Raptor

And wise words they are... Thank you, brother... Proud to be Union too. Raptor

Consider the source. What knowledge does Aljazeera really have on the topic of aviation? Not much, as it shows in their "reporting", if one can call it that. The three crashes they give as examples are BS. It doesn't matter to Aljazeera that the crashes were ALL runway under/overruns, the cause in each case was pilot error. Oh No, it had to be the "bad parts" that were to blame. Even the National Inquirer has done better reporting than this Junk... The "whistle blowers" were all people who don't even touch the parts in question. One is a parts buyer, who sits at a desk and shuffles paperwork, never even seeing the part she is buying. Her job is to buy the part, not inspect it as it arrives at Boeing. You don't CNC machine those types of parts anyhow. The process is called stretch forming and often the parts are cut to length by hand after the forming operation. The "corrosion" one of the "whistle blowers is so concerned about, would be caught in the normal tear down the the planes go thru periodically. And a repair to a ring segment that he points out is routine and just part of the normal life of a plane. Raptor

"Their own agenda" is to negotiate the best contract for you AND your family. You are making what you make and have the benefits you have because of their efforts to negotiate a fair and balanced contract that is best for the membership which your union represents. Remember, a union is a democratic organization that is only as good as it's members and how well they are involved with the issues that you face at work. You have the right and privelege of voting for those officals who represent you at the bargaining table in your name. You get to choose who you think has your best interests at the bargaining table, that sit across from their lawyers and company reps, who damn sure don't have your best interests at heart. You don't have the choice of who is the CEO of the company. You do have that choice at the Union Hall. You have the right of grievance, should the "company" decide to fire you for some ridiculous reason. Too much time from work, while you were taking care of your sick wife is one example I have seen. Perhaps you weren't promoted to a position that your were qualified for and had more time with the "Company" than the guy who was promoted. Layoffs are beginning, you have 20 years of service and are layed off, but someone with 2 years gets to stay, even though you both do the exact same job. With a union you have recourse to right that wrong, without the union, there is nothing that you can do about it, it just stinks to be you. While the 2 year wonder is laughing at you. It's democracy in action, and only as good as its membership is... It called collective bargaining for a reason. The operative word is "bargaining". No one is holding a gun to the "companies" head and saying give everyone a 5.00 dollar raise. It is negotiated "in good faith", by both sides, and is a mutual agreement that both parties willingly sign, as a legal binding document. It is an agreement the "company" signed and is obligated to abide by, as is the union. Both are bound by its language. If you think your "Company" has YOUR best interests at heart, better rethink that one. They don't... Crossing a picket line isn't a good idea either. The company doesn't respect picketline crossers either. Raptor

Good points. The fill in is still done today. We call it aero-sealing for aero smoothing and for it keeps out the weather too. Raptor

They didn't self certify the "airworthiness certificate". They are allowed to "Self-Certify" certain build operations as does evey airframer in the business. It's called self inspection. You, the mechanic are inspecting your work as meeting the requirements of the airframe builder AND the FAA specifications. You are also held accountable if something breaks too. If it is found that you certified an operation that doesn't meet the criteria, then your self inspection capability is revoked. You are now required to get a company inspector to inspect your work as being acceptable. Boeing is licensed thru the FAA to build the aircraft, and Boeing certifies that it's workers are working to FAA regulations to build the airplane as the airframe builder. There are certifications and classes required for the production guys at Boeing to do the work. Anything that has "Safety of Flight" type of operations involved will have a Company inspectors buyoff requirement as well. AKA: There are not enough FAA inspectors to inspect every single operation to build an aircraft. Raptor

It's still a design change. Engineers changed the material, therefore they changed the specifications of the wings blueprint. To those on the factory floor, IT is a design change to be incorporated into the production line for the next applicable plane that engineering tells them to apply it to. If you change anything in the plane, you have to generate a design change to tell them to do something different from the last plane. One doesn't diviate from the blueprint without engineering approval. It requires a Drawing Change Notice, which changes the blueprint. And No, Boeing didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts. They did it for the same reasons as Airbus did. They did it to bring the plane up to the design specifications they told their customers the plane would meet, AKA: the specified number of flight cycles the airfame would fly. AIrbus is modifying the existing fleet to meet that same promise. In other words, Airbus is doing the exact same thing as Boeing did... Modifiy the aircraft to meet the number of cycles promised. The composite issues for Boeing was largely due to Alenia not being familiar with composite layup and fabrication technics, in fact they were very new to the material. Boeings' problem was a lack of oversight of their subcontractor (Alenia). They would have been better off to subcontract that work to Northrop-Grumman with their vast expertise in the field of large airframe composite structures. The electrical system is the one area where Boeing overstreched the technology. Everything else has been done in other aircraft before, just not brought into the same airframe as Boeing has done in the 787. Raptor

"Finally, I think the reason why the USAAF stopped painting so many of its aircraft in 1944 was to save weight. On an aircraft the size of a B-17 or B-24 the weight saving was very significant." That was more for time savings during the build process. We had acheived air superiority by 1944 over Europe and we were at peak production rates in '44 as well. So USAAF made the decision to for-go the paint altogether as a way to save time. Given the speeds of the time, any weight savings would be neglible for the mission being flown. Saving fuel wasn't high on the list during wartime. Composites have to be painted, or at least some sort of topcoat applied. They are too porous to be left bare, unlike aluminum clad skins. "I'd imagine it's very much the same with an aeroplane." It is. If you have bare metal, out comes the Alodine, and the paint brush. Conversion coat first, then you apply the polyurethane paint to touch up. Raptor

The above are single system issues as is the case for the 787. What is going on with the Sukhoi is more than that. Different systems and areas of the plane are involved with the SSJ-100 Series. AviationWeek has a few articles concerning the aircraft that Sukhoi is trying to build and market. Seeing that Sukhoi's main customer isn't buying their products in mass today, it's trying it's hand at airliners. Perhaps it might be best to stick to what they know. Tactical military aircraft. Airliners are a very different animal from a military aircraft. Difficult to change ones mindset from military builds to commercial builds in real world practice. Raptor

It's a RF-84 Thunderflash alright. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-84F_Thunderstreak Raptor

It's a RF-84 Thunderstreak alright. Where did you take the photo? Look down the Wiki link and there is a list of surviving planes on display, but it's not complete, as I see there is one that I know of not listed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-84F_Thunderstreak Raptor

Rutan is a rebel to most of the conventional thinking folks in avaition. He thinks outside the box. which I like. Bone headed move by Beech. There were a couple of them that I would see fly over here. Miss that sound, you knew what was coming before you saw it visually. Raptor

"In any case it is putting aviation in peril !!!" . It will have a detrimental effect on the industry, as is already beginning to happen as agencies prepare for a long slog with reduced funding. In the long term, peril just might become the operative word. We will have to wait and see. If there are reduced hours for inspectors, for example, that means longer times to wait to get their approval to go on to the next step. Longer wait times means idle time for mechanics and that burns up budget, and gets nothing done. No company would keep staffing levels up with that going on, so that does mean layoffs for people and their families. The time frame of this happening is the big question, the longer it goes on, the more likely layoffs will happen. It's simply, trickle down economics. I don't see this being "fixed" before the end of the fiscal year in Sept. And let's remember, at the end of March, we hit the debt ceiling again and the Yo-Yos in WDC are going to have to come up with yet ANOTHER spending "work around" to fund the Government yet again... But this is the way of this President and the Congress. Are you getting a sense of De Ja Vu ? AGAIN... Raptor

We did. "We the People", as The Constitution sets out for election of our leaders. I agree with your description of the state of affairs we have found ourselves in today. Yes, it is on US. They (the ruling class,we elected and keep sending back to WDC) cut jobs and money for jobs for American citizens, but THEY still have their jobs and benefits, including exempting their staffs from such cuts and furloughs. Now, What is wrong with this picture? Raptor

What are those spinning things at the back? Big difference, me thinks... Only razzing ya, Matthew... In a serious note, Boeing, Lockheed and NASA with DARPA are looking at supersonic flight again in an attempt to minimize the shockwave under the planes path. They are using computational fluid dynamics to shape the planes exterior to ease the shockwaves footprint and impact at ground level. AviationWeek has had several articles on the program. Raptor

That's kool. But you stated we won't see the effects, when some of us are seeing those effects today. That was the point I was making, not trying to debate the sequester. Raptor