national

Dreamliner completes test flight with ANA chairman, Boeing CEO on board

31 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

31 Comments
Login to comment

all we know so far about Dreamliners is nothing but battery problem and Yuasa Ceo is not taking this flight. .

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

It should include Boeing engineers and vendors onbord for the longest test flights of Dreamliners as well. Otherwise, I am not too convienced.

With my professional experience in the past, I can see two conflicting internal objectives; a management team for corporate profit, and an engineering team for safety and quality assuarance.

Again, I will be totally convienced if all senior engineers are willing to join the test flights.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

"He explained that the solution for the batteries eliminated the potential for fire and heat to get into the airplane. “No matter what happens to the battery, regardless of the root cause, the airplane is safe,” he said."

Hmmmm, regardless of the root cause....which they still have not found...+...“Even if we missed the root cause, we have identified 80 potential causal factors and we have addressed all of them in the design,” does not, in my opinion, = "the airplane remains absolutely safe”, in their opinion.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If you believe that Boeing only values profits, do you really think they would jeopardize the 787 program with a fix they don't think will work?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Well, if the real 'root cause' hasn't actually been addressed, we can be sure that we will find out about it sooner or later through the grace of Murphy's Law.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Wow! Doing a test flight with the CEO of Boing and the chairman of ANA is a pretty bold move. Imagine the consequences of a failure.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

According to Numerology : a) "787" = 4, b) "Dreamliner" =9, a+b) 787Dreamliner =4. ANA should urge Boeing to re-name 787s fleet.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Well, if the real 'root cause' hasn't actually been addressed, we can be sure that we will find out about it sooner or later through the grace of Murphy's Law.

Just as we would with any commercial flight on any aircraft.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Seriously, paulinusa has hit this on the head. Boeing is a seriously large corporation who are ultimately responsible for flying an untold amount of people around the world globally EVERY day. Of course Boeing want to make profits for their shareholders, of course they want to have the biggest market share in the world of passenger airliners. Wouldn't you if you ran a company? Do people here seriously believe that they would put your lives in danger? Also, please do not forget that most countries have to certify these aircraft to fly AND that most countries will follow an FAA directive regardless. You all know that the batteries in question are NOT used in flight I assume? That's not an excuse from anybody. The planes should have been on the ground until the problem could be fixed and the new casings satisfy all those involved. I wonder how many of you flew on a 777 between 1995-2008 that had the faulty fuel oil heat exchanger that finally caused a crash at Heathrow? That could have happened at anytime and it took 13 years to come to light. However, these teething problems happen, this was identified and fixed to make the plane airworthy.

@globalwatcher: You are scaremongering without cause. You do not state your qualifications, and unless you were a Boeing Engineer involved in the production of the 787 you really have little to offer with your comments.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

A two-hour test flight, eh? Well boys, I'm glad you got back safely and all, but the flights that experienced problems were all international ones, which fortunately developed said problems quickly and could land safely. Now, had those problems developed over the Pacific... well... This test flight should have been one that was to go overseas -- say the Boeing president coming over to Japan for a visit, then the Japanese flight company presidents going back with him for a visit to New York. Are the Dreamliners going to be put in commercial use flying between domestic airports?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

smith: Flight cycles were key to this, the batteries are used ON the ground, NOT the length of the flight. Does the information provided to you just go over your head?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

and smith again: The ANA flight that had the emergency evacuation in January WAS a domestic flight. It was at Takamatsu.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

theResidentApr. 28, 2013 - 02:50PM JST

@globalwatcher: You are scaremongering without cause. You do not state your qualifications, and unless you were a Boeing Engineer involved in the production of the 787 you really have little to offer with your comments.

I think I have. I fly between two countries too much and quite often. You have assume too much for unknown about me. I am currently visiting Japan, and you do not know my reason of this visit.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

LOL, the batteries are NOT used in flight, they are not a threat to flight safety.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

So hmm.. yeah two hours. Maybe we could use them between Narita and Osaka... or would that be pushing the envelope?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

LOL, the batteries are NOT used in flight, they are not a threat to flight safety.

LOL, they are if they catch fire.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Did the ANA chairman and the Boeing CEO check out the problem of passengers over 175 cm tall having their knees crushed in economy class?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think I have. I fly between two countries too much and quite often. You have assume too much for unknown about me. I am currently visiting Japan, and you do not know my reason of this visit.

None of which qualifies you as an authority on aviation matters. People like you ARE fear mongers. This problem has been blown way out of proportion. Every airliner in existence has had problems that were not foreseen in design. Some problems are just not know until an aircraft enters revenue service. Those of you who say that you will not fly on the 787 because it is a "dangerous" aircraft are ignorant. Every aircraft is dangerous.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

DaveAllTogether: "Some problems are just not know until an aircraft enters revenue service. "

And some are continually denied despite several near accidents in order to keep the bottom line.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

DaveAllTogether: "Every aircraft is dangerous."

True... we probably weren't meant to fly. But then, I'd reckon even YOU would say an airplane with a bunch of problems is not as safe with one that has little or none.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

And some are continually denied despite several near accidents in order to keep the bottom line

I have not once seen Boeing deny the existence of problems with the 787. It is in the best interest of Boeing's bottom line to address the issues with its aircraft. They have.

I'd reckon even YOU would say an airplane with a bunch of problems is not as safe with one that has little or none

I would say that. Fortunately the 787 does not have a "bunch" of problems. All in all it has about as many problems as the plane I fly, the 777.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@smithinjapan

A two-hour test flight, eh? Well boys, I'm glad you got back safely and all, but the flights that experienced problems were all international ones, which fortunately developed said problems quickly and could land safely.

Whoopsadaisy, showing that you don't understand the issue. Not all international, some were domestic, but what is your point exactly? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21038128

Are the Dreamliners going to be put in commercial use flying between domestic airports?

Yes, about 280 flights across the 787 fleet are going to be test flights and will mainly be domestic. It won't appease you though, so by all means feel to complain further on this page!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

smithinjapan: But then, I'd reckon even YOU would say an airplane with a bunch of problems is not as safe with one that has little or none.

What was the plane that was used in the Air France crash in 2009 after leaving Brazil? Since you keep a mental record of which planes to avoid I'm sure you can tell us.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This is what happens when we Americans start outsourcing engineering jobs to other countries.

We should recognize that we Americans MBAs are left with Engineering Solution as: "Put the batteries in a stainless Bento box and give them a vent - slam dunk!

However, I see this is a great opportunity for Mitsubishi (former Nakajima Hikooki Co) to start developing their own quality aircrafts to replace Boeing in the future.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I see this is a great opportunity for Mitsubishi (former Nakajima Hikooki Co) to start developing their own quality aircrafts to replace Boeing in the future.

Mitsubishi is in the process of developing a new aircraft. Nothing that will compete with any of Boeing's offerings, but Bombardier and Embraer should be concerned.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I may suggest to Mike Sinnett, JAL, ANA, all other critical senior engeneers of Boeing to fly for the TransPacific flights.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

TransPac flights are not important. This is a case where length is not important, but how many times you do it.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

This is a case where length is not important, but how many times you do it.

As I'm always telling the wife....

2 ( +2 / -0 )

He is sacrificing his life for the company.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

No. He is just proving his faith in the product of his company.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Methinks I shall take a wait-and-see attitude toward getting on one of these...just how did they "fix" the, as yet, unidentified cause of the problem?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites