nzherald.co.nz

Winston Aldworth: My plan for the Dreamliner: sit back and enjoy the ride

By Winston Aldworth @WinstonAldworth
9:30 AM Tuesday Jan 22, 2013
The new Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Photo / Doug Sherring

The new Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Photo / Doug Sherring

The bean-counters at Boeing might be having some sleepless nights about the Dreamliner, but should we, the humble travellers, be worried?

In truth, many of us have probably flown on aircraft with shonkier safety records* than the 787 will ever be tagged with. From clapped-out Cessnas, to sightseeing helicopters or champagne-soaked first class, all flights have their charms - and dangers.

So, what can we do? Easy: Sit back and try not to think about it. In flight, I'll always feel like a shaved monkey in a flying tin can - or rather, in the case of the 787, a flying hybrid plastic bucket.

Teething troubles with new aircraft are nothing new. Back in 1970, the first commercial flight by a brand new 747 was delayed by seven hours because of engine trouble. Other early Jumbos had similar problems.

Life must have been more simple back then. Boeing first announced their plans to build the Jumbo in 1966 and that first flight took off just four years later. That turnaround from announcement to first takeoff is quicker than the delay in Air New Zealand's Dreamliner deliveries.

The 747 worked out and put more than $120 billion into Boeing's coffers. So, Dreamliners? She'll be right.

* Shonkiest safety record of all: Boeing's 737 JT8D - the earliest 737 model - which runs at one crash per 507,500 flying hours. There are still more than 500 in operation, mostly in poorer countries and with airlines not noted for excellence in the field of maintenance.

By Winston Aldworth @WinstonAldworth
Unreal (New Zealand) | 10:20AM Tuesday, 22 Jan 2013
Having worked in the avaition industry in the past, all planes fly with "snags" and these are recorded. I am sure the 787 will be amazing to fly on once this issue is resolved.

Let's not forget all the issues with the A380 when it came out. I'd be more concerned about flying with Qantas than any other airline in the world given all the different issues they have had over the last few years!
NDW (New Zealand) | 03:43PM Tuesday, 22 Jan 2013
The problem with the batteries catching fire on the 787 is somewhat more serious compared to the other safety issues discussed in this articles. In the age of the first 747's, if one engine failed they could fly safely on the other three.

This was before ETOPS operations, which meant that aircraft had to fly within a certain flying time from a suitable diversion airport should a problem occur.
However, in the age of twin engine aircraft with "ETOPS" operations, aircraft are allowed to fly further away from airports than before, so if there is a problem it takes longer to reach that diversion airport.

In the case of fire on board, this is much more serious than engine failure as the fire can potentially destroy the aircraft before it reaches a suitable airport. A twin engine aircraft such as the 787 can fly safely on one engine until landing at an airport.
Just Me (Auckland Region) | 03:43PM Tuesday, 22 Jan 2013
Also having worked in aviation before you will find me dodging these new range of tupperware planes. I just don't trust the carbon fibre construction, all this cost & weight saving has already shown to be a compromise with the battery fire issues, not to mention wing cracks early on in both planes.

I think we are seeing the coming of a second "Comet" with the Dreamliner, I guess only time will tell if I am right or wrong.
Copyright ©2013, APN Holdings NZ Limited