blue streak 1 scraping is a very funny thing. There was a series of earlier in service B-737s ( about 12 ) that had a skin attachment problem. One was the Hawaiian airline that the top pealed back in flight and was landed amazingly. Boeing ended up paying partially for that serial series to be scrapped with newer B-737s .
scraping is a very funny thing. There was a series of earlier in service B-737s ( about 12 ) that had a skin attachment problem. One was the Hawaiian airline that the top pealed back in flight and was landed amazingly. Boeing ended up paying partially for that serial series to be scrapped with newer B-737s .
I think it is a credit to Boeing that that old, high time, 737 didn't break in half.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Dave,
The Airbus had been soaked in saltwater. That's highly corrosive to aluminum. The decision was easy. It won't likely fall apart sitting on the ramp but when pressurized the hull could fail at any time.
Norm
Leo:
Here in Charlotte we have the Airbus that landed in the Hudson River. I stood beside it in the museum and asked the docent why it was taken out of service. It doesn't seem to be hurt that bad. He replied that it had been in the water and therefor was no longer serviceable. I didn't ask him whether Airbus, USAirways or the FAA made that decision.
Norm48327 Leo, Putting those fuselages in service would leave Boeing open to HUGE liability claims should something go wrong with them. Some internal equipment they can prove is undamaged may be used in future planes. I've been repairing planes for thirty years, and hidden damage is a major consideration. Should there be something that gets overlooked in the repair process it could pose a major headache for Boeing. It's also not likely any airline would consent to taking a fuselage that may have been damaged. Planes have been totaled for less.
Leo,
Putting those fuselages in service would leave Boeing open to HUGE liability claims should something go wrong with them. Some internal equipment they can prove is undamaged may be used in future planes.
I've been repairing planes for thirty years, and hidden damage is a major consideration. Should there be something that gets overlooked in the repair process it could pose a major headache for Boeing. It's also not likely any airline would consent to taking a fuselage that may have been damaged. Planes have been totaled for less.
Thanks, I was just wondering if it was your opinion or if you actually had some inside knowledge here.
That said, even though your response is opinion based, I suspect you're right about their fate (especially for the two that went into the river) But if you're in this business, you should know that significant damage doesn't equate automatically to it being a write off. And you should definitely know that it doesn't work like new automobiles would. We're talking very expensive assets here. If they're scrapped, it's going to be because they were deemed uneconomical to repair the damage that they incurred.
They don't scrap multi million dollar airliner fuselages with long lead times just because of heebie jeebies. A recent example that comes to mind is a Boeing 767 in the past 4 or 5 years that had a gears up belly landing and the only reason it was scrapped, as I recall, was because the airframe was already over 10 years old. It was a very close decision on if it was economical to repair and they reportably would've green-lit it had it been newer (Other airliners have been repaired after successful belly landings).
There's no mystery where airframe damage is concerned. That's why something like that famous 747 that had the cargo door fail 25 years ago sucking out passengers over the Pacific was ultimately repaired and flown for years afterwards. With your thinking after such an incident, it's an automatic write-off for liability.
Doesn't work that way. It's not guesswork, it's scientifically based when making such an assessment. There are airliners flying today that suffered significant damage prior to acceptance by the customer that had the damage fully mitigated.
jclassOnce the fuselages have been dunked like that, are they unsalvageable?..... http://news.msn.com/us/train-derails-in-western-montana-3-cars-in-river
Once the fuselages have been dunked like that, are they unsalvageable?.....
http://news.msn.com/us/train-derails-in-western-montana-3-cars-in-river
WOW that is some wreck.
I can't believe torsional stresses occurring during the wreck process hasn't warped at least one of the fuselages. I bet the insurance company has just taken delivery of at least one really big paperweight. This mess is going to cause some sleepless nights in more than one head office.
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
Norm48327 The fuselages now belong to the insurance company.
The fuselages now belong to the insurance company.
While I suspect from that picture that it's safe to consider at least the two pictured fuselages as goners, do you have any source for this? We're not talking automobiles here, if they're salvageable, they'll be salvaged. We've seen no shortage of major repairs to civil airliners over the years including airframes that received damage during test and delivery flights before the buyer took ownership..
I don't know why these would automatically be write offs like you're suggesting just because they were involved in a derailment. If they're scrapped, it's going to be because they're too damaged to economically justify repairs.
Not going to speculate on the cause. Suffice to say a conductor in a caboose could not have prevented the derail.
From the current news story, this derailment went very badly. Any details as to possible cause? Rock-slide, broken rail, bearing failure? Seems this was not a low speed derailment, IMO.
Question, with these types of shipments, is there a rear-end crew to keep an eye on things (caboose?) or is it all up to a two men crew in the front? IMO, such a high-price shipment the RR would want to reduce risk by having as many eyes on the train as possible.
http://www.king5.com/news/Train-derails-with-aircraft-parts-265866171.html
I wonder who picks up the tab for this one. These aren't cheap, but neither is the shipment.
samfp1943 Boeing has several of the Very Large Capacity aircraft ( I think they indicated that they have four(?) of the B747 Variant aircraft flying ( remember the one that went long on its runway approach and landed about 3 miles not of the McConnell (AFB) Runway, and set down at a small commercial airport? ( It was at Jabara Airport, a considerably shorter runway than they usually use !)
Boeing has several of the Very Large Capacity aircraft ( I think they indicated that they have four(?) of the B747 Variant aircraft flying ( remember the one that went long on its runway approach and landed about 3 miles not of the McConnell (AFB) Runway, and set down at a small commercial airport? ( It was at Jabara Airport, a considerably shorter runway than they usually use !)
Although a 747, the aircraft that landed at Jabara was not Boeing owned. It was contractor owned. Pilot error was the cause. They thought they were approaching McConnel AFB. They weren't. Visual approaches don't always work well at night in unfamiliar territory.
There may be some salvage of internal equipment they can determine hasn't been damaged. OTOH, liability considerations will prevent those fuselages from ever flying. Should one of them break in flight Boeing Airplane Company would likely be history. Lawyers would have a field day with them.
blue streak 1 samfp1943 Looks like the Production schedule for the Boeing 737's, took a hit with this one! They[Spirit Aviation] are supposed to be shipping around forty, plus fuselages for the 737s, and its Variants, a month, according to their Press Releases.. . You hit the nail on the head. Usually each production aircraft variant is a custom design that has special items that do not interchange especially fuselages. This is due to length differences and max gross weight limitations that are quite different. Further different variants may have different wiring harnesses especially for customer provided auxiliaries.. Boeing can probably maintain production of following aircraft by using "super guppy " cargo aircraft to ferry one at a time fuselages immediately upon their production at Wichita. However the vendor supplies for aircraft could be in jeopardy due to just in time supplies. Imagine production of 40 a month probably means within two weeks glitches will smooth out ? If Boeing is making one variant on the line right now not too much delay until it gets to the variant(s) traveling on the train.
samfp1943 Looks like the Production schedule for the Boeing 737's, took a hit with this one! They[Spirit Aviation] are supposed to be shipping around forty, plus fuselages for the 737s, and its Variants, a month, according to their Press Releases.. .
Looks like the Production schedule for the Boeing 737's, took a hit with this one!
They[Spirit Aviation] are supposed to be shipping around forty, plus fuselages for the 737s, and its Variants, a month, according to their Press Releases.. .
You hit the nail on the head. Usually each production aircraft variant is a custom design that has special items that do not interchange especially fuselages. This is due to length differences and max gross weight limitations that are quite different. Further different variants may have different wiring harnesses especially for customer provided auxiliaries..
Boeing can probably maintain production of following aircraft by using "super guppy " cargo aircraft to ferry one at a time fuselages immediately upon their production at Wichita. However the vendor supplies for aircraft could be in jeopardy due to just in time supplies. Imagine production of 40 a month probably means within two weeks glitches will smooth out ? If Boeing is making one variant on the line right now not too much delay until it gets to the variant(s) traveling on the train.
Boeing usually flies the 787 fuselage sections in their 747 "Dreamlifters" from its production point in Italy to the Charleston,S.C. Plant .
It is the 737's that all make their 'first flights' on the BNSF from Wichita to their Washington Plant ( In Renton, Wa. ?) Virtually every 737 aircraft variant flying now has 'ridded the train' .
You don't have JIT inventory control without having contingencies for failure. What Boeings contingencies are - Boeing knows.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
blue streak 1 Just found a link. Its bad for MRL & Boeing. 3 parts cars in water and 2 fuselages in water. ++ some haz mat maybe in water ?. This is gong to make a hole in Boeing's manufacturing line. http://newstalkkgvo.com/montana-rail-link-train-derails-near-superior-three-cars-in-clark-fork-river-audio/ Note there is a link on link to an interview with a MRL spokeswoman
Just found a link. Its bad for MRL & Boeing. 3 parts cars in water and 2 fuselages in water. ++ some haz mat maybe in water ?. This is gong to make a hole in Boeing's manufacturing line.
http://newstalkkgvo.com/montana-rail-link-train-derails-near-superior-three-cars-in-clark-fork-river-audio/
Note there is a link on link to an interview with a MRL spokeswoman
Looks like the Production schedule for the Boeing 737's, took a hit with this one! Went past the plant on Tuesday and there were two fuselages, and two cars with Cockpits on the track to be picked up. [ Partially completed components from " Spirit Aviation Systems' here in Wichita to be completed in Washington by Boeing.]
They[Spirit Aviation] are supposed to be shipping around forty, plus fuselages for the 737s, and its Variants, a month, according to their Press Releases.. .The partially completed cockpits( some are for 747s, and 787s are shipped in closed cars,( They open like a clamshell and are loaded by crane).
The only one I can find happened in 2011.
There are conflicting reports that MRL derailed a Boeing train. Reports are from just off track on ties to accordion style derailment. Reports of fuselages OK to one or more in the water. Does anyone have any more reliable info ?. If derailment report false will remove this post.
Found link its bad for Boeing. Note radio link to MRL partially down on this link
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/freight/single-view/view/ups-to-move-china-europe-containers-by-rail.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.