A potential Boeing scandal, but a doubtful source

[The Avon Lady]

Interesting read (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/09/the_return_of_rathergate.html).

Dan Rather's name will be perma-mud if this whistle-blower is the phonie he initially appears to be.

[SUBMAN1]

Dan Rather already has a bad name from a previous phonie scam like this. He always likes to jump in head first it seems without checking if there is any water is in the pool.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Reading that article, it has some merit on one hand, but with added benfit on the other. Quite frankly, if you hit the ground at 500 MPH, it really doesn't matter anymore. If you crash off the end of the runway, the sparks from a metal airframe may actually create more fires than a composite one, so it may be a case of trading one thing for another here. I think I'd rather be banged around instead of burned alive.

-S

[Chock]

It's probably worth noting that even though the B787 was recently 'rolled out', in actual fact it wasn't really finished when that roll out took place. There were over 100 temporary fastenings on the airframe which emerged amid all the fanfare. That airframe is currently back in Everett's 40-26 assembly facility, to have all that sorted out, in preparation for its certification flight tests due to begin after high-speed taxi and ground testing is completed. Delivery isn't due with All Nippon Airways (the launch customer) until May 2008 at the earliest, as the certification process will take around eight months.

With all that in mind, how anyone could know the aircraft's crash durability, is beyond me, and probably beyond some fired Boeing worker's knowledge as well. Most of the Airbus info in that article is speculative too; the A350 XWB isn't expected to be delivered before mid 2013, which means the design is far from being finalised.

:D Chock

[The WosMan]

Reading that article, it has some merit on one hand, but with added benfit on the other. Quite frankly, if you hit the ground at 500 MPH, it really doesn't matter anymore. If you crash off the end of the runway, the sparks from a metal airframe may actually create more fires than a composite one, so it may be a case of trading one thing for another here. I think I'd rather be banged around instead of burned alive.

-S

Yep, that is the way I see it. You usually don't hear of any survivors in jet crashes. Anything hitting the ground at 500+mph is going to be dead.

[bookworm_020]

I guess we find out the answer when one crashes. I still think they will be safer than standard aircraft.

[SUBMAN1]

I guess we find out the answer when one crashes. I still think they will be safer than standard aircraft.
Thats the problem. If Boeing keeps building aircraft, you won't have anymore crashes to find out. Their last aircraft built back in the 90's, the 777, is the only aircraft flying right now without incident, so we don't even know how that would perform in the actual event. If you fly A340 or A330, we have some crash data on those due to them going off runways and such, but no data exists for a 777. Hopefully with the 787 we have similar results.

-S

[bookworm_020]

Hope they can keep that record up, but wait a little longer untill they get older and fall into the hands of the cheap and cheerful fly by night operators who will push them till they break.

[The Avon Lady]

Dan Rather already has a bad name from a previous phonie scam like this. He always likes to jump in head first it seems without checking if there is any water is in the pool.
I hope he drowns (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27111_Rather_Sues_CBS_for_Damaging_His_Repu tation), the fool! :nope:

[bookworm_020]

More airtime for for an airhead? Time to tune out

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/us-anchor-sues-network-for-82m/2007/09/20/1189881627359.html