read, that if you rest your hands on the throttle and are a little stiff (as in white knuckling because your screwing up) you may not perceive the servo trying to move the throttles. That can lead to it not doing its job. That could explain the statement that it all of sudden started moving the throttles. As in, the pilot took his hands off them momentarily and the servo was allowed to push them forward for more power. Another way for this to happen is to use the FLCH (flight level change) mode which is not an appropriate mode for landing. They could have used the mode and forgot to switch it to another mode. If it was set incorrectly, the crew could think the auto throttles would maintain target speed when in fact the mode setup would tell it not to make any changes. It's incompetence either way. The final authority on verifying a correct approach are the humans that have big bright displays in front of them showing speed and altitude with colored markers to assist them in knowing when they are too slow or fast. Now, if all the eyeballs are looking outside the window and not at the displays in front of them periodically, known as "the scan" then they are going to get intro trouble. By the way, if these guys were really sharp at visual approaches, you wouldn't need to look at the altitude/speed information, you could perceive a lot of that with a reasonable amount of accuracy by looking out the window and judging angle of approach and coverage rate. You learn these things with practice. But, a professional still scans the instruments. How do you know your speed if you don't look at it. How do you know the engines are OK if you don't look at there parameters. Incompetence. Plain and simple.
Oh don't get me wrong, it's going to be tens of millions of dollars, but it won't be over a billion like has happened in the past when a whole plane load died. Mark
If you mean continuous, no. The airplane is built in sections and joined in final assembly. Note: The join area will be stronger than the surrounding structure, also heavier.
OK. you've sucked me into this conversation...i am no pilot but definitely into aviation...the USA is in the midst of its longest, safest stretch in history and old timers complain about pilots not knowing how to fly? it seems to me that the problem is the PILOTS, replace them with computers and these things wouldnt happen. we are talking about a day and age when GOOGLE cars will be driving themselves? how about airplanes? so easily automated, and whats more mechanical than landing an airplane? they should definitely have auto take-off and auto land and full time auto pilot. most every accident is pilot error. would a computer allow a plane to stall? explain that to me. why would you ever go below stall rate in-flight? a computer wouldnt allow that, as in the Buffalo crash and many others. Pilots should be removed from the equation and just be computer operators.
Sorry for the off topic What the above photo shows is the 777 (aluminum). The green is the temporary protective coating. Once removed it shines like chrome. You are looking at the open ends of the forward and aft sections, nose to tail in the crawler. The 787 is constructed somewhat similarly but the sections are painted an-off white to protect the C/F from UV deterioration
