Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

glideslope · Dec 4, 2009, 09:02 AM

It has begun. Another big surprise to come soon. God Bless the Queen.

Korean Air to buy five Boeing 747-8s worth $1.5 bln | Reuters

turtle777 · Dec 4, 2009, 09:39 AM

-t

OreoCookie · Dec 4, 2009, 09:41 AM

By the way, when is the 748's maiden voyage?

Spheric Harlot · Dec 4, 2009, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

-t

I *think* he's trying to start a flamewar about how *their* socialist government-propped-up flying monstrosity is better than *our* socialist government-propped-up flying monstrosity.

But I could be wrong.

glideslope · Dec 4, 2009, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

I *think* he's trying to start a flamewar about how *their* socialist government-propped-up flying monstrosity is better than *our* socialist government-propped-up flying monstrosity.

But I could be wrong.

Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that good things come to those who wait. However, I see your point. I don't see a compairson any longer. The 748 has it's own nitch market. It will be plentiful. More of an issue for the 77W IMO

imitchellg5 · Dec 4, 2009, 01:19 PM

Well the first freighter in pretty much complete, so I don't think it'll be that long until a first flight. Funny how this project is moving way more quickly than the 787... although it sounds as if the 787 will be flying this month.

mduell · Dec 4, 2009, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

By the way, when is the 748's maiden voyage?

First flight 1Q10, entry into service 4Q10 for the cargo version. EIS 4Q11 for the self loading freight version.

OreoCookie · Dec 5, 2009, 10:49 AM

So the 748's first flight is before that of the 787? Who would have thought?

imitchellg5 · Dec 5, 2009, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

So the 748's first flight is before that of the 787? Who would have thought?

787 flies December 19 or 22nd.

OreoCookie · Dec 5, 2009, 01:34 PM

Or perhaps not? Is Boeing still on target with that date?

Art Vandelay · Dec 5, 2009, 02:06 PM

Yes, they just announced those dates this week. The 2nd plane flies about a week after the first.

mduell · Dec 5, 2009, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

So the 748's first flight is before that of the 787? Who would have thought?

Not as currently scheduled.

OreoCookie · 08:02 AM

The 787 has seen substantial delays (just like any aircraft project these days, it seems) and I'm not checking aircraft aficionado blogs all day, so I wasn't sure whether these last dates are realistic. A lot of maiden voyage dates have been set. And I hope they can pull it off this time.

glideslope · Dec 6, 2009, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

The 787 has seen substantial delays (just like any aircraft project these days, it seems) and I'm not checking aircraft aficionado blogs all day, so I wasn't sure whether these last dates are realistic. A lot of maiden voyage dates have been set. And I hope they can pull it off this time.

Things are a go for the 788 on the 22nd, weather providing. Honestly I'm more excited to see the 748F Rotate. Can't explain why. 787 burnout perhaps?

voodoo · Dec 7, 2009, 03:16 AM

Originally Posted by glideslope

Things are a go for the 788 on the 22nd, weather providing. Honestly I'm more excited to see the 748F Rotate. Can't explain why. 787 burnout perhaps?

I'm certainly more curious about the 788 and seeing it fly will be very interesting, but I'm not that excited about it. It's yet another twin.

Now the 748 on the other hand... more fun to watch take off. Too bad it is the freighter version. Though in proportions the F is more similar to the 741 than 744, which will be cool.

A quad. They just good.

OreoCookie · Dec 7, 2009, 04:27 AM

I spoke to some people in the aircraft industry and they told me that using composites for everything was an idea put forth by `the suits' and not the engineers. On the other hand, the 788 is a major engineering challenge and I'm very curious how everything unravels and what kind of solutions engineers will find to problems. E. g. how you would detect and repair a minor damage to the fuselage (composites tend to fail catastrophically and defects are very hard to detect; even for bikes with carbon fiber frames you need to go to a dealer which preferably has a detector)? Does anyone know?

However, the 748 doesn't get my blood pumping: it's a make-over for a design from the 60s, more like a stop-gap solution than anything else.

glideslope · Dec 7, 2009, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I spoke to some people in the aircraft industry and they told me that using composites for everything was an idea put forth by `the suits' and not the engineers. On the other hand, the 788 is a major engineering challenge and I'm very curious how everything unravels and what kind of solutions engineers will find to problems. E. g. how you would detect and repair a minor damage to the fuselage (composites tend to fail catastrophically and defects are very hard to detect; even for bikes with carbon fiber frames you need to go to a dealer which preferably has a detector)? Does anyone know?

However, the 748 doesn't get my blood pumping: it's a make-over for a design from the 60s, more like a stop-gap solution than anything else.

You need to look a little deeper into the sub-systems, avionics, flight deck, and construction. The Fuse design needs no re-design Aerodynamically. It's much more than a stretch with a (gorgeous) new wing, and GenX Engines. On the same level as the 380? Of course not. But you will see plenty of 748i orders next year. The Queen lives.

OreoCookie · Dec 7, 2009, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by glideslope

You need to look a little deeper into the sub-systems, avionics, flight deck, and construction. The Fuse design needs no re-design Aerodynamically. It's much more than a stretch with a (gorgeous) new wing, and GenX Engines. On the same level as the 380? Of course not. But you will see plenty of 748i orders next year. The Queen lives.

… because the King is dead (well, in a coma)? I always thought of the 748 as Plan B that is taken out of the drawer if the delays with the 787 become unbearable. Plus, I think the design of the 747 (on a purely aesthetic basis) is dated and boring. The early drafts of the 788 on the other hand were really sexy

Do you have some info on how to maintenance an aircraft with a fuselage made of composites? I really wonder how this is done.

imitchellg5 · Dec 7, 2009, 10:57 AM

I can understand and agree with your sentiments OreoCookie, especially since the 748 was announced pretty much as the last 744 was being built. It sort of feels like that the 748 exists in case an operator doesn't want to jump on the A380 bandwagon yet. I wonder how carriers will treat the 748; will it be just another 747 type, or will the have to look at it as a whole different airplane because of the wing and engines ( I assume that'd be the case at least maintenance-wise).

OreoCookie · Dec 7, 2009, 11:27 AM

For Lufthansa, for instance, the move made sense because (i) they support a two-supplier ecosystem and (ii) they have lots of staff that knows how to service 747s. I heard that one of the selling points is that maintenance staff can use the know how from the regular 747 and transfer it to the 748.

mduell · Dec 7, 2009, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

E. g. how you would detect and repair a minor damage to the fuselage (composites tend to fail catastrophically and defects are very hard to detect; even for bikes with carbon fiber frames you need to go to a dealer which preferably has a detector)? Does anyone know?

Detect using NDT methods such as ultrasonic. Repair with a patch.

Composites are not new in aircraft design.

OreoCookie · Dec 8, 2009, 04:41 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

Detect using NDT methods such as ultrasonic. Repair with a patch.

Sure, when you're talking about a wing, that seems easy, but if the whole fuselage is made out of composites, how do you even scan it?

And regarding repair, I thought composites don't react well to that: from what I understand, you cannot just take a patch and attach it to the skin with some rivets as this damages the fibers even further, tears originating from the holes will spread. The strength of the part comes from interlocking fibers, so even if you glue it (= no holes), the part won't be as strong.

(I'm just curious and have little clue about how it's actually done.)

exca1ibur · Dec 8, 2009, 01:26 PM

Basic concept

Repair - NetComposites

mduell · Dec 8, 2009, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Sure, when you're talking about a wing, that seems easy, but if the whole fuselage is made out of composites, how do you even scan it?

Why can't you ultrasound or x-ray a fuselage?

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

And regarding repair, I thought composites don't react well to that: from what I understand, you cannot just take a patch and attach it to the skin with some rivets as this damages the fibers even further, tears originating from the holes will spread. The strength of the part comes from interlocking fibers, so even if you glue it (= no holes), the part won't be as strong.

Why would you use rivets? You glue on a patch.

This site has a few examples of repairs on Cirrus aircraft. I can't find a bootleg copy of an A300/330/340 series SRM online (composite vertical fin).

OreoCookie · Dec 8, 2009, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

Why can't you ultrasound or x-ray a fuselage?

The fuselage is much bigger and I would think it's harder to access parts of it. There is a lot of stuff between the cabin and the outer layer, can you see anything if the cracks start on the inside and you have lots of cabin, cables and other things in between?

Originally Posted by mduell

Why would you use rivets? You glue on a patch.

I honestly don't know what you'd use on composites. If the skin were made of aluminum, I would guess that one way to fix a damaged area is to affix another piece of aluminum onto the fuselage with rivets. Is gluing a patch on really stable enough?

mduell · Dec 8, 2009, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

The fuselage is much bigger and I would think it's harder to access parts of it. There is a lot of stuff between the cabin and the outer layer, can you see anything if the cracks start on the inside and you have lots of cabin, cables and other things in between?

The interior cabin panels are easily and routinely removed during scheduled maintainence checks or you can inspect from the exterior.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I honestly don't know what you'd use on composites. If the skin were made of aluminum, I would guess that one way to fix a damaged area is to affix another piece of aluminum onto the fuselage with rivets. Is gluing a patch on really stable enough?

Yes. They're even using composite patches for some repairs on metal airplanes because the rivet/bolt would further reduce the strength of the remaining material. Here's one FAA Tech Report on repairs of composite sandwiches.

OreoCookie · Dec 9, 2009, 11:25 AM

Thanks for the info. I'm surprised it's `that easy' to repair composite materials. I'm sure the devil is in the detail, but to me, it's still a big marvel and mystery how much high tech and low tech is in those planes.

BTW, Boeing isn't the only one who wants to tell its shareholders than the new bird flew `sometime in 2009,' Airbus has announced the A400 M will have its maiden voyage in calendar week 50

badidea · Dec 10, 2009, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

...I'm sure the devil is in the detail...

Yes it is. Repairing Composite is not the problem but as it was already mentioned, detecting the faulty structure is the problem!
You don't scan the whole fuselage every day but what happens if one of those cargo trucks hits the fuselage and the driver doesn't say anything because he's afraid of the consequences?
There's your devil!

OreoCookie · Dec 10, 2009, 12:05 PM

So it's just like with mountain bikes that have a carbon frame: clamp them too hard onto your bike rack and it's broken

@badidea
Do you have a professional opinion about this: is it `easy' in practice to detect problems in a composite fuselage? Is it more complicated than with normal fuselages made of, I guess, aluminum?

badidea · Dec 10, 2009, 02:03 PM

No, it's not easy! That's the problem! With aluminum you usually see a deformation - composite can be seriously damaged without any visual effect! (this is what I heard - I'm not an expert)

mduell · Dec 10, 2009, 02:04 PM

Aerospace composite structures are designed with damage tolerance in mind. They're not making $900 bike frames.

“Our Sonic Cruiser task group recommended that fuselage design allowables should be such that any damage in the composite that is not evident at the laminate surface on visual inspection will not prevent the structure from bearing its design loads,” [Justin Hale, deputy chief mechanic on the B787 program] told us. This philosophy has been applied to the B787. The fuselage has been engineered with carbon fibre laminate thicknesses ranging from almost an inch at access door surrounds and other vulnerable areas, including parts of the lower belly, to half an inch at joins between separately manufactured fuselage ‘barrel’ sections and just a tenth of an inch in parts of the crown (fuselage top). This tailoring of damage tolerance enables Boeing to advise, in effect, that if there is no damage to be seen, there is nothing to worry about and it is safe to operate. (source)

They've also developed a tool that ramp rats with no non-destructive training or certification can use to determine if further inspection is needed.

What's with all the fearmongering?

Spheric Harlot · Dec 10, 2009, 02:31 PM

Using new materials in circumstances where failure generally means the death of hundreds of people is, to my mind, something where asking sensible questions does not necessarily equate to "fearmongering".

imitchellg5 · Dec 10, 2009, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by badidea

No, it's not easy! That's the problem! With aluminum you usually see a deformation - composite can be seriously damaged without any visual effect! (this is what I heard - I'm not an expert)

What about the cases then of over-stressed Al on a bunch of Southwest classic 737s? Or is that just because nobody took the time to ever look?

mduell · Dec 10, 2009, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Using new materials in circumstances where failure generally means the death of hundreds of people is, to my mind, something where asking sensible questions does not necessarily equate to "fearmongering".

I think you're overhyping the "new" angle. It's not like they're blazing some revolutionary path. Raytheon Premiers have been flying composite fuselages for a decade. Plus all the military platforms. And the Airbuses with composite primary structure. Yes, there are differences between the 787 and the previous platforms, but they're not that dramatic.

imitchellg5 · Dec 10, 2009, 11:00 PM

The 787's first flight is December 15th according to King5.com

mduell · Dec 11, 2009, 01:48 AM

The first flight window opens at 10AM on the 15th. Could still be delayed due to weather, etc.

badidea · Dec 11, 2009, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

What about the cases then of over-stressed Al on a bunch of Southwest classic 737s? Or is that just because nobody took the time to ever look?

As I said, I'm not an expert! I have no idea!

Now let's hope that everything goes well with the 787 first flight! I'm looking forward to it!
(this is my private/not professional opinion since this is the direct competitor to the A350 I'm working on

)

glideslope · Dec 11, 2009, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

What about the cases then of over-stressed Al on a bunch of Southwest classic 737s? Or is that just because nobody took the time to ever look?

There was some "stretching" involved for the 788 1st flight. The box fix actually involved attaching cables and pulling the frame from each end. Nice to see the thread still going. Just got out of the hospital. Fractured my elbow in 3 places. 4 hrs of surgery, 3 plates, and 56 screws.

glideslope · Dec 11, 2009, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

The 787's first flight is December 15th according to King5.com

Will be confirmed 12/12/09.

Spheric Harlot · Dec 11, 2009, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by glideslope

Fractured my elbow in 3 places. 4 hrs of surgery, 3 plates, and 56 screws.

YEOW!

What happened? I hope the pain isn't too bad, and that the swelling is starting to go down...

imitchellg5 · Dec 11, 2009, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by glideslope

There was some "stretching" involved for the 788 1st flight. The box fix actually involved attaching cables and pulling the frame from each end. Nice to see the thread still going. Just got out of the hospital. Fractured my elbow in 3 places. 4 hrs of surgery, 3 plates, and 56 screws.

Yikes! That's not fun at all.

imitchellg5 · Dec 11, 2009, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by badidea

As I said, I'm not an expert! I have no idea!

Now let's hope that everything goes well with the 787 first flight! I'm looking forward to it!
(this is my private/not professional opinion since this is the direct competitor to the A350 I'm working on

)

When is it looking like the A350 will be up in the air?

Well no matter, since I won't be able to fly on one until 2016 when United takes delivery.

mduell · Dec 11, 2009, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

when is it looking like the a350 will be up in the air?

2012

imitchellg5 · Dec 11, 2009, 02:08 PM

A400M flew today

glideslope · Dec 11, 2009, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

YEOW!

What happened? I hope the pain isn't too bad, and that the swelling is starting to go down...

Was helping a friend with a project that went into the wii hours. Tripped over a cable on the ground. Landed on a floor jack. Too tired to see the danger. No excuse. Lot's of swelling still. Should get back to 90% by early Feb. I'm in fairly good shape, and had an outstanding Hand&Elbow Surgeon. By far the most painful injury of my life.

Should be able to get back to assisting lightly in a couple weeks when the Wound Vac comes off the elbow ( reduces swelling sooner).

mduell · Dec 11, 2009, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

A400M flew today

Oh no, a composite wing! How did it not fall out of the air because someone secretly damaged it and didn't tell anyone!

imitchellg5 · Dec 12, 2009, 01:06 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

Oh no, a composite wing! How did it not fall out of the air because someone secretly damaged it and didn't tell anyone!

It flew because it's so ugly the ground doesn't want it

mduell · Dec 12, 2009, 01:42 AM

What, that's no helicopter!

OreoCookie · Dec 12, 2009, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

Oh no, a composite wing! How did it not fall out of the air because someone secretly damaged it and didn't tell anyone!

Come on, there is no need to be passive aggressive: to have a composite fuselage in a plane this size is unprecedented and safety concerns (as it's new and unproven technology in the commercial airline industry) are good and just natural. Composite wings have been around for decades.

OreoCookie · Dec 12, 2009, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

It flew because it's so ugly the ground doesn't want it

You got pictures of a pretty military transport? They're all pretty chubby.