The relevancy is very strong - if there was really any 'serious' design problem with 787 it would have been known/discussed in professional trade magazines (say AW&ST or ATW, etc) not in Al Jazeera or Vanity Fair or RollingStone or Hindustan Times for example.

++++1 :Applause: :Applause: :Applause:

I know only one worse media outlet than Al Jazeera - RT.

You can always find an engineer or two (out of thousands) who will tell you exactly the story you want to hear. 

You can always find evidence to fit your preconceived thesis.

Stating that Al Jazeera and RT is the "worst" news is one of the most ridocolous things I've heard in a very long time. Just because they provide news from a non-western insight it doesn't mean it's crap and you can actually find some truth in it compared to other mainstream medias.

 

CNN and BBC are completely biased to what the American and British government wants, and obviously provides such news. A lot of it is ignoring the truth and only letting you know what you want to hear,so you really go to open your eyes.

So CNN and the BBC are biased and Al Jazeera and RT are not ? Utter rubbish , they all are .

It doesn't matter where you are on the planet , someone is always going to disagree with " your view " of whatever subject . I believe someone once said ( but maybe never did )  , " Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story " . So no one needs their eyes opened , they just need to use common sense and not believe everything they see on television , read in the papers or on the net .

On another note , in the B737 film , the Turkish Airlines 737 did not " overshoot " the runway , as it crashed several hundred yards short of the runway , so that programme wasn't 100% accurate either .

 

John

So CNN and the BBC are biased and Al Jazeera and RT are not ? Utter rubbish , they all are .

It doesn't matter where you are on the planet , someone is always going to disagree with " your view " of whatever subject . I believe someone once said ( but maybe never did )  , " Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story " . So no one needs their eyes opened , they just need to use common sense and not believe everything they see on television , read in the papers or on the net .

On another note , in the B737 film , the Turkish Airlines 737 did not " overshoot " the runway , as it crashed several hundred yards short of the runway , so that programme wasn't 100% accurate either .

 

John

EVERY mainstream media is biased including RT and ALJAZEERA. But that doesn't JUSTIFY talking rubbish about non-western news channels as the rest of the world is very sick of them (the west).

 

And remember your "common sence" is not "common sence" where I live. "common sence" just depends on your country and culture and simply cannot be applied globally, hence your analogy is incorrect.

 

However, it's true you shouldn't believe everything on the news or the net or whatever... But in a world like this is will be very hard to know what's actually going on.

 

I do not like to get into arguments like this, but if somebody insults a Russian media outlet and praises their own I do have to get involved. At work I have to deal with people like this everyday.

Well said Tushka.  And for the record I personally know engineers that work on the 787 at QR, to this day the aircraft are still considered glitchy and the worst in regards to maintenance issues.

 

 I don't think it is a bad aircraft, Boeing simply pushed the boundaries and engineers are dealing with the teething issues of a fairly new machine.  Lessons will be learned all round.

 

QR currently have a bunch of engineers in Toulouse on a A350 course, I good friend of mine is down there at the moment, will be interesting to hear what issues crop up on that aircraft once it comes into service.

 

With that said, whenever I book an ID90 with QR I make sure I am flying a 777 or A330/340.  I am not the only one who does so.

 

Regards

Well said Tushka.  And for the record I personally know engineers that work on the 787 at QR, to this day the aircraft are still considered glitchy and the worst in regards to maintenance issues.

 

 I don't think it is a bad aircraft, Boeing simply pushed the boundaries and engineers are dealing with the teething issues of a fairly new machine.  Lessons will be learned all round.

 

QR currently have a bunch of engineers in Toulouse on a A350 course, I good friend of mine is down there at the moment, will be interesting to hear what issues crop up on that aircraft once it comes into service.

 

With that said, whenever I book an ID90 with QR I make sure I am flying a 777 or A330/340.  I am not the only one who does so.

 

Regards

Unfortunately that is very true, real aircraft in some cases are as glitchy as the FSX ones. Especially the ones bringing something never seen before in aviation... New technology will unfortunately always have some unfortunate miscalculations into them and in many cases loss of life such as De Havilland Comet which was the first jet liner. And accidents like that is why Tupolev, Boeing and Sud Aviaiton could identify the flaws of the comet and apply their fixes on their own aircraft.

 

Tu-154 had wing issues, Airbus 320 had flybywire concerns... even the 737 had rudder issues. We feel safer in extensively tested aircraft that have been in service for a long time for such reasons but when a plane crashes in 90% of the cases lessons are learnt from it making aviation safer every year.

 

The victim today is 787 and very likely A350. I, as you, would also prefer to fly on a 777, A340 or some other extensively tested aircraft.

Although not a mainstream new agency, the people on PPrune are not overly keen on the 787, i don't think it's a badly designed plane, it's just got a few teething troubles.  Personally, i would be happy to fly on a 787; my only real concern is 10 years from now when the airframes have 1000's hours on them, i haven't read how they'll be able to discern damage/fatigue to the composite structure. Same applies to the A350 and to a lesser extend the A380.

 

 

 

CNN and BBC are completely biased to what the American and British government wants

 

While i entirely agree with you in principle, the BBC have a public mandate to be neutral, they may not always get it right, but i would trust them more than Fox (American) / RT (Russia).  I have always found Al-Jazeera's reporting to be quite professional, along with ITAR-TASS in Russia.

While i entirely agree with you in principle, the BBC have a public mandate to be neutral, they may not always get it right, but i would trust them more than Fox (American) / RT (Russia).  I have always found Al-Jazeera's reporting to be quite professional, along with ITAR-TASS in Russia.

Occasionally I check what BBC is writing, sometimes it makes sence and sometimes it doesn't. I used to watch it many years ago and it was better and not as controlled, also somehow more neutral. But if I have to choose between BBC and CNN/FOX it would definitely be BBC.

 

ITAR-TASS is far more neutral than RT and provides a clearer insight, as in case of RT despite I like to read it, half of the news are actually anti US/UK just as much the CNN is anti-Russian.

 

For me I just like to keep contact with people from different parts of the world as different personal insights are easier to understand than a bunch of mainstream medias attacking each other trough journalism.

 

As of the case of Aljazeera Boeing 787 article I first thought it would somehow benefit Airbus by trashtalking the 787, but I might be wrong.

Im flying on a Jetstar 787 in March next year I hope it was not assembled in Charleston SC looks like they have very serious QC Problems

"On another note , in the B737 film , the Turkish Airlines 737 did not " overshoot " the runway , as it crashed several hundred yards short of the runway , so that programme wasn't 100% accurate either ."

 

And that has what bearing on the 737 scandal.

 

 

I hope it was not assembled in Charleston SC looks like they have very serious QC Problems

They don't , sheer unfounded propaganda, it is already known that behind all this anti-SC  is unionized Everett workforce that wants to make non-unionized SC workforce look bad. Sheer labor union propaganda. It is already known that behind this 'hidden' camera wasn't really an SC employee but a union member from Everett who was sent to SC to train their workers and decided to spin this story about non union workers being 'bad'. This anti-SC agenda plus this pension plan vote vote last year when Boeing workers passed through narrow margin some changes to their pension plan is the root of all this idiocy.

And the bottom line here.............is money!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

All we hope for is that nothing ever has to happen to prove anything........

 

But it is a sad fact of life today in any Corporate company Money/costs/schedules and the worst of this modern society red tape ...performance... rules...ask any worker at review time

"On another note , in the B737 film , the Turkish Airlines 737 did not " overshoot " the runway , as it crashed several hundred yards short of the runway , so that programme wasn't 100% accurate either ."

 

And that has what bearing on the 737 scandal.

 

What 737 scandal ?

 I watched a film about two ex employee's from Boeing , heard their story and that's it . Are Boeing 737's falling out of the sky ? Have I missed something happening ? Because the story wasn't sensational enough , they added the three crashes to " prove " their point .They said they also received death threats , well they didn't look very dead to me so that obviously didn't work because they " told their story ".

Of the three crashes mentioned at the end , I only have any knowledge of the Turkish Airlines crash at Schiphol . Did their story have anything to do with the crash ? No it didn't , just with the end result , i.e. how the aircraft broke up after belly flopping into a field .

The whole point of this topic ( about the 787 ) had to do with the truth ( or not ) of the comments made in the media . Luckily for me I am still able to make up my own mind without blindly accepting everything I read or hear on television or internet . I also do not see conspiracy's every time I watch the six-o-clock news , read a newspaper or a topic on AVSIM .

 

John

Are Boeing 737's falling out of the sky ?

 

Well yes, they were just falling out of the sky  The 737 Jurassic & Classic are the only types I would flat out refuse to board.  Think I would walk if I had to, can't think of anything worse than being in one of those small metal tubes during a rudder hardover.

  The 737 Jurassic & Classic

I regularly fly 737 Classics as a passenger and I have no problems with them, in fact I feel safer in it than with an Airbus 320 and Sukhoi Superjet 100.