If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chicago Trib)   Japan Airlines 787 Dreamliner involved in incident at Boston Logan airport. This is not a repeat from yesterday. Honestly. Not even the same plane   (chicagotribune.com) divider line 84
    More: Scary, Japan Airlines, Logan International Airport, Dreamliner, Boeing, leaks, jal, electrical fire, airlines  
•       •       •

8832 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Jan 2013 at 5:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



84 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-08 05:44:34 PM
More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???
 
2013-01-08 05:44:36 PM
Dammit, subby. Why did this get greenlighted and my very similar headline didn't? :(
 
2013-01-08 05:47:10 PM
Why on earth are they making a big deal about fuel leaks on a heavy wide bodies aircraft. Its not like jet fuel even burns very well.

/the vapors on the the other hand....
 
2013-01-08 05:48:42 PM
If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going! Looks like I ain't going.
 
2013-01-08 05:49:12 PM
Good thing they outsourced the production of parts to all over the world. We all know how badly those union thugs screwed up the 747 and 737. So now your choice is Airbus running Windows ME as the OS for the fly by wire controls, or a plastic POS put together badly. Great/.

/kidding about the Airbus, but only barely....
 
2013-01-08 05:51:12 PM
Saw yesterday the dreamliner was on a nonstop (Narita/Logan) had smoke in the cargo hold/cabin after everyone had deplaned normally Smoke spread from cargo gold to cabin when fire crews arrived. The article alluded to, but did not say outright it may be a power panel issue.
 
2013-01-08 05:51:34 PM
I read the headline as "Barrio Logan" and thought, hmm, a plane crash there would increase the real-estate values.
 
2013-01-08 05:51:37 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???


Dammit ... well played.
 
2013-01-08 05:51:38 PM
Maxor


This isn't the SR-71. When your fuel-line couplings are put together improperly, it may a negative impact on reaching one's destination. It's kind of a big deal.
 
2013-01-08 05:52:13 PM
*ones
 
2013-01-08 05:52:19 PM
Every new major aircraft that isn't an iteration on a previous design undergoes a break in period. Let's just hope this one doesn't go on much longer.

I'm still waiting for those blended wing-body aircraft we were promised a decade ago.
 
2013-01-08 05:52:20 PM
dvdmedia.ign.com

I told you guys it was Dangerous.

/this is a repeat from yesterday
 
2013-01-08 05:52:46 PM
Call me when one crashes.
 
2013-01-08 05:53:59 PM
I picked the wrong week to quit smoking.
 
2013-01-08 05:56:27 PM

lordargent: I read the headline as "Barrio Logan" and thought, hmm, a plane crash there would increase the real-estate values.


What a plane crash into San Diego might look like
kfmb.images.worldnow.com
 
2013-01-08 05:59:13 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???


i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-08 05:59:17 PM
I had a clear view of Logan on 9/11.


/obscure?
 
2013-01-08 06:00:36 PM

Lev_Astov: Every new major aircraft that isn't an iteration on a previous design undergoes a break in period.

You mean like the Comet?
 
2013-01-08 06:02:12 PM
+1 on FlippityFlap's comment.

This isn't the SR-71, who's design sort of demanded that it leak like a sieve on the Tarmac.
 
2013-01-08 06:02:22 PM
Still Beta testing?
 
2013-01-08 06:02:29 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER


I like the parallel with "Scarebus".

/You may have already had that in mind
 
2013-01-08 06:03:09 PM

vabeard: I had a clear view of Logan on 9/11.


/obscure?


You're joking right?
 
2013-01-08 06:07:02 PM
The plane yesterday had an overheated battery.

The plane with the fuel leak is not ascertained, but given that it already left (four hours late) it wasn't a major problem.

The description of the battery incident mentioned that the battery might have been worsened when the battery was hit with a fire ax.

Do we really need to get into a comparitive of how the DC-10 had doors that blew open causing loss of aircraft, the comets that unravelled like a self peeling banana, the A320 with the hull losses due to FBW tech, the 747's that often didn't leave the gate because of major engine issues, the 777 that had a knack for stranding people in siberia due to engine shutdowns in flight, or the many issues that the MD-11 had on introduction with not being able to make the full trip? The A380 had an engine explode that shredded a wing. Oh and the A380 had a bunch of cracks in the wing too.

New planes have problems. So far the 787 has had a bunch but nothing that should cause hysteria and panic.
 
2013-01-08 06:08:34 PM
So, Boeing: sell, hold or buy?
 
2013-01-08 06:09:13 PM
FWIW
"While we have complete confidence that Boeing will ultimately rectify this problem, our experience has shown that random electrical issues with aircraft can be very difficult to troubleshoot. If the problem is in the software, there are millions of lines of code to examine. If the problem is in the wiring there are over 50 miles of wiring and 50,000 connectors that could be the cause. Hardware problems are the easiest to fix, but at this stage we find it hard to believe the problem is related to such highly tested items. The fact that Boeing (1) made major replacements of traditional copper wire with aluminum wire and (2) for the first time in its history outsourced the production and installation of its electrical connection systems only increases our concern that this issue may be more difficult to solve than most are assuming."- Carter Leake (snicker) analyst at BB&T
 
2013-01-08 06:10:29 PM
I'm still waiting for those blended wing-body aircraft we were promised a decade ago.

Ain't happening for passenger use. People sitting at the far ends of the rectangular passenger compartment would experience zero-G/+2 g forces every time the plane rolled into a turn. Not a pleasant experience over and over and over....
 
2013-01-08 06:12:28 PM
starrion

You DON'T hit your battery with a fire ax? What's it doing in my engine compartment then?
 
2013-01-08 06:13:08 PM
New aircraft designs tend to have issues for about the first 2 years. Its being the much hyped 78 isn't helping the publicity department.
 
2013-01-08 06:13:50 PM

FlippityFlap: starrion

You DON'T hit your battery with a fire ax? What's it doing in my engine compartment then?


axing questions.
 
2013-01-08 06:15:02 PM

Lev_Astov: wing


The problem with large BWBs is that people have to sit really far out from the centerline of the aircraft. Like 50ft+. This causes up and down movements of like 20ft vertically when the airplane enters turns. Turns aren't really all that noticeable on the thin tubes we have today, but in those its causes some serious discomfort to the point of widespread motionsickness.

Also, its hard to come up with an acceptable method of evacuating the airplane with the ratio of wall space (ie: places for exists) to people onboard so much lower. Right now everyone is close to an aisle and close to an exit. Lot different when the interior looks more like movie theater seating.
 
2013-01-08 06:15:18 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???


Yes!
 
2013-01-08 06:15:21 PM

starrion: The description of the battery incident mentioned that the battery might have been worsened when the battery was hit with a fire ax.


Oh, details.
 
2013-01-08 06:15:29 PM

Charlie: "Ray, all airlines have crashed at one time or another, that doesn't mean that they are not safe. "


Raymond: "QANTAS. QANTAS never crashed. "


Charlie: "QANTAS? "


Raymond: "Never crashed. "


Charlie: "Oh that's gonna do me a lot of good because QANTAS doesn't fly to Japan out of Boston, you have to get to Melbourne! Melbourne, Australia in order to get the plane that flies to Japan! "


2.bp.blogspot.com

 
2013-01-08 06:16:31 PM

vabeard: I had a clear view of Logan on 9/11.

/obscure?


What? Why? Something happen on 9/11?

In other news, I didn't even realize the Dreamliners were flying. All of a sudden they're causing incidents. Maybe they're not ready for primetime.
 
2013-01-08 06:18:21 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???


I think this is karma for all the trolls who made scarebus comments.

farking morons.

/Screamliner.
 
2013-01-08 06:28:29 PM

darch: +1 on FlippityFlap's comment.

This isn't the SR-71, who's design sort of demanded that it leak like a sieve on the Tarmac.


How does a plane fly like that?

spawn73: 95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???

I think this is karma for all the trolls who made scarebus comments.

farking morons.

/Screamliner.


I don't get it.

1.bp.blogspot.com

My brain is full of billions and billions of Wat.
 
2013-01-08 06:28:42 PM
Flying into Logan tomorrow night on a Boeing. (A 717, so I should be fine). I really shouldn't be reading articles like this beforehand though.
 
2013-01-08 06:29:49 PM

95629: More like SCREAMLINER

Amirite???


I like it.
 
2013-01-08 06:30:38 PM

Fark Rye For Many Whores: How does a plane fly like that?


really really really fast.
 
2013-01-08 06:31:19 PM

Fark Rye For Many Whores: darch: +1 on FlippityFlap's comment.

This isn't the SR-71, who's design sort of demanded that it leak like a sieve on the Tarmac.

How does a plane fly like that?


Answering my own question, special fuel won't light unless lit specially: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sr-71#Fuel
 
2013-01-08 06:31:24 PM
Ok, this whole 'SCREAMLINER' things seems to be growing legs. So, and it may seem petty, you may want to redirect your praise to me as I coined it in yesterday's thread.SCREAMLINER

/in fact, truth be known, I've been pushing it in pretty much every Boeing thread for the last few months
 
2013-01-08 06:34:20 PM
If yours is a serious question, the SR-71 flew so high and so fast that it literally expanded in flight. The body was designed to flex. Great for hypersonic, stratospheric flight, not so great parked on a Tarmac.
 
2013-01-08 06:35:50 PM

Cormee: Ok, this whole 'SCREAMLINER' things seems to be growing legs. So, and it may seem petty, you may want to redirect your praise to me as I coined it in yesterday's thread.SCREAMLINER

/in fact, truth be known, I've been pushing it in pretty much every Boeing thread for the last few months


The engineers coined it man. It's as old as Scarebus.
 
2013-01-08 06:37:41 PM

FlippityFlap: *ones


I like how you corrected one error in your post but not another

/screamliner
 
2013-01-08 06:38:58 PM

Acharne: Cormee: Ok, this whole 'SCREAMLINER' things seems to be growing legs. So, and it may seem petty, you may want to redirect your praise to me as I coined it in yesterday's thread.SCREAMLINER

/in fact, truth be known, I've been pushing it in pretty much every Boeing thread for the last few months

The engineers coined it man. It's as old as Scarebus.


'The engineers' ?

Right.

Only other mention I can find of it in relation to Boeing, using Google, is some article in an Onion- type site from a year back.
 
2013-01-08 06:40:14 PM

jack21221: Flying into Logan tomorrow night on a Boeing. (A 717, so I should be fine). I really shouldn't be reading articles like this beforehand though.


You should be fine. That isn't really a Boeing.
 
2013-01-08 06:43:07 PM

Maxor: Why on earth are they making a big deal about fuel leaks on a heavy wide bodies aircraft. Its not like jet fuel even burns very well.

/the vapors on the the other hand....


hmmmm because typically they DON'T LEAK! what you think this is an SR-71 designed to go 3.5 Mach?
your pretend 'expertised' on fuel systems and aircraft skin contraction may work at other forum but no here chump.

and jet fuel do burn!
 
2013-01-08 06:43:23 PM

Cormee: Ok, this whole 'SCREAMLINER' things seems to be growing legs. So, and it may seem petty, you may want to redirect your praise to me as I coined it in yesterday's thread.SCREAMLINER

/in fact, truth be known, I've been pushing it in pretty much every Boeing thread for the last few months


Yesterday it was too-soon. Today, well, its almost so-last-week.
 
2013-01-08 06:43:53 PM
Airbus / Scarebus continues its ritual un-prosecuted pre-meditated killing of passengers world wide. From forcing tsunami destroyed countries to buy Scarebus to get aid, to failing the A380 150% wing-loading test, Scarebus builds on its reputation for falling out of the sky. FL35, cruise and it "breaks up". Nice. Good planes.

If its not a Boeing, I'm not going.

Scarebus continues its engineering of murder and mayhem the world over. How many of our sons, daughters mothers and fathers and wives and husbands must be murdered by SCAREBUS before we stop this animal!

There have been recent and still as yet unexplained incidents at cruising altitude in the A330

See Qantas A330-300 (Flight QF72) emergency landing in Western Australia:

http://www.youtube.com/v/5d7aZtSOWZE

Concerning an A330 crash at an air show in France; a Discovery Channel documentary on this plane indicates that Air France had their best pilot on this plane and that computer was the cause:

http://www.youtube.com/v/fX4_Ho992TQ

Airbus / Scarebus continues its ritual un-prosecuted pre-meditated killing of passengers world wide. From forcing tsunami destroyed countries to buy Scarebus to get aid, to failing the A380 150% wing-loading test, Scarebus builds on its reputation for falling out of the sky. FL35, cruise and it "breaks up". Nice. Good planes.

Boeing planes crash because operators violate the plane. Screw up maintenance. Basically Boeing crashes are from terrorists, people painting over pressure sensors, people flying them into things or massive mechanical failures brought on by horrific neglect or poor maintenance. They can be EXPLAINED.

Scarebus accidents have a scary high percentage of massive catastrophic failure that cannot be explained.

All I have to say is : B-17, B-24, B-29 and B-52, these planes were built in ways that could soak up gun fire for well over 60 years. They know how to build planes that have more than normal survivability. Air BUS. Its not AirPlane, its AirBus. Cheap garbage made as cheaply as possible to line the pockets of fat cats and unionized sickos and the safety of the plane is left to be at the EXACT minimums required, and they cheat often at those. Airbus is the culture of death. If you own stock in them, you are a killer. If you work for them, you are a killer.
 
2013-01-08 06:54:54 PM

darch: If yours is a serious question, the SR-71 flew so high and so fast that it literally expanded in flight. The body was designed to flex. Great for hypersonic, stratospheric flight, not so great parked on a Tarmac.


Concorde too expanded in flight. There were expansion joints on the floor of the cabin. Captains used to tell the passengers it was normal to see the floor plates move, however if you could see the ocean through one of the openings, to warn the flight atendant.
 
Displayed 50 of 84 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report