Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Dreamliners or Nightmares: Why Has India bought the troubled Boeing 787
Despite more than a decade to work out problems and an estimated $20 billion to build it, Boeing’s 787 aircraft is still plagued by issues. Ever since 787s finally began flying in 2011, there have been technical and mechanical problems, from software bugs and engine defects to faulty wiring, trouble with hydraulics and fuel tank leaks. (www.newdelhitimes.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Insel Air I think is still flying ALM's old MD82s out of CUR :) . Pretty cool they've kept them flying all these years!!!
hey, I'm from Curacao. I'm not really sure if they're still flying ALM's MD82's. I've been on a few of them and I can tell you at least one is an ex Alitalia MD. I did a quick search on the others and I haven't found one that is from ALM yet.
Hello there!!! I know it's a little of topic but interesting on Insel Air's MD82s not being ex ALM anymore. I thought they were still flying ALM's :(
I flew on a few of ALM's MD82s between Bonaire (TNCB/BON) and Miami (KMIA/MIA) In the 90's and early 2000's. I also remeber flying on the Dash 8's from TNCC to TNCB during the same time period. They were a cool airline which I miss!!!
I flew on a few of ALM's MD82s between Bonaire (TNCB/BON) and Miami (KMIA/MIA) In the 90's and early 2000's. I also remeber flying on the Dash 8's from TNCC to TNCB during the same time period. They were a cool airline which I miss!!!
[This poster has been suspended.]
Boeing has openly stated that they have sent out updates that tell Airlines about issues.
Boeing states they have some carriers that are right on top of these problems fixing between flights and slightly adjusting their schedule.
Boeing further states they have carriers (like AI) that refuse to update the equipment in the same timely manner as other more proactive carriers have.
Carriers have also stated that the aircraft itself is so popular with the public and their accountants that they refuse to side line them for any amount of time for these service bulletins.....preferring to wait for scheduled maintenance and the fix from the bulletins being done then.
Boeing states they have some carriers that are right on top of these problems fixing between flights and slightly adjusting their schedule.
Boeing further states they have carriers (like AI) that refuse to update the equipment in the same timely manner as other more proactive carriers have.
Carriers have also stated that the aircraft itself is so popular with the public and their accountants that they refuse to side line them for any amount of time for these service bulletins.....preferring to wait for scheduled maintenance and the fix from the bulletins being done then.
Empirically speaking, when comparing the "composite" fleet, Air India has four times as many Airbuses as 787's. And which ones are breaking in an inordinately higher proportion?
Depending on one's point of view (or sense of nationalism) one could claim that these are just teething problems (some major), or you could say this airplane is indeed a "maintenance turkey" because it was built by committee and outsourced in too many directions -- in an attempt to leapfrog Airbus in areas pioneered by them 30 years ago. IMHO the plane is a "Zebra."
All one has to do is read in detail the full Wikipedia entry, among other sources of information, before one jumps conclusions which attempt to cloak the 787's problems by killing the many messengers, or by blaming Third World countries.
The underlying current of superiority and nationalism, as seen so often in the comments on this subject, are very obvious. ("We're the best and our airplanes are the best." ) Therefore it's the Third World MRO's fault for buggering up these thoroughbreds--they're really not zebras at all.
Fact is, there are more 787's based in the First and Second World, and Asia, than there are in the "Third World." But yet, the problems continue to be reported from all "Worlds" -- not just the New Delhi Times.
One has to ask; how come those Third World MRO's aren't breaking other modern (composite) airplanes--or is it that these 787's are indeed a lot more fragile and finicky? Hard to admit?
Depending on one's point of view (or sense of nationalism) one could claim that these are just teething problems (some major), or you could say this airplane is indeed a "maintenance turkey" because it was built by committee and outsourced in too many directions -- in an attempt to leapfrog Airbus in areas pioneered by them 30 years ago. IMHO the plane is a "Zebra."
All one has to do is read in detail the full Wikipedia entry, among other sources of information, before one jumps conclusions which attempt to cloak the 787's problems by killing the many messengers, or by blaming Third World countries.
The underlying current of superiority and nationalism, as seen so often in the comments on this subject, are very obvious. ("We're the best and our airplanes are the best." ) Therefore it's the Third World MRO's fault for buggering up these thoroughbreds--they're really not zebras at all.
Fact is, there are more 787's based in the First and Second World, and Asia, than there are in the "Third World." But yet, the problems continue to be reported from all "Worlds" -- not just the New Delhi Times.
One has to ask; how come those Third World MRO's aren't breaking other modern (composite) airplanes--or is it that these 787's are indeed a lot more fragile and finicky? Hard to admit?
Excessive exposure to UV rays can reduce the lifetime of plastics, wiring insulation, plexyglass, electronics and so on......
This affects even the best equipment