Ethiopian 787 Repair...

The Crewroom for non-FS related stuff, fun and general chat.

Moderators: Guru's, The Ministry

emfrat
Concorde
Concorde
Posts: 921
Joined: 09 Jul 2008, 07:09
Location: 50 DME West of Brisbane, Ugarapul and Kitabul country in Sunny Qld

Re: Ethiopian 787 Repair...

Post by emfrat »

Fire in the air is really the worst kind of problem.
Unfortunately, in India lately, the likelihood of fire, on the ground or in flight, caused by an incompetent pilot who obtained a licence by bribery, has become more and more likely.

User avatar
Chris Trott
Vintage Pair
Vintage Pair
Posts: 2591
Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 05:16
Location: Houston, Texas, USA
Contact:

Re: Ethiopian 787 Repair...

Post by Chris Trott »

Chris, I meant this fire was not a major issue and was not the plane's fault. A brake fire on the ground should never be a "major issue" anyway. The designers are required to do specific testing that covers such events to ensure they're not major issues. Yes, airframes have been lost due to brake fires - prior to the introduction of the testing. No modern airline airframes have been lost due to a brake fire without someone failing miserably to do their job in the incident. 99% of brake fires can be safely extinguished with the 50lb. Fire Bottles that should be at every gate.

Additionally, I do object to your statement that CFRP is a highly combustible material, especially when the history of CFRP shows the opposite to be true as long as the proper resins are used, which the FAA ensured were in their testing requirements for Boeing and the industry, that, BTW, were initially established back in the 1970's when the Beech Starship was being designed and built.

The 787 is not the first CFRP airplane (which is in-fact, only 50% CFRP compared to the 53% CFRP on the A350). It's just the first airliner. The Beech Starship has a long history of CFRP operations and never was flammability or combustibility of the airframe an issue. Same with the CFRP-heavy Avanti. So why is the 787 suddenly different? Because the media says it is? The same media who can't tell the difference between a 737 and an A320? The same media who will listen to a lady who watches planes from a fence line on occasion as if she's been working in the industry for 30 years? When a battery catches fire, it's not the fault of the CFRP, so why are you acting like it is?

User avatar
airboatr
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 6775
Joined: 25 Oct 2007, 07:17

Re: Ethiopian 787 Repair...

Post by airboatr »

Chris Trott wrote:The same media who will listen to a lady who watches planes from a fence line on occasion as if she's been working in the industry for 30 years? When a battery catches fire, it's not the fault of the CFRP, so why are you acting like it is?
As compared to someone who pumps gas? ..... admittedly you do pump a lot of it. - Gas that is.

:wasntme:

User avatar
Chris Trott
Vintage Pair
Vintage Pair
Posts: 2591
Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 05:16
Location: Houston, Texas, USA
Contact:

Re: Ethiopian 787 Repair...

Post by Chris Trott »

I don't go out to the media and try to tell them what happened either. I do the research when I don't know the answer. The FAA published several reports on CFRP flammability, including the Boeing spec and found that the CFRP isn't especially flammable but suggested a modification to the resin because it did prove to have some flammability problems.

http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/07-57.pdf

http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/2007conferen ... esPres.pdf

http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/ar11-6.pdf

User avatar
airboatr
Red Arrows
Red Arrows
Posts: 6775
Joined: 25 Oct 2007, 07:17

Re: Ethiopian 787 Repair...

Post by airboatr »

You mean you read others published research? Or am I to understand Boeing granted you access to said aircraft so as to conduct your own research.

If the latter is the case. ?. My apologies.

Cheers

Joe

Post Reply