Skip to content
 
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.

(Aviation International News)   "Fuselage surface below the paint is degrading at an accelerated rate" is probably not what you want to discover on your Airbus A350 fleet   (ainonline.com) divider line
    More: Scary, Airbus A350, Qatar Airways, Airline, Airbus A350 aircraft, Qatar's civil aviation authorities today, latest development, Airbus A330, US Airways  
•       •       •

860 clicks; posted to STEM » on 05 Aug 2021 at 5:45 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



33 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-08-05 5:07:30 PM  
Sounds like a t-shirt you should give to your mom.
 
2021-08-05 5:55:21 PM  
Well at least the fault was found and the planes grounded before multiple crashes occurred killing hundreds of people. Or was that something i missed in the past few months?
 
2021-08-05 6:04:30 PM  
Should have paid for the undercoating.
 
2021-08-05 6:08:10 PM  
Sounds like the paint shop made some serious mistakes.
 
2021-08-05 6:17:17 PM  

WelldeadLink: Should have paid for the undercoating.


static3.thethingsimages.comView Full Size


moneysense.caView Full Size


/indeed
 
2021-08-05 6:18:43 PM  

aaronx: Sounds like the paint shop made some serious mistakes.


Should have ground that aluminum down to bare steel.
 
2021-08-05 6:45:43 PM  
Good thing we all sit in the top half of the fuselage.
 
2021-08-05 6:55:20 PM  

WelldeadLink: aaronx: Sounds like the paint shop made some serious mistakes.

Should have ground that aluminum down to bare steel.


A350s are made from recycled yogurt cups.
 
2021-08-05 6:58:36 PM  
"which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.
 
2021-08-05 7:03:11 PM  
Obvious fix:

Needs more paint.
 
2021-08-05 7:10:57 PM  

iToad: "which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.


No, it doesn't. It also sounds like these are new airframes, which usually means being painted by the manufacturer, although the fuselage barrel assemblies would probably be primed by the sub-contractor. Hmm, Wonder what kind of degradation they are seeing. if aluminum fasteners were used to attach sub-structure, they would need to have a resilient coating that could take installation forces without being compromised. Otherwise the aluminum would corrode when touching the carbon fiber.
 
2021-08-05 7:11:05 PM  
It'd be nice if they explained how the aluminium is degrading and what paint has to do with it.
 
2021-08-05 7:17:04 PM  
Now he's on the fuselage!
i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2021-08-05 7:20:04 PM  

riffraff: iToad: "which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.

No, it doesn't. It also sounds like these are new airframes, which usually means being painted by the manufacturer, although the fuselage barrel assemblies would probably be primed by the sub-contractor. Hmm, Wonder what kind of degradation they are seeing. if aluminum fasteners were used to attach sub-structure, they would need to have a resilient coating that could take installation forces without being compromised. Otherwise the aluminum would corrode when touching the carbon fiber.


Yea, very odd.  It isn't as if they can simply replace a panel if it was a manufacturing defect as the composite frame doesn't lend itself to that like more traditional metal body. Given it is across multiple new air frames I wonder what is going on and if their composite recipe wasn't quite right resulting in degraded performance on this production run.  It is a newer design but there are 400+ air frames manufactured, so it if it was straight design flaw, you would have think it would have been discovered before now.
 
2021-08-05 7:33:34 PM  

Daedalus27: riffraff: iToad: "which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.

No, it doesn't. It also sounds like these are new airframes, which usually means being painted by the manufacturer, although the fuselage barrel assemblies would probably be primed by the sub-contractor. Hmm, Wonder what kind of degradation they are seeing. if aluminum fasteners were used to attach sub-structure, they would need to have a resilient coating that could take installation forces without being compromised. Otherwise the aluminum would corrode when touching the carbon fiber.

Yea, very odd.  It isn't as if they can simply replace a panel if it was a manufacturing defect as the composite frame doesn't lend itself to that like more traditional metal body. Given it is across multiple new air frames I wonder what is going on and if their composite recipe wasn't quite right resulting in degraded performance on this production run.  It is a newer design but there are 400+ air frames manufactured, so it if it was straight design flaw, you would have think it would have been discovered before now.


Yup. Sounds like it could have been a bad lot of pre-preg fabric or adhesive, possibly. Or they could have pissed off the autoclave gods and forgot to sacrifice a cat that month.
 
2021-08-05 7:44:18 PM  
The Boeing design for planes until the 787 were forged in fire... the fire of war with the B-17 and the B-29. The techniques used to keep the B-17 together when they full of holes was used to keep the pressure in on the B-29.  The shields in a 747 engine that keep the engine parts mostly contained when they fail is directly related to the anti-flak shields that have a history going back to at least the B-17.
 
2021-08-05 8:02:56 PM  

aaronx: Sounds like the paint shop made some serious mistakes.


Sounds like delamination of the composite fuselage.
 
2021-08-05 8:32:02 PM  

iToad: "which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.


It's not, and I already know what happened. I've seen the exact same thing happen on painted composites before. They used an incompatible curing agent during the painting process. During the process of evaporation and curing, the agent degraded the epoxy in the composite material (likely fiberglass and carbon fiber interwoven).

They DO make curing agents that are specifically formulated to play nice with composite resins and epoxies, but they cost more. My guess is someone was looking to save a buck somewhere in the supply chain.
 
2021-08-05 8:36:04 PM  

scanman61: aaronx: Sounds like the paint shop made some serious mistakes.

Sounds like delamination of the composite fuselage.


That's not really how stuff like this usually fails. Delamination infers improper epoxy application, which is so easy to spot just be visual inspection that there's no way a part at risk of delamination would make it past QC.

They degraded the epoxy in the composites with incompatible curing agents used in the paint. Very easy to do if you don't know what you're doing, and can often happen just by virtue of following the product instructions without thinking you're doing anything wrong. Many paints use similar curing agents in their use as what is used in the curing of the epoxies in most composites. They make curing agents specifically to play nice with composite resins and epoxies and those can be a bit more expensive. Someone cut corners.
 
2021-08-05 8:38:48 PM  

riffraff: Daedalus27: riffraff: iToad: "which has an all-composite fuselage". Doesn't sound cheap or easy to fix.

No, it doesn't. It also sounds like these are new airframes, which usually means being painted by the manufacturer, although the fuselage barrel assemblies would probably be primed by the sub-contractor. Hmm, Wonder what kind of degradation they are seeing. if aluminum fasteners were used to attach sub-structure, they would need to have a resilient coating that could take installation forces without being compromised. Otherwise the aluminum would corrode when touching the carbon fiber.

Yea, very odd.  It isn't as if they can simply replace a panel if it was a manufacturing defect as the composite frame doesn't lend itself to that like more traditional metal body. Given it is across multiple new air frames I wonder what is going on and if their composite recipe wasn't quite right resulting in degraded performance on this production run.  It is a newer design but there are 400+ air frames manufactured, so it if it was straight design flaw, you would have think it would have been discovered before now.

Yup. Sounds like it could have been a bad lot of pre-preg fabric or adhesive, possibly. Or they could have pissed off the autoclave gods and forgot to sacrifice a cat that month.


In shops where you'd see these parts made they have coupons built in specifically to test for that, and EVERY. PART. IS. TESTED.

All of the problem areas are under the paint. They used an improper curing agent during paint.
 
2021-08-05 8:58:51 PM  

Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: In shops where you'd see these parts made they have coupons built in specifically to test for that, and EVERY. PART. IS. TESTED.

All of the problem areas are under the paint. They used an improper curing agent during paint.


The big question is is that Airbus who cocked up or was it the airlines contractor who painted it?
 
2021-08-05 9:09:04 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: In shops where you'd see these parts made they have coupons built in specifically to test for that, and EVERY. PART. IS. TESTED.

All of the problem areas are under the paint. They used an improper curing agent during paint.

The big question is is that Airbus who cocked up or was it the airlines contractor who painted it?


Airbus does their painting in-house. However, whether someone in the supply chain was trying to pocket a few bucks seems far more likely. I've worked on Airbus parts and dealt with their QC and Supplier QEs. They're one of the more professional aerospace companies around, and I've dealt with Boeing, Lockheed Martin, 3M, ULA, SpaceX, SNC, etc..

I'd say it's a 30/70 chance as to whether it was actually INSIDE the Airbus supply chain that farked up or one of Airbus' suppliers that falsified a cert on the paint/cure, respectively. Aside from Boeing, stuff like this almost always traces back to a falsified cert. If you remember that rash of satellite deployment failures from the payload fairing failing to separate a while back, that was falsified certs. Wrong type of aluminum was used.
 
2021-08-05 9:26:41 PM  

Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: Airbus does their painting in-house. However, whether someone in the supply chain was trying to pocket a few bucks seems far more likely. I've worked on Airbus parts and dealt with their QC and Supplier QEs. They're one of the more professional aerospace companies around, and I've dealt with Boeing, Lockheed Martin, 3M, ULA, SpaceX, SNC, etc..


Well at least the British factory is in the clear. We make the wings, not the fuselage.

/You did also insist in mid 2016 that BAe would be out of business by the end of that year. They're still here....
 
2021-08-05 9:48:32 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: Airbus does their painting in-house. However, whether someone in the supply chain was trying to pocket a few bucks seems far more likely. I've worked on Airbus parts and dealt with their QC and Supplier QEs. They're one of the more professional aerospace companies around, and I've dealt with Boeing, Lockheed Martin, 3M, ULA, SpaceX, SNC, etc..

Well at least the British factory is in the clear. We make the wings, not the fuselage.

/You did also insist in mid 2016 that BAe would be out of business by the end of that year. They're still here....


They've been hemorrhaging contracts ever since. MCC got dropped by pretty much everyone and I think 90% of THAT market is now controlled by L3. EV Products? I don't see them anywhere anymore. The military doesn't want anything to do with them anymore and is contemplating refits to get rid of their BOFORS and MGS products in favor of actual American manufacturers.

I haven't had a single BAE product cross my bench in 4 years. Why? Because they're too much of a regulatory hassle to deal with anymore. You do realize that the latest re-hash of ITAR was negotiated with the US state department by the EU, right? That still hasn't been renegotiated and won't be until somebody with more than 2 neurons to rub together gets into parliament. They've been slowly losing contracts the the US big three, ALL the parts they had contracts for on the F-35 got switched over to 3M and GE.

They're not out of business YET, but their stock dropped over 40% the day the deadline hit. The only reason they're not dead yet is because the EU is treating the UK with kid gloves and as of yet hasn't had the heart to actually make them deal with the mess they've made. As soon as that happens, buh-bye!
 
2021-08-05 10:15:28 PM  
Anyone want to give odds on Qatar becoming a launch costumer for the A350-F?
 
2021-08-05 10:35:04 PM  

Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: They're not out of business YET, but their stock dropped over 40% the day the deadline hit. The only reason they're not dead yet is because the EU is treating the UK with kid gloves and as of yet hasn't had the heart to actually make them deal with the mess they've made. As soon as that happens, buh-bye!


I predicted this exact line. When a prediction fails to happen it would be "well the EU are being nice to us out of the generosity of their hearts".
BAe reported sales and profits up on last year. They sell more to the US military than to the UK, and just bought Raytheon and Collins GPS and radio business in the US. Their shares are up 15% YTD.
 
2021-08-05 10:47:21 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: They're not out of business YET, but their stock dropped over 40% the day the deadline hit. The only reason they're not dead yet is because the EU is treating the UK with kid gloves and as of yet hasn't had the heart to actually make them deal with the mess they've made. As soon as that happens, buh-bye!

I predicted this exact line. When a prediction fails to happen it would be "well the EU are being nice to us out of the generosity of their hearts".
BAe reported sales and profits up on last year. They sell more to the US military than to the UK, and just bought Raytheon and Collins GPS and radio business in the US. Their shares are up 15% YTD.


BAE is down ~30% since Brexit. Raytheon and Collins GPS does GPS for drones. And don't expect any new deliverables to have anything to do with BAE. UTC still has full control of everything else.

BAE is slowly getting removed from America's hair like sticky bubblegum. Don't kid yourself into thinking anything else. Deliverables to the US is down a full 50% or more since Brexit. Unless BAE decides to move keel over to the EU, there's simply too much hassle. I literally cannot share prints with UK-based BAE employees that have an ITAR box on them. Even if they are BAE prints being sent to a BAE e-mail address. UK based employees are sequestered. State Department has no sense of humor, and nobody UK-side has re-negotiated with them about ITAR. Nobody wants to deal with that, most of my clients turn down BAE contracts on principle. And the UK doesn't have well enough trained manufacturing capability to handle the stuff I work on.

Desperate propaganda from somebody desperate to be blind to the stupid decisions from a party of bigotry and white supremacy.
 
2021-08-05 11:04:08 PM  

Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: BAE is down ~30% since Brexit. Raytheon and Collins GPS does GPS for drones. And don't expect any new deliverables to have anything to do with BAE. UTC still has full control of everything else.

BAE is slowly getting removed from America's hair like sticky bubblegum. Don't kid yourself into thinking anything else. Deliverables to the US is down a full 50% or more since Brexit. Unless BAE decides to move keel over to the EU, there's simply too much hassle. I literally cannot share prints with UK-based BAE employees that have an ITAR box on them. Even if they are BAE prints being sent to a BAE e-mail address. UK based employees are sequestered. State Department has no sense of humor, and nobody UK-side has re-negotiated with them about ITAR. Nobody wants to deal with that, most of my clients turn down BAE contracts on principle. And the UK doesn't have well enough trained manufacturing capability to handle the stuff I work on.

Desperate propaganda from somebody desperate to be blind to the stupid decisions from a party of bigotry and white supremacy.


But you said they'd be out of business by the end of 2016.
 
2021-08-05 11:07:33 PM  
So if this is an Airbus cockup then will they have to replace the planes? If the fuselage is corroding can it be repaired? Economically? Composites usually require putting in an oven, and you can't do that when it's full of seats and electronics. And having to strip all that out is going to cost.
 
2021-08-05 11:23:13 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: BAE is down ~30% since Brexit. Raytheon and Collins GPS does GPS for drones. And don't expect any new deliverables to have anything to do with BAE. UTC still has full control of everything else.

BAE is slowly getting removed from America's hair like sticky bubblegum. Don't kid yourself into thinking anything else. Deliverables to the US is down a full 50% or more since Brexit. Unless BAE decides to move keel over to the EU, there's simply too much hassle. I literally cannot share prints with UK-based BAE employees that have an ITAR box on them. Even if they are BAE prints being sent to a BAE e-mail address. UK based employees are sequestered. State Department has no sense of humor, and nobody UK-side has re-negotiated with them about ITAR. Nobody wants to deal with that, most of my clients turn down BAE contracts on principle. And the UK doesn't have well enough trained manufacturing capability to handle the stuff I work on.

Desperate propaganda from somebody desperate to be blind to the stupid decisions from a party of bigotry and white supremacy.

But you said they'd be out of business by the end of 2016.


Maybe, but I was also literally watching BAE tickets drop off the list of things coming down the chute every day. I also said that if they don't relocate (which they did, somewhat, by the way, they reconsolidated and opened up 3 more major offices in the US) or successfully navigate around what seemed at the time to be a rather people's-eyebrow-raising EU putting their foot down, they wouldn't be able to move in time. The EU never put their foot down and they seem like they never will.

That doesn't change the fact that unless they're willing to relocate entirely to the US, maybe let 3M buy them out, NOONE want's new contracts with them. No one. Communications, EV, Weapons, Cyber-security, Renewables, nobody wants to buy a product from someone they're then going to have to go through so much crap for to get them into literally any other market except the UK. There's a robotics company here in CO that literally decided to change their entire business plan to develop their own AI and sensor packages for recycling that BAE actually had a tailor-made product for. And that they were planning on using. Top-250 by Forbes. Too. Much. Regulatory. Bullshiat.

We don't want to hear your whiny little voices about what you want when you're less than 10% of the market we could be getting in the EU and the extra work that goes into getting what you have to offer into actual profitable markets isn't worth the 10-15 point savings we make on getting it from you. Sorry, you're not that special. Deal with it.
 
2021-08-06 7:28:56 AM  
Hey Qatar!

Next time buy American!

USA USA
 
2021-08-06 9:31:31 AM  

Jeff5: Obvious fix:

Needs more paint.


(don't forget the duct tape and Bondo)
 
2021-08-06 1:12:45 PM  

Inebriated Bolshevik Muppet: That doesn't change the fact that unless they're willing to relocate entirely to the US, maybe let 3M buy them out, NOONE want's new contracts with them. No one. Communications, EV, Weapons, Cyber-security, Renewables, nobody wants to buy a product from someone they're then going to have to go through so much crap for to get them into literally any other market except the UK. There's a robotics company here in CO that literally decided to change their entire business plan to develop their own AI and sensor packages for recycling that BAE actually had a tailor-made product for. And that they were planning on using. Top-250 by Forbes. Too. Much. Regulatory. Bullshiat.


BAE Systems wins $325 million Pentagon contract for GPS receivers

Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems have been awarded separate contracts by the US Army Contracting Command to provide infrared countermeasures systems and support.

Lockheed Martin has awarded a $117m contract to BAE Systems to manufacture next-generation missile seekers for the long-range anti-ship missile (LRASM). The latest LRASM contract will support missiles for the US Navy (USN), US Air Force (USAF), and US allies through Foreign Military Sales (FMS).

Bae Systems plc Signs Contract with Finland to Upgrade the Finnish Army'S Fleet of Cv90s

BAE Systems PLC said on Friday that it has been awarded a contract valued at around 135 million pounds ($188 million) to enhance the Eurofighter Typhoon combat aircraft's capabilities.
The London-listed defense company said the contract is part of the commitment by the Eurofighter consortium, and the U.K., Spain, Italy and Germany, to continue developing the jet fighter's technology-led capability.

BAE Systems wins £1.3bn Eurofighter Typhoon contract as Germany orders 38 aircraft
(Appears to be separate from the other Typhoon update deal)

Germany to equip new coastal patrol vessels with BAE Systems' 57mm guns

That's just a couple of minutes Googling.

Your definition of "no one" is rather different to mine....
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.