787 program quality starting to fall apart?

[Mojocvh]

Latest of a series of mishaps

http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/drea...

"The incident was the second in less than 10 days involving engines from GE and Rolls-Royce on Dreamliners. Japan's All Nippon Airways pulled five 787s with Rolls-Royce engines from service on July 21 after the manufacturer found that some components had a shorter-than-expected service life.

Oddly enough the Rollers issue is with the gearbox manufacture of which is subcontracted to GE I believe........



http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57482008/bo...

Edited by Mojocvh on Wednesday 1st August 10:58

[Mojocvh]

thehawk said:

Not really the 787 or Boeing though is it?

It's their name on the label.

[Mojocvh]

Talksteer said:

Please don't use the term Roller or similar when referring to Rolls-Royce it's plebeian :-)

The correct term is a Royce or Royce's.... also always use the hyphen.

GE bought Smiths Groups Aviation business a few years ago, the design will date before that point.

Yep, just knew you'd bite. Get over yourself.

[Mojocvh]

dr_gn said:

Mojocvh said:

thehawk said:

Not really the 787 or Boeing though is it?

It's their name on the label.

And it's Airbus on the label of the A380 with their recent engine failures too, so why single out Boeing?

If you're trying to do something new, and to make progress, these things are bound to happen, it's hardly "quality falling apart" in either case.

Really? We shall see.

[Mojocvh]

Godalmighty83 said:

Or the reference to his claim that the f-35 b has suddenly dropped over 2g's of performance over night with no-one realising.

Actually it never had it in the first place but do carry on....

[Mojocvh]

Chuck328 said:

Do you know something we don't?

I sincerely hope not..

[Mojocvh]

Godalmighty83 said:

It's not the first time he has used that phrase to avoid posting any sort of info or source or infact anything to support his opinion.

Oooo I'm being monopulsed tracked then

[Mojocvh]

el stovey said:

dr_gn said:

el stovey said:

Godalmighty83 said:

Chuck328 said:

Do you know something we don't?

It's not the first time he has used that phrase to avoid posting any sort of info or source or infact anything to support his opinion.

He has some connection to EADS.

I would say that is extremely unlikely. Maybe 30 years ago but little knowledge of the state-of-the-art. In my opinion

I don't know but there's a clear anti Boeing stance. I'm not saying people from EADS are anti Boeing or vice versa but he is for some reason.

Far from it.

However their use of **grandfather rules in aircraft certification is quite exceptional, I think you will agree.

787 fuselage crash testing, just use an empty barrel that will be representative of a finished aircraft. Etc, etc.

• where existing designs are allowed to stay in production and "skip" aircraft types, despite more up to date legislative requirements having been issued by the authorities.

Door size, want to talk about that ES?.

[Mojocvh]

el stovey said:

He has some connection to EADS and posts this twaddle all the time.

Wrong! Have extensive experience of a number of aircraft manufacturers procedures and quality systems, some are good, some have their get-out clauses and some, well, are just contradictory

[Mojocvh]

dr_gn said:

BTW, we're still waiting for a reference for your statement on the other thread that the F-16 E/F has 1,000,000 times the computing power of the current USAF F-16C/D...Or did you simply make it up?

Nope. And that isn't what I said either, is it.



However.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article10.html

"he aircraft's advanced avionics suite has room available for future improvements. The Block 60's modular mission computer has a processing throughput of 12.5 million instructions per second and provides sensor and weapons integration."

und

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-uaes-f-16-...

have a wee read to yourselves.