View Full Version : Up, up and away....
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner takes off. (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/12/15/boeing-dreamliner-ready-flight/?test=latestnews)
Well done Boeing. What a beautiful aircraft. :thumbup:
Video here. Check out the wing flex. (http://video.ap.org/?g=1215dv_787_first_flight)
Ghetto youtube capture of CNN broadcast: (start at 2:30 for roll out)
lQVnZJDeP3c
Apparently, the wings are made of soft cheese. :p
Ghetto youtube capture of CNN broadcast: (start at 2:30 for roll out)
lQVnZJDeP3c
Apparently, the wings are made of soft cheese. :p
So much for him stopping the commentary.
That's one damn good looking airliner.
link without 8 year old computer nerd :gomer:
rlmkAdimq4c
stroker
12-15-09, 05:20 PM
I wonder how well it floats?
TravelGal
12-15-09, 09:42 PM
Glad to know it happened. I posted a notice and the blog for it under the original thread "much troubled airliner." This is a much nicer subject line :)
Hard Driver
12-16-09, 12:44 AM
Nice video about the plane with a few inside shots:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34438373#34438373
miatanut
12-16-09, 01:24 PM
I just learned my 2001 vintage PowerBook can't process a youtube video. :gomer:
Guess I'll check it out when I get home.
oddlycalm
12-16-09, 03:55 PM
Apparently, the wings are made of soft cheese. :p
Seriously, anyone know the spec for total flex excursion at the wing tip? The spec on the old 707 was only around 17ft. as I recall but it used to make me bit nervous in turbulent conditions to see those engines bouncing up and down that much...
oc
This is one artist's guess. I haven't seen any numbers from Boeing.
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/7916/wingflexdiagramthumb476.jpg
Reportedly, the 777 wing failed at 24' of deflection.
Seriously, anyone know the spec for total flex excursion at the wing tip? The spec on the old 707 was only around 17ft. as I recall but it used to make me bit nervous in turbulent conditions to see those engines bouncing up and down that much...
oc
the total deflection is ridiculous, but better than failure I guess.
oddlycalm
12-16-09, 06:44 PM
the total deflection is ridiculous, but better than failure I guess.
Indeed, and having all these years to get used to seeing it happen has helped some as well...:gomer:
oc
When w/ family, I have a habit of looking out the window during turbulence and saying aloud "I wonder how much more until it just snaps and breaks away."
Then mom or dad usually swipe an open hand in the general direction of my head
stroker
12-16-09, 10:33 PM
One of the old mainstays of SAC was renowned for its enormous amount of wing deflection and that was back in the 50's or 60's. I think it might have been the B-47.... Turned out the aluminum didn't flex as well as composites and they ended up rebuilding all the wings on a rotational basis over the years.
Damn, it bugs me that I can't remember which plane.
aluminum is unique in structural metals in that it has no fatigue limit, so it's always rebuilt/replaced at some point anyway. the length of spec'ed lifecycle dependent upon design/environment, of course.
Sean Malone
12-17-09, 11:47 AM
aluminum is unique in structural metals in that it has no fatigue limit, so it's always rebuilt/replaced at some point anyway. the length of spec'ed lifecycle dependent upon design/environment, of course.
I was simulating this last night... after each can of Busch Light I finished, I would bend the can back and forth and for all 24 cans it only took about 3 or 4 bends before it broke in half. I was like "that's why I don't fly"!!!
oddlycalm
12-17-09, 02:15 PM
I was simulating this last night... after each can of Busch Light I finished, I would bend the can back and forth and for all 24 cans it only took about 3 or 4 bends before it broke in half.
You are now qualified to work at Airbus.
oc
Hard Driver
12-17-09, 09:45 PM
787 wing break test.
http://www.787milestones.tpninteractive.com/
TravelGal
12-17-09, 10:02 PM
They are planning to do eight (?) planes around the clock for the next six months to make sure those puppies don't break up with passengers in them. Test pilots on the other hand.......
I was simulating this last night... after each can of Busch Light I finished, I would bend the can back and forth and for all 24 cans it only took about 3 or 4 bends before it broke in half. I was like "that's why I don't fly"!!!
I see you've adapted well to your Floridian environs :gomer:
Boeing 787 Dreamliner completes flutter, ground effects tests (http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/archives/198786.asp)
This was the part that caught my eye:
During flutter testing, the first flight-test 787 flew above 43,000 feet and, in dives, as fast as Mach 0.97, with calibrated airspeeds as high as 405 knots, Tinseth wrote. "The technical team has made an initial assessment of the data and we couldn't be more pleased with the performance of the 787. The damping was as predicted and the pilots report that the airplane responded as expected.
For all the computer design stuff, there is still the test pilot who will be pushing the envelope on these things. :thumbup:
Methanolandbrats
03-23-10, 09:29 AM
:eek:Test pilots have got to be borderline suicidal. No normal person would ever want that job.
stroker
03-23-10, 11:11 AM
:eek:Test pilots have got to be borderline suicidal. No normal person would ever want that job.
That, and EOD...
787 test mule put out pasture.
The first Boeing 787 to fly is following other retirees south today. Just a few weeks shy of the anniversary of its first flight, ZA001 is currently en route to Palmdale, California. It will be pulled out of service and stored until its final fate is determined.
The first 787 to fly back on December 15, 2009, ZA001 has served as the workhorse of the flight test fleet with 518 flights and more than 1,326 hours according to Boeing. The airplane has been all around the world and just returned from Australia last month.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2011/12/boeings-first-787-flying-into-retirement/?mbid=ob_ppc_auto
That was a fast two years.
cameraman
12-02-11, 07:57 PM
Sooooo, they are going to fly it to the desert and remove the engines and then in a couple of years they will put engines back in it and fly it to Seattle and stick it in a museum:confused: Why not just fly it to the museum location and pull the engines and shrink wrap it in place until they are ready to donate it. That way they don't have to reactivate it to move it.
Maybe they could tow it like a glider behind a 777. :p
miatanut
12-03-11, 12:43 AM
Sooooo, they are going to fly it to the desert and remove the engines and then in a couple of years they will put engines back in it and fly it to Seattle and stick it in a museum:confused: Why not just fly it to the museum location and pull the engines and shrink wrap it in place until they are ready to donate it. That way they don't have to reactivate it to move it.
I was wondering that myself. I'm guessing there just isn't enough space up here and maybe they need to expand the museum grounds before they even have a spot to put it. In Palmdale, it's not in the middle of a big city, so there's lots of space to store it in the mean time. They recently demolished the WWII bomber factory ("Plant 2") and the museum had to move their WWII bombers out of there, so the museum is even more pressed for space. The factories don't have gobs of extra space either.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.