787 flawed

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:00:32 +0000 (UTC)
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

WhoGivesAFig? wrote in newsWVHi.40$Wv3.34
@newsfe06.lga:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
WhoGivesAFig? wrote in
:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2007-09-18 07:06:06 -0700, WhoGivesAFig?
said:

This could be huge

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABP...2003889769.pdf
Hmmm. A retired employee who worked for Boeing for 46 years claims
to
know more than the FAA and Boeing about how planes should be crash
tested. He concludes that composites are not as crashworthy as
metal,
but does not back his assertions up with any hard data.

His complaint is that composite materials are stronger in some
directions than they are in others, that cracking is less visible,
and that composites are more subject to fire and more vulnerable to
lightning. He points out that g levels in a crash are unlikely to
be
uniform all along a composite structure. All of this is true, but
he
seems to be alleging some sort of Boeing coverup of these facts. He
discounts actual experience with other composite aircraft, saying
that either they are not airliners subjected to the stress and
number
of flights that airliners get, or that the numbers of such
composite
aircraft are too few to be statistically significant.

Of course, his report will make great fodder for trial lawyers when
the first 787 crashes, no matter what the actual cause of death of
the passengers is. Weldon seems to be down at the site trying to
tell
people how to crash test an airplane even though he no longer works
there. No doubt his experience is valuable, but he cannot possibly
be
aware of everything that Boeing is doing to mitigate these problems
and Boeing is certainly not going to give corporate secrets to
former
employees.

He claims to know more than Boeing he may or may not. 46
years is a lot of experience. Does he know more than the
FAA? My dog knows more than the FAA about aviation.


I think I just found a new pet.


Bertie


You can have him. He is a fat worthless
mutt. Just like a Government employee



I meant you fjukkwit!

Fetch!


Bertie

Every Tom Dick and Hairy *knows* that carpon fibre is *much* more g-resistant than 4041 aluminium tubes.

Sheesh.

--
http://isolatr.com

Richard Riley wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 12:47:09 -0400, WhoGivesAFig?
wrote:

He claims to know more than Boeing he may or may not. 46
years is a lot of experience. Does he know more than the
FAA? My dog knows more than the FAA about aviation.

I don't know what you have to do to get fired from Boeing with 46
years of seniority, but it's a LOT.


Well I don't know about Boeing but in the FAA
just being a white male will get you ostracized and run off.

Also, if you fail to "Kiss the Black Ass" you will also be
run off from the new FAA. Experience means nothing anymore.

Politically Correct Tyranny and Diversity ass kissing means
everything now in our twisted society. Maybe his boss was a
diversity experiment that was technically clueless and he
stood up to the idiot?

§ñühw¤£f wrote:

Every Tom Dick and Hairy *knows* that carpon fibre is *much* more g-resistant than 4041 aluminium tubes.

Sheesh.

You're talking drivel. Plus you missed the point as in whooossshh !

Graham

On Sep 18, 10:46 pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote:
I have personally witnessed the post-crash fire of an experimental
Velocity. When the fire was out, there was nothing left on the ground
except some metal parts from the wheels, avionics and control links.

IOW, about the same as what's left of a burned out aluminum airplane.

I have only seen photos of metal airplane crashes, and in most cases
you can tell that it was an airplane crash. Many tell tale parts of
the airplane will remain intact. In this case you would not have known
that this was an airplane crash. There were no discernible parts.
Aluminum melts around 650C. Fiberglass epoxy will turn into a gel at
a far lower temperature, around 100C. Most fiberglass airplanes can't
even withstand normal heat from the sun unless they are painted
white. So the fact that the glass airplane simply vaporized in the
fire makes sense to me.

In any case, my observations are only anectodal, and are based on
homebuilt aircraft. Boeing may be using advanced epoxies with superior
thermal and mechanical properties. If that is the case, it would be
trivial for them to put these concerns to rest. I hope that is indeed
the case, and that the 787 is not built with the same epoxy I am using
on my homebuilt.

In any case, my observations are only anectodal, and are based on
homebuilt aircraft. Boeing may be using advanced epoxies with superior
thermal and mechanical properties. If that is the case, it would be
trivial for them to put these concerns to rest. I hope that is indeed
the case, and that the 787 is not built with the same epoxy I am using
on my homebuilt.

Did you lay your composites up on a frame and bake them at high
temperature and pressure in a giant autoclave to cure them? If not,
then I bet you aren't using the same materials or processes...

Eeyore wrote in
:



§ñühw¤£f wrote:

Every Tom Dick and Hairy *knows* that carpon fibre is *much* more
g-resistant than 4041 aluminium tubes.

Sheesh.

You're talking drivel. Plus you missed the point as in whooossshh !


Good grief. PKB

Bertie

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote:
Fiberglass epoxy will turn into a gel at
a far lower temperature, around 100C.

It won't withstand boiling water?

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Eeyore wrote
§ñühw¤£f wrote:

Every Tom Dick and Hairy *knows* that carpon fibre is *much* more
g-resistant than 4041 aluminium tubes.

Sheesh.

You're talking drivel. Plus you missed the point as in whooossshh !

And now the planespotting know nothing sticks his oar in.

I wondered when the bad penny would turn up.

I bet I know a heck of a lot more about materials than you do.

Graham

Eeyore wrote in
:



Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Eeyore wrote
§ñühw¤£f wrote:

Every Tom Dick and Hairy *knows* that carpon fibre is *much* more
g-resistant than 4041 aluminium tubes.

Sheesh.

You're talking drivel. Plus you missed the point as in whooossshh !

And now the planespotting know nothing sticks his oar in.

I wondered when the bad penny would turn up.

I bet I know a heck of a lot more about materials than you do.

What, been spotting in the aircraft spruce catalog?

bertie

On Sep 19, 3:01 pm, Richard Riley wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:18:58 -0500, "Dan Luke"

wrote:

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote:
Fiberglass epoxy will turn into a gel at
a far lower temperature, around 100C.

It won't withstand boiling water?

The epoxies used in homebuilts - cured at room temperature - generally
start to soften around 200 degrees F. It varies with the epoxy and
with what temperature any one part has been exposed to before - you
can post cure many epoxies by subjecting them to higher temperatures,
and get their transition temps up, by as much as 70 degrees F.

The epoxies used in the 787 are cured at much higher temperatures to
begin with.

But this can't be too difficult for Boeing to explain. All they have
to say is "our fiberglass is treated to handle as much heat as
aluminum" or something similar, if that is indeed true.