सभी
← Back to Squawk list
Boeing’s 777X Fuselage Was Ripped Apart During Pressure Testing
New images have surfaced of what really happened during the September pressure testing of Boeing’s new 777X aircraft. September’s pressure test was widely reported to have failed, with a cargo door being blamed for the issue. Now, it seems that the situation was a lot more serious than that. The news that a cargo door had blown off the 777X during its stress test in September was shocking enough. However, it now appears that the situation was far worse than we could ever have imagined. According… (www.seattletimes.com) और अधिक...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
It is unfortunate when press paints a negative and alarming picture. I always thought the (and still believe) the purpose of a test is to validate. I test the lid is watertight on a container before I trust the container to carry liquid in my car. We test all sorts of things to make sure they operate as expected. And when it fails in a test we should be happy that the situation was not live. If a car will have a steering problem, I prefer that failure in test, not with my family on the road.
But the press seems to turn a failed test into a real problem. What about fixing that car, getting a better container for liquid, or reinforcing the airplane. I applaud Boeing for testing beyond a limit they expect in normal conditions. Using words like "ripped apart" makes it sound so dramatic and dangerous.
DISCLAIMER- That is my personal opinion, while I work for Boeing I have zero knowledge, affect, insight or involvement with airplanes other than what I read publicly.
But the press seems to turn a failed test into a real problem. What about fixing that car, getting a better container for liquid, or reinforcing the airplane. I applaud Boeing for testing beyond a limit they expect in normal conditions. Using words like "ripped apart" makes it sound so dramatic and dangerous.
DISCLAIMER- That is my personal opinion, while I work for Boeing I have zero knowledge, affect, insight or involvement with airplanes other than what I read publicly.
If a tested item failed at 149% of it's required limit - I would consider that to be a winner. The point of having a 150% passing grade is to ensure the item's design exceeds requirements of every day use.
Just another troll post from a POS find another place to troll you know like facebook or something about your lever of education if you even have one.
How many times are you going to repost this, Airbus troll?
A troll riles people up for no reason other than juvenile fun. Shill is probably a better term.
Look at the photo of the failure. Where did it fail? In the middle of the skin! It did not fail at a seam. Why did it fail at that particular location? What really failed? Did that particular sheet of aluminum have an unseen flaw that caused the failure? Was the test overkill in how it was performed? Would the test have been a success without the “extra” twists and turns? All of these things will go into evaluating the failure by Boeing and FAA engineers and will probably show that the airplane is perfectly safe structurally and will meet the airworthiness regulations. Profits and shareholder concerns will have nothing to do with it!