Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
First Boeing 787 commercial aircraft damaged by airline
The first ever completed and delivered Boeing 787 aircraft has already been damaged in the field. According to Flightglobal, the incident took place while the aircraft was being towed near a jetbridge and resulted in damage to the cowling around one of the engines. With the damage only skin deep, however, the airline put the aircraft back into testing for the scheduled commercial launch later this month.All Nippon Airways is the first delivery partner for the new Boeing Dreamliner, and they're expected to receive a total of 55 aircraft over the next few years. With a new aircraft footprint and a range of other features to the new technology it's expected that there will be teething problems with getting the Dreamliner fully integrated into operation. Hopefully this minor damage is the extent of the challenge.
[flickr image via PYNOKO]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
philip Oct 24th 2011 12:51PM
TOTALLY misleading article/headline
NOT a problem for BOEING a problem for ANA
the plane worked fine the ground crew bumped the engine
this headline is more like the enquiirer..........
VP Oct 24th 2011 1:59PM
Agreed. They're making it out to be a mechanical problem when it isn't.
Jeff Oct 24th 2011 1:57PM
U are exactly right
Apple Oct 24th 2011 2:14PM
Yes, that is a huge expsensive problem! Employee negligence has now cost them big bucks and unexpected delays before the plane could even take it's first flight!
Mary Oct 24th 2011 2:43PM
Right on, Philip, that's the Huffington Post for you.
Visconti24 Oct 24th 2011 3:05PM
If "damage" was so light, it was skin deep and did not affect training and flights, it is not damage. It is a scratch, if that.
When I read the headline I thought: "Oh no, a crack in the the wing box or turbine blades disintegrating or window frames separating from fuselage.
This plane still has lots of problems to be fixed but this story is entirely stupid.
Boeing Tech Oct 24th 2011 3:17PM
Thanks Phillip! Well done and great comment. I'd like to have a nickel for every time this happens GLOBALLY with the same grounding results! No airport nor ANY airline is immune to "ramp rash." In fact, some airlines who are BIG in airports such as CLT and PHL seem to thrive on their occurrences of aircraft damage from "under-the-wing" workers! Sometimes,I believe it's a contest of who can do the most damage...and how often they can do it! And I wonder how many times the Space Shuttle was wacked before it got the "ultimate wack!"
Al Schrader Oct 24th 2011 6:14PM
Boeing makes the best jets there are. If you look at the turbo-fan engine you will notice the blades. If a bird enters, the blades can fail. I invented a new kind of jet engine that works on the same principle as the Dyson blade-less fan. Birds or fod simply pass right through it. And the faster it flies, the more power it can make....Al-
Robert Oct 25th 2011 1:01PM
Pilot for the world's largest airline.....the the big red widget....just landed our 747 in Tokyo Narita and taxied by the ANA 787. Looked like they were getting ready to put it back in service. Yeh, the media headline, as usual, is misleading. The Japanese are very efficient and diligent in their work ethic....but...accidents happen.
julie c Oct 24th 2011 1:16PM
I agree with Philip. Aol News has recently shifted to 'teaser' headlines that try to make more out of the underlying story, or worse, provide false implications of the actual facts. I find that I have stopped relying on Aol News for relevant, honest content.
JohnS Oct 24th 2011 1:36PM
If you think this headline is bad, check out the political section.
JTFloore Oct 24th 2011 2:20PM
yes, aol's headlines on political stories are now atrocious, a total embarrassment.
John Oct 24th 2011 1:41PM
I have been an AOL customer for 30 years and I am looking to change TOO MANY ADDS and not enough content on news articles
JohnL Oct 24th 2011 4:01PM
when you said that you have been an AOL cust. for 30 years I thought, "AOL hasn't been around that long", I was wrong, it was founded in 1983 as Video Control Corporation, not quite 30 years but close enough.
Learned something today, maybe it will come up in a trivia game.
Linda Oct 24th 2011 5:38PM
Wow - AOL has been around for 30 years? I thought I had it a long time lol. I remember having Compuserve in the 80's and thought it was wonderful lol. Very interesting but maybe more interesting is I love AOL. I have tried other ISP's through the years, but always come back to AOL. Thanks for the post, we learn something new every day!
dmainswo Oct 24th 2011 7:22PM
pretty soon all AOL will be is the answer to some obscure trivia question.
mike Oct 24th 2011 1:59PM
Thats What they get for being Cheap , now they can hire more so called engineers to measure the bridges.
asrisl Oct 24th 2011 2:04PM
Julie C is wrong (sort of). AOL News shifted to teaser headlines more than a year ago, maybe two. Glad a conversation reacting to it has been started. I hardly ever click on AOL headlines anymore. They are almost all exaggerations and half-truths.
I use AOL now only for my mail. I have news.google.com tabbed for my headlines.
AOL now wallows with The Enquirer, Star and the like, but its free for us to use and they have decided to take that route. It's their decision. Maybe they will see the error of their ways when advertisers see that people are clicking less and less on their sensationalized headlines.
John Oct 24th 2011 2:12PM
This needs to be said over and over. Thanks for saying it.
Joe Papierz Oct 24th 2011 3:04PM
Your so right. AOL has gone downhill steadily for about five years now. You can't trust them for factual news anymore..Double check everything they write to be safe. They have turned into a powder puff news source and have copied some aspects of the National Enquirer by writting misleading headlines to get our attention often making it seem like there was a disaster somewhere when it actually they are reporting a non event.