Boeing halts 777-9 certification tests.

[RobPol471]

A thrust linkage mounting component attached to one of the two GE Aerospace GE9X engines failed after a test flight.

 

https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/boeing-halts-777-9-certification-tests-engine-mount-checks

[Flyfox]

The negative Boeing headlines don’t stop …

[GACSavannah]

This is WHY you do flight testing. And the system worked as designed. You test, you inspect, you test, you inspect... and if you find any thing that does not perform or function as expected you rework it and start the process over again.

[james42]

4 years since the -9 rolled out and still nowhere near certification. I've got a feeling Boeing is pushing the 777 design one step too far.

[Flyfox]

22 minutes ago, james42 said:

4 years since the -9 rolled out and still nowhere near certification. I've got a feeling Boeing is pushing the 777 design one step too far.

… what they actually did when they developed the 737MAX based on the NG series rather than creating a completely new, up-to-date aircraft. We all know the consequences …

[james42]

1 hour ago, Flyfox said:

… what they actually did when they developed the 737MAX based on the NG series rather than creating a completely new, up-to-date aircraft. We all know the consequences …

Agreed. The MAX is absolutely pushing the now 63 year old 737 design too far. I think Boeing should of designed a total new narrow-body in the 90s alongside the 777. As for the 777X, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it never carries a single passenger.

[Biggles2010]

4 hours ago, GACSavannah said:

This is WHY you do flight testing. And the system worked as designed. You test, you inspect, you test, you inspect... and if you find any thing that does not perform or function as expected you rework it and start the process over again.

In this instance, the component had completely severed, which appears to be how it was noticed. Subsequent tests on the 2 other test aircraft then revealed existing cracking of the same components. Clearly these cracks had previously not been picked up by inspection. If the testing system worked 'as designed', then the system is evidently not good enough.

[Spam3d]

Really surprised that the thrust link severed, never seen anything near that before and I've inspected many a thrust link for GENx and GE90s. I guess its a positive that apart from redesigning the component, its quite isolated in its fault and not having a knock on to other parts, and its a doddle to replace them.

[Matthew Kane]

On 8/21/2024 at 10:12 AM, james42 said:

Agreed. The MAX is absolutely pushing the now 63 year old 737 design too far. I think Boeing should of designed a total new narrow-body in the 90s alongside the 777. As for the 777X, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it never carries a single passenger.

What people don't consider is that the 737 was reused from many 707 components, the flight deck, windows, doors, the fuselage diameter and components it was basically a shortened 707, but with changes to wings, rudders, tail, landing gears etc. Reusing as much as the could saved on the development and was a very good idea at that time. Same as the 727 it has lots of common items with the 707. The 757 was actually developed from the 727 and has common items as well. 

Therefore its design partially goes back to the mid 1950s and yes by now I would call it a FrankenPlane 

[Luis Hernandez]

13 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

What people don't consider is that the 737 was reused from many 707 components

Then please don't look at your cars: OEMs carry over several components to various models and generations. Well, cars don't fly (yet), but I'm not surprised aircraft shares also several components. I mean, the A300 nose gear is used in the A330 and A340.

[Matthew Kane]

On 8/23/2024 at 12:31 AM, Luis Hernandez said:

Then please don't look at your cars: OEMs carry over several components to various models and generations. Well, cars don't fly (yet), but I'm not surprised aircraft shares also several components. I mean, the A300 nose gear is used in the A330 and A340.

Yes cars and planes don't compare, a car you can pull over and lift the hood, and the large majority of driver training in the world is when a Parent teaches their Kid how to drive 😄

[darrenvox]

On 8/20/2024 at 12:33 PM, Flyfox said:

The negative Boeing headlines don’t stop …

yeah i cant trust them anymore...when can we go back to trusting them? not sure..

have a good day

[Luis Hernandez]

1 hour ago, Matthew Kane said:

Yes cars and planes don't compare, a car you can pull over and lift the hood, and the large majority of driver training in the world is when a Parent teaches their Kid how to drive 😄

True 😂

42 minutes ago, darrenvox said:

when can we go back to trusting them? not sure..

When they manage to get the Starliner crew safely back to Earth, maybe?

[dave2013]

While I'm no longer a fan of Boeing, I do think the criticism of a failure during testing is a bit harsh.  Failures and malfunctions will happen with any aircraft, especially one that's been redesigned, and it's better to discover these during testing than in flight with a plane full of passengers.

The 737 Max has actually turned out to be a pretty good plane.  Boeing made a monumental error with the stupid MCAS system, but it's clearly been corrected.

I don't know that we really need a brand new single-aisle plane design to replace the 737s and A320s.  The recent NEO and Max upgrades have made these much more efficient with longer range. 

What I'd like to see is a larger plane with longer range to replace the 757, the so-called middle of the market aircraft.  The A321XLRs are great, but can't really replace a plane like the 757.  I'd like to see a redesigned 757 that's a bit longer with better engines that can carry 250pax up to 5,000nm.

Dave

Edited August 24 by dave2013

[Matthew Kane]

17 hours ago, dave2013 said:

I don't know that we really need a brand new single-aisle plane design to replace the 737s and A320s.  

Boeing has had many concepts that never came to development but one they considered prior to the MAX was a twin aisle regional plane with efficient engines, the advantage of twin aisles is they are much faster to load and disembark passengers therefore much faster turn around times. The 757 is the worst airline for the time in takes to load and unload passengers in the history of aviation due to its length and being single aisle.

Short and Wide 2-2-2 configuration for a regional would have been far better then the current 737s and A320s for performance and turn around on the ground and passenger experience, the time it takes to get off an aircraft is the worst part and being at the back of an A321 is frustrating. Getting on and off a 2-2-2 configuration regional would be the best regional ever built in my POV

Edited August 24 by Matthew Kane