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.

(The Local)   One of the advantages of the Dreamliner of course, is that it doesn't really need all that fuel   (thelocal.no) divider line 54
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

10392 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jan 2014 at 12:56 PM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-21 12:38:28 PM
farm4.staticflickr.com
 
2014-01-21 12:58:35 PM
ill say done in one.
 
2014-01-21 12:59:20 PM

echomike23: ill say done in one.


Yeppers.
 
2014-01-21 01:00:22 PM
I'm guessing someone forgot to close something after putting fuel in.  Or the fuel dumping mechanism (for getting rid of it to lose weight before an emergency landing, for instance) was left on by mistake.
 
2014-01-21 01:01:34 PM
Confucious say: Man who walk through airport turnstyle with hard-on, going to Bangkok.
 
2014-01-21 01:02:21 PM
It's just wants to be an SR-71 Blackbird when it grows up.
 
2014-01-21 01:03:38 PM
Balto said that most of her fellow passengers were sympathetic to Norwegian, with few blaming the airline for its problems.

My first thought is that this was a maintenance or procedural problem.  Why did these passengers arrive at the opposite?
 
2014-01-21 01:03:58 PM
"The passengers weren't angry at Norwegian, but felt more that Norwegian has unfortunately been put into a very difficult situation by buying these Dreamliner planes."

Apparently Boeing is the only game in town. Which would be sad.
 
2014-01-21 01:04:29 PM
But, if the igniters had worked...

How cool would the plane have worked during takeoff:

www.semissourian.com
 
2014-01-21 01:05:11 PM
I just can't wait for a Dreamliner to have a hull lose accident, maybe even fatal, just so air crash investigation does an episode on it
 
2014-01-21 01:05:53 PM
that is one crappy airplane. we can't even do aviation right anymore. welcome to americastan.
 
2014-01-21 01:06:17 PM
The Horrorliner continues to grow its legend.
 
2014-01-21 01:09:21 PM

echomike23: ill say done in one.


I'll disagree - 'tis done in the headline.
 
2014-01-21 01:11:34 PM
The passengers weren't in any danger except for the fact strikes in Bangkok are pushing for revolution, and the police have been playing nice so far.
 
2014-01-21 01:13:58 PM
I like the Spokesman for the airline said yes the pilot noticed it and no one was in an trouble.  I didn't know the pilot was using his smartphone on takeoff from the cockpit.

It's just like Docs when a patient has the correct answer, Doc says no no you don't have that even as they are writing it down on the chart.

Some poeple can noever be wrong.

(see those words above are Norwegian spelling, not a mistake by myself)
 
2014-01-21 01:15:46 PM
Hmmm ... fuel leaks and batteries that like to ignite. Good combo!
 
2014-01-21 01:16:45 PM
Scareliner?
 
2014-01-21 01:18:17 PM
Again, blaming the maker instead of the airline running the thing.
 
2014-01-21 01:18:25 PM
The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.
 
2014-01-21 01:21:25 PM

Rapmaster2000: Balto said that most of her fellow passengers were sympathetic to Norwegian, with few blaming the airline for its problems.

My first thought is that this was a maintenance or procedural problem.  Why did these passengers arrive at the opposite?


Because Boeing has already admitted in public that the 787s delivered to Norwegian haven't met reliability goals. Fairly or unfairly, they own every technical problem with those planes now.
 
2014-01-21 01:23:18 PM
You get what you pay for. You want plastic? We'll sell you plastic.
 
2014-01-21 01:33:30 PM
Nervous sex tourists upset at unwanted publicity for their trip to Thailand.
 
2014-01-21 01:34:36 PM

LewDux: Scareliner?


I think the official unofficial name is Screamliner
 
2014-01-21 01:48:04 PM

tuna762: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.


I am not a scientist but I'm pretty sure liquid fuel will not expand by any significant amount at that range of temperatures.
 
2014-01-21 01:52:54 PM

Jument: tuna762: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

I am not a scientist but I'm pretty sure liquid fuel will not expand by any significant amount at that range of temperatures.


No, but the air in the tanks will.
 
2014-01-21 01:54:28 PM

moike: Jument: tuna762: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

I am not a scientist but I'm pretty sure liquid fuel will not expand by any significant amount at that range of temperatures.

No, but the air in the tanks will.


Well then he should have said that. This is the internet!
 
2014-01-21 01:57:13 PM
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-01-21 01:59:26 PM
Didn't I see this same link on Boeing Boeing?
 
2014-01-21 02:03:36 PM
If only they could vanquish those pesky unions, this would never have happened!  Boeing's mechanics sabotaged teh company!!
 
2014-01-21 02:07:07 PM

Dinobot: I just can't wait for a Dreamliner to have a hull lose accident, maybe even fatal, just so air crash investigation does an episode on it


Even for Fark, that's pretty sick.
 
2014-01-21 02:12:27 PM
I love how the pilot "was aware of it" since taxiing, and took off anyway; but as soon as a passenger reported it, the plane landed immediately. See, if there's a problem, ok, there's a problem. But don't lie to me about it. Because now you're the problem.
 
2014-01-21 02:24:56 PM
The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

2 Points:  Shouldn't the folks filling the tanks be aware of that and not put quite so much in?  And 2, the leak isn't coming from the wingtips.
 
2014-01-21 02:34:20 PM
What takeoff may have looked like...

www.askthepilot.com
 
2014-01-21 02:41:30 PM
wow, judging from the picture and the jet fuel they lost, that is about..hang on.. carry the 1.. yup ok i did the math, thats about another $20 per carry on for the next few years worth of fuel on the taxiway.
 
2014-01-21 02:51:54 PM

other_white_meat: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

2 Points:  Shouldn't the folks filling the tanks be aware of that and not put quite so much in?  And 2, the leak isn't coming from the wingtips.


That's because the vents in question aren't on the wingtips. That's where the surge tank overflow valve exits. Looks like it's simply a valve that failed to shut. Happens on all types of aircraft on a not-too-rare occasion.
 
2014-01-21 02:58:04 PM

Dinodork: other_white_meat: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

2 Points:  Shouldn't the folks filling the tanks be aware of that and not put quite so much in?  And 2, the leak isn't coming from the wingtips.

That's because the vents in question aren't on the wingtips. That's where the surge tank overflow valve exits. Looks like it's simply a valve that failed to shut. Happens on all types of aircraft on a not-too-rare occasion.


This type of venting would vent the air from the top of the tanks first. You would not design them to vent from the bottom of the tanks.

Nice try but the article mentions a stuck valve.
 
2014-01-21 03:07:20 PM

Rapmaster2000: Balto said that most of her fellow passengers were sympathetic to Norwegian, with few blaming the airline for its problems.

My first thought is that this was a maintenance or procedural problem.  Why did these passengers arrive at the opposite?


There must not have been very many people from the US on the flight.  They're rationally thinking people who understand shait happens and it would have been handled fine.

People from the US would be screaming bloody murder and be wanting to sue about Hertz for allegedly being responsible when a gas station attendant doesn't put a gas cap back on right.

Really, it's embarrassing.
 
2014-01-21 03:31:46 PM
Ever noticed how all of these Dreamliner problems have occurred only on craft owned and operated by third world airlines? It isn't the airplane or its design. Boeing doesn't build bad planes. It's the shiatty maintenance and improper operations that is the problem here.
 
2014-01-21 03:40:07 PM

JackieRabbit: Ever noticed how all of these Dreamliner problems have occurred only on craft owned and operated by third world airlines? It isn't the airplane or its design. Boeing doesn't build bad planes. It's the shiatty maintenance and improper operations that is the problem here.


Are you seriously suggesting that Norway is a 3rd world country?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/norway-greatest-place-on-ea rt h_n_4550413.html
 
2014-01-21 03:44:39 PM

JackieRabbit: Ever noticed how all of these Dreamliner problems have occurred only on craft owned and operated by third world airlines? It isn't the airplane or its design. Boeing doesn't build bad planes. It's the shiatty maintenance and improper operations that is the problem here.


True. Norway is a total third-world shiat hole.
 
2014-01-21 03:46:31 PM

BiffSpiffy: I like the Spokesman for the airline said yes the pilot noticed it and no one was in an trouble.  I didn't know the pilot was using his smartphone on takeoff from the cockpit.

It's just like Docs when a patient has the correct answer, Doc says no no you don't have that even as they are writing it down on the chart.

Some poeple can noever be wrong.

(see those words above are Norwegian spelling, not a mistake by myself)


The statement from the airline contradicts the article. If the pilot had already noticed it then why did the plane stop only after the cabin crew alerted her?

I don't think the pilot was using her cell phone. The phone the cabin crew used to alert her was probably the intercom handset.
 
2014-01-21 03:59:38 PM

Farking Canuck: Dinodork: other_white_meat: The vents for the tanks are on the wing tips. If the plane was loaded near full with fuel say from a truck that sat in the cold outside air and the the fuel warmed in the tanks it will expand and vent from the wing tips instead of rupturing the tanks. Its a feature not a bug.

2 Points:  Shouldn't the folks filling the tanks be aware of that and not put quite so much in?  And 2, the leak isn't coming from the wingtips.

That's because the vents in question aren't on the wingtips. That's where the surge tank overflow valve exits. Looks like it's simply a valve that failed to shut. Happens on all types of aircraft on a not-too-rare occasion.

This type of venting would vent the air from the top of the tanks first. You would not design them to vent from the bottom of the tanks.

Nice try but the article mentions a stuck valve.


You would, because the fuel vapor venting from the top would be far more dangerous than the liquid fuel.
 
2014-01-21 04:18:43 PM

Farking Canuck: LewDux: Scareliner?

I think the official unofficial name is Screamliner


Doomliner?
 
2014-01-21 04:21:06 PM

TrollingForColumbine: that is one crappy airplane. we can't even do aviation right anymore. welcome to americastan.



The  De Havilland Comet was verysuccessful and three of them fell apart in the air before they figured out the windows were the wrong shape. I'd say the Dreamliners teething problems are relatively minor for such a complex machine.
 
2014-01-21 04:50:31 PM

Best Princess Celestia: This type of venting would vent the air from the top of the tanks first. You would not design them to vent from the bottom of the tanks.

Nice try but the article mentions a stuck valve.

You would, because the fuel vapor venting from the top would be far more dangerous than the liquid fuel.


Right ... because there is no vapor coming off the pools of liquid fuel all over the runway and in the hangar.

Additionally, it is highly unlikely that there would be open vents. If venting was the preferred response to over-pressure it would likely be on pressure release valves and not open air vents.

And, of course, you still have not addressed this:

FTFA:fuel pouring out of a leaking valve on one of the new planes' wings

Clearly says "leaking valve".

It is also interesting that only one wing experienced your theoretical "temperature differential" problem. Was the other wing in the shade?
 
2014-01-21 05:39:48 PM

TrollingForColumbine: that is one crappy airplane. we can't even do aviation right anymore. welcome to americastan.


The Dreamliner is built from parts manufactured from all over the globe. Your beef is with the country of origin that built the valve, or the Norwegian carrier's maintenance (or lack thereof).
 
2014-01-21 05:56:34 PM

Farking Canuck: JackieRabbit: Ever noticed how all of these Dreamliner problems have occurred only on craft owned and operated by third world airlines? It isn't the airplane or its design. Boeing doesn't build bad planes. It's the shiatty maintenance and improper operations that is the problem here.

Are you seriously suggesting that Norway is a 3rd world country?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/norway-greatest-place-on-ea rt h_n_4550413.html


3rd world has nothing to do with prosperity.  It is an Cold War term to describe a nation's allegiance to either the US and NATO or the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact.

3rd world indicated a country without direct ties or allegiance to either.  While Norway is and was a NATO country and is therefore 1st world, it is not 3rd world because of its prosperity.
 
2014-01-21 06:29:03 PM
I think there is a valve and hose in the flap rail cover leading to the fuel dump nozzle at the back. Something amiss there I think.
 
2014-01-21 06:47:55 PM

AirGee: 3rd world indicated a country without direct ties or allegiance to either. While Norway is and was a NATO country and is therefore 1st world, it is not 3rd world because of its prosperity.


The original definition is as you described. Current common usage is for a underdeveloped country (languages evolve). Either way, JackieRabbit's assertion that Norway is a 3rd world country is incorrect.
 
2014-01-21 07:32:06 PM

JackieRabbit: Ever noticed how all of these Dreamliner problems have occurred only on craft owned and operated by third world airlines? It isn't the airplane or its design. Boeing doesn't build bad planes. It's the shiatty maintenance and improper operations that is the problem here.


Yes, Japan and Norway are certainly third world shiat holes.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report