ANA Boeing 787 has engine problem before takeoff

should be called the LEMONliner, but in all fairness arnt the engines made by GE?

That's two in two days. Even the smallest glitch for these planes will get a lot of attention.

If this had happened on any other airplane it would not have made the news.

If this had happened on any other airplane it would not have made the news.

A plane returning to an airport due to a defect usually gets press coverage. Engine troubles (on the ground) usually not, unless many people were affected (such as in this case)

Dreamliner? Turning into the Nightmare Liner for Boeing.

So far everyone has been lucky and these 'glitches' have caused only inconveniences for passengers and airlines. Let's hope that Boeing gets this mess sorted out ASAP.

again?

The reason that this is making headlines is because of the numerous issues, including fires, smoke in the cabin, etc that the 787 experienced in the past. The planes only recently re-entered service and are showing other performance issues now... Poor ANA - they are stuck with brand-new-unreliable fleet of aircraft.

If this had happened on any other airplane it would not have made the news.

It would if the entire global fleet in question had been grounded for a prolonged period shortly after the model's launch for a problem that remains a mystery. After which the maker refused to replace the problem components, and after which the planes continued to suffer "glitches."

Well said Dave. I'm flying to Frankfurt on it next month. Got to show some support.

Maybe swimming to Frankfurt would be safer?

"Should be called the LEMONliner"

Heh, the "LEMONliner" will be one of the most popular aircraft in the world in another ten years.

Just glad that these glitches haven't caused any loss of life. I'd be reluctant to fly on one.

Got reservations on a UAL flight this summer on a 787. As long as the problems only happen on the ground, I'm cool with it.

"Glitch"?!? The engine didn't start. Kind of important. What if you bought a new expensive car, turned the key and the engine didn't start? Would you call it a "glitch"?

This is not going to stop, is it? I dare not imagine how many more different things can go wrong with this plane. I 'm also going to fly to Frankfurt on one of these in August, and to be honest, I'm not too keen, with everything that is going wrong. Appreciate the suggestion by scoobydoo to swim instead, but found that I probably lack the stamina and will have to take my chances with this Nightmareliner... ;-)

but in all fairness arnt the engines made by GE?

ANA = RR, JAL = GE. But either way, what is the "fairness" referring to?

DaveAllTogether is right. I thought the same as soon as I read the headline.

Here we have problems with batteries, which got the planes grounded. Then a problem with deicing. Then a problem with an engine that didn't start. What's the common thread here? Nothing other than the model number 787. Realistically, what are the chances that these different parts on different planes are all going wrong due to a shared reason? It's possible, but it's more likely these are just random, normal mechanical difficulties. Anyone who has flown long enough has experienced mechanical delays or cancellations for one reason or another.

I know it's boring, and therefore unpopular, but we're probably just seeing statistical noise combined with a reporting bias. That's not as interesting as "LEMONliner" (hence, again, it being unpopular) but it's scientific.

I am sure this will be a great machine. But the fact of the matter is that they went into commercial production and operation too fast by skipping some deep reliability checks due to financial pressure most likely.

For a new Microsoft software like Windows XYZ, this is OK, but not with an airplane.

"This is regrettable" they need to scrap those hunk of junk planes!

So here's a question I haven't seen asked yet. Why have the one incident (the battery fire at BOS) and all of the other minor equipment issues (sorry but yes they're all minor folks) only involved ANA and JAL 787's? Sure, they were the first to take delivery, but there have been more 787's operated by other airlines worldwide than these two combined for most of the past year. Statistically we should be seeing these problems crop up with the 787's operated by non-Japanese carriers but so far every time there's a problem it's an ANA or JAL bird? Is it just coincidence? I don't know which production numbers the 787's that have had the mechanical issues are, but could they all possibly be limited to the first several airframes that rolled off the assembly line, a trend often seen with new car models? This still wouldn't be a good thing for Boeing and their quality control but it would explain why every problem that's reported involves ANA or JAL.

A plane returning to an airport due to a defect usually gets press coverage.

Singapore-bound JAL Dreamliner turns back due to anti-icing system glitch

A heavy chance that we might be risking a scenario similar to the Final Destination trilogy (And yes, it occurred once in 1987)

@USNinJapan2:

787 Deliveries:

ANA: 19 JAL: 8

Air India: 6 China Southern: 1 Ethiopian: 4 LAN Air: 3 LOT Polish: 3 Qatar Airways: 5 TUI Travel: 2 United Airlines: 6

I imagine it has a lot to do with the media and culture of openness in the different countries. No way in hell are you going to hear about problems with planes in Qatar or India due to how secretive and corrupt the companies and media are there.

No way in hell are you going to hear about problems with planes in Qatar or India due to how secretive and corrupt the companies and media are there.

I don't know how you would cover up a non-starting engine, requiring all the passengers to be moved. Many of Qatar's passengers are Westerners.

That is the trouble with plastic planes!

The problem with the 787 is Boeing CEO and other executives that came from McDonnell Douglas. Why keep executives that caused the downfall of a company like McDonnell Douglas? They ousourced too much and Boeing is paying the price. The really need to get rid of McNerney and it they have problems with the GE engines.... McNemey worked to GE for almost 20 years before Boeing in 2005.