HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Boeing 787 pilot training...

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:35 AM

Boeing 787 pilot training...first hand:

Got this email just now. Pilots and Aviation buffs will find it very interesting.
It sure ain't like it used to be on the 747.
trof
=============================================
I just completed the first pilot training class on the 787 at United Airlines, an airplane which is destined to replace the 767 and live for many years after I retire. Here's what I've learned in 787 training so far. By the way, last night we passed our MV (maneuvers validation) check ride, with emergency after emergency, and the FAA observing. Tonight was our LOE (line-oriented evaluation), again with FAA - this time 2 FAA observers. It's 0200 and I just got back to the hotel and poured a well-earned glass of wine to celebrate. I now have a type rating in the 787. Phew. I'm pretty confident this will be the last one for me.

I've summarized some of the major differences and unique features of the 787 versus more traditional "old school" airplanes like the 777 (not kidding) - from the pilot's viewpoint. Our "Differences" course takes 11 days to gain an FAA type rating, which is a "common" type rating with the 777. The course has been like drinking from a fire hose, but has finally come together. Some of our pilots attended Boeing's 5-day differences course, and deemed it unacceptable. The FAA approved the Boeing 5-day course, but our guys decided it lacked too much information. FAA is observing our checkrides now, and taking our course as well, to certify the training. We're just the guinea pigs.

A computer nerd would describe the 787 as 17 computer servers packaged in a kevlar frame. The central brains is the Common Core System (CCS). Two Common Computing Resources (CCRs) coordinate the communications of all the computer systems, isolating faults and covering failed systems with working systems. When battery power is first applied to the airplane in the morning, it takes about 50 seconds for the L CCR to boot up. After this, a few displays light up and you can start the APU. If there is a major loss of cockpit displays, this may require a CCR reboot, which would take about a minute. Here are a few of the major features and differences from the 777.

Electrics - Though a smaller plane, the 787 has 4 times the electric generating power of the 777 - 1.4 gigawatts. Generators produce 235 VAC for the big power users. Other systems use the traditional 115 VAC and 28 VDC. There are 17 scattered Remote Power Distribution Units which power about 900 loads throughout the plane. The big power distribution system is in the aft belly, along with a Power Electronics Cooling System (PECS). This is a liquid cooling system for the large motor power distribution system. There's also an Integrated Cooling System (ICS), which provides refrigerated air for the galley carts and cabin air, and a Miscellaneous Equipment Cooling System for Inflight Entertainment Equipment.

If 3 of the 4 engine generators fail, the APU starts itself. The APU drives two generators, and can be operated up to the airplane's max altitude of 43,000 feet. If you lose all 4 engine generators, the RAT (ram air turbine) drops out (like a windmill), powering essential buses. (It also provides hydraulic power to flight controls if needed).

If you lose all 4 engine generators and the two APU generators (a really bad day), you are down to Standby Power. The RAT will drop out and provide power, but even if it fails, you still have the autopilot and captain's flight director and instruments, FMC, 2 IRSs, VHF radios, etc. If you're down to batteries only, with no RAT, you'd better get it on the ground, as battery time is limited. Brakes and antiskid are electric - 28V - so you don't lose brakes or antiskid even when you're down to just standby power.

Normal flight controls are hydraulic with a couple exceptions. Engine driven and electric hydraulic pumps operate at 5000 psi (versus normal 3000 psi) to allow for smaller tubing sizes and actuators, thus saving weight. If you lose all 3 hydraulic systems (another bad day), you still have two spoiler panels on each wing which are electrically powered all the time, as is the stabilizer trim. You can still fly the airplane (no flaps, though). If you're having an even worse day and you lose all hydraulics and all generators, flight control power is still coming from separate Permanent Magnet Generators (PMGs) which produce power even if both engines quit and are windmilling. If the PMGs fail, too, your flight controls will be powered by the 28 V standby bus.

If you lose all 3 pitot/static systems or air data computers, the airplane reverts to angle of attack speed (converts AOA to IAS), and this is displayed on the normal PFDs (primary flight displays) airspeed indicator tapes. GPS altitude is substituted for air data altitude and displayed on the PFD altimeter tapes. Very convenient.

If you lose both Attitude and Heading Reference Units (AHRUs), it reverts to the standby instrument built-in attitude & heading gyro, but displays this on both pilot's PFDs for convenience.
If you lose both Inertial Reference Units, it will substitute GPS position, and nothing is lost.

If someone turns one or both IRSs off in flight (I hate it when they do that), you can realign them - as long as one of the GPSs is working!

There is no pneumatic system. The only engine bleed is used for that engine's anti-ice. Wing anti-ice is electric. Each of two air conditioning packs control two CACs, which are electric cabin air compressors. The four CACs share two air inlets on the belly. Each pack controller controls two CACs, but if a pack controller fails, the remaining pack controller takes over control of all 4 CACs.

There are no circuit breakers in the cockpit. To check on them, or if you get a message that one has opened (more likely), you select the CBIC (circuit breaker indication and control) display on one of the MFDs (multi function displays). There you can reset the virtual C/B if it is an "electronic" circuit breaker. You can't reset a popped "thermal" circuit breaker.
If you have an APU fire on the ground or inflight, the fire extinguishing bottle is automatically discharged. If there is a cargo fire, the first two of seven bottles will automatically discharge also.

There's a Nitrogen Generation System which provides automatic full-time flammability protection by displacing fuel vapors in the fuel tanks with nitrogen (Remember TWA 800?).
Like the 767 and 777, the 787 also has full CPDLC capability (controller-to-pilot datalink communications). In addition, its full FANS capability includes ADS-B in & out. The controller can uplink speed, heading, and altitude changes to the airplane. These show up on a second line right under the speed, heading and altitude displays on the mode control panel. If you pilot wants to use them, he can press a XFR button next to each window. The controller can even uplink a conditional clearance, like - After passing point XYZ, climb to FL390. If you accept this, it will do it automatically.

Fuel system - like the 777, the 787 has a fuel dump system which automatically dumps down to your maximum landing weight, if that is what you want. In addition, it has a Fuel Balance switch which automatically balances your L & R main tanks for you. No more opening crossfeed valves and turning off fuel pumps in flight. No more forgetting to turn them back on, either.

Flight Controls - An "Autodrag" function operates when the airplane is high on approach and landing flaps have been selected. It extends the ailerons and two most outboard spoilers, while maintaining airspeed, to assist in glidepath capture from above, if you are high on the glideslope. The feature removes itself below 500 feet.

Cruise flaps is an automated function when level at cruise. It symmetrically moves the flaps, ailerons, flaperons, and spoilers based on weight, airspeed and altitude to optimize cruise performance by varying the wing camber, thus reducing drag.
Gust suppression - Vertical gust suppression enhances ride quality when in vertical gusts and turbulence. It uses symmetric deflection of flaperons and elevators to smooth the bumps. This should result in fewer whitecaps in passengers' coffee and cocktails. Lateral gust suppression improves the ride when on approach by making yaw commands in response to lateral gusts and turbulence.

Instrument Approaches - The airplane is actually approved for autoland based not only on ILS but on GLS approaches - GPS with Ground based augmentation system, which corrects the GPS signals. GLS minimums are the same as CAT I ILSs - 200' and 1/2 mile visibility. Our airline is not yet approved for GLS autolandings yet, though we will be doing GLS approaches.
Special Cat I & II HUD approaches - These allow lower than normal minimums when the Heads Up Devices are used at certain approved airports (HUDs). The HUDs include runway centerline guidance which helps you stay on the centerline on takeoff when visibility is greatly reduced. It uses either ILS or GLS for this.

Cabin - Pressurization differential pressure maximum is 9.4 psid, so the cabin altitude is only 6000 feet when at the max cruising altitude of 43,000 feet. There is a cockpit humidifier switch, and cabin air humidification is fully automatic. Cabin windows are larger than other airplanes, and window shading is electronic. The passenger can select 5 levels of shading, from clear to black. The flight attendants can control the cabin lighting temperature - mood lighting - to aid in dealing with changing time zones (evening light after dinner, morning light to wake up, etc.).

Much of the cockpit seems like it was designed by Apple. The Control Display Units (CDUs) are virtual, so you can move them from one MFD to another. In fact, you can configure the displays in 48 different ways, I think, though we have found a few favorites we will use to keep it simple. To move the cursor from one MFD to another, you can either use a button, or you can "flick" your finger across the trackpad (Cursor Control Device) to fling the cursor from one screen to the next - much like an iPad.

I'm going home this morning, and will return for a 777 simulator ride before I go back to work. They want to make sure we've still got the old-fashioned legacy airplane in our brain before we fly the 777 again, even though it shares a "common type rating". We won't get the first 787 until October, and begin operations in November or December. At that time I'll return for at least 4 days refresher training before beginning IOE - initial operating experience in the airplane - with passengers.

What a ride. It may be "fuel efficient", but I'm glad someone else is paying for the gas.
P.S. If you wish to share this with someone else, be my guest, but please remove all email address, and don't send it to your entire mailing list. I think the 787 will be a great plane, but there could be some surprises with this level of innovation. Time will tell

54 replies, 6299 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 54 replies Author Time Post
Reply Boeing 787 pilot training...first hand: (Original post)
trof Dec 2012 OP
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #1
Buns_of_Fire Dec 2012 #2
backscatter712 Dec 2012 #4
trof Dec 2012 #5
Major Nikon Dec 2012 #7
11 Bravo Dec 2012 #24
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #19
Major Nikon Dec 2012 #11
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #15
Major Nikon Dec 2012 #16
green for victory Dec 2012 #21
trof Dec 2012 #25
Cooley Hurd Dec 2012 #36
A HERETIC I AM Dec 2012 #3
DemoTex Dec 2012 #6
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #10
trof Dec 2012 #14
trof Dec 2012 #26
jody Dec 2012 #8
trof Dec 2012 #13
high density Dec 2012 #9
oldhippie Dec 2012 #34
madokie Dec 2012 #12
LineReply .
green for victory Dec 2012 #17
PCIntern Dec 2012 #38
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #18
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #20
SharonAnn Dec 2012 #22
trof Dec 2012 #28
trof Dec 2012 #29
Politicub Dec 2012 #23
madinmaryland Dec 2012 #27
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #30
oldhippie Dec 2012 #31
oldhippie Dec 2012 #32
jeff47 Dec 2012 #33
jmowreader Dec 2012 #35
Esse Quam Videri Dec 2012 #51
Cooley Hurd Dec 2012 #37
canonfodder Dec 2012 #39
trof Dec 2012 #40
Angleae Dec 2012 #41
canonfodder Dec 2012 #44
Angleae Dec 2012 #46
WillyT Dec 2012 #42
Angleae Dec 2012 #43
canonfodder Dec 2012 #45
Angleae Dec 2012 #47
canonfodder Dec 2012 #48
Angleae Dec 2012 #49
canonfodder Dec 2012 #50
PavePusher Dec 2012 #52
KoKo Dec 2012 #53
Flybywire Jan 2013 #54

Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:41 AM

1. It's an amazing machine...

A few years ago in connection with my old job I got to fly the 787 simulator while the thing was still being developed. Wish I'd been able to experience the actual aircraft.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:58 AM

2. Wow. It almost makes it sound like all the pilot has to do is

patiently type in the destination (Albuquerque) on the console, and the software will then take over and safely and unerringly route you directly to... Anchorage!

Just kidding, of course. I know there's more to it than that, and the people who fly these suckers have my utmost respect...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:12 PM

4. Tell me the 787 isn't running Apple Maps software...

In the Denver area, if you search for an airport on Apple Maps, it will guide you to Stapleton International Airport...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:35 PM

5. I'm not sure the pilot even has to do that.

Sounds like destination, flight plan, etc. can be inserted remotely by dispatcher or whoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:55 PM

7. Works great until you get a re-route, yes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 04:16 PM

24. Or something breaks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:24 PM

19. Yes, all that stuff can be uploaded to the FMS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:04 PM

11. Believe it or not the technology for that is not all that advanced

My airplane was manufactured in 1968. It no longer has 1968 avionics, but my GPS is still about 15 years old or so. It's coupled to the autopilot. I can enter a flight plan into the GPS, turn on the autopilot, and sit back and enjoy the next 3-4 hours. If ATC changes my route (and they almost always do), it's just a matter of pushing a few buttons.

Waypoints have a 3 to 5 letter code. Pilots enter them incorrectly all the time which can and does result in minor to serious navigational errors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:13 PM

15. Oh, yes it is. Trust me -

I became familiar with the 787's systems at my old job. While GPS itself isn't new, the way the 787 uses it is pretty advanced (although an offshoot of earlier Boeing systems). One guy I worked with explained the airplane like this: It's like that movie, "Men In Black," where the aliens look like regular people until you look inside them. The 787 is like that - it looks and flies like a conventional airplane but if you take it apart you find very strange things inside, like you've never seen before. It really is cutting-edge stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:18 PM

16. I'm not saying the 787 doesn't have very advanced avionics

I'm just saying the technology associated with having the aircraft automatically fly a predetermined flight plan is not that advanced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:56 PM

21. U.S. Govt. Remote Controlled Jumbo Jet Into Target In 1984

 

Controlled Impact Demonstration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Impact_Demonstration

The Controlled Impact Demonstration (or more colloquially the Crash In the Desert) was a joint project between NASA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to test the impact of a Boeing 720 aircraft.

...During those same flights, NASA Dryden also developed the remote piloting techniques necessary for the B-720 to fly as a drone aircraft.

...On the morning of December 1, 1984, a remotely controlled Boeing 720 transport took off from Edwards Air Force Base, California, made a left-hand departure and climbed to an altitude of 2300 feet. The aircraft was remotely flown by NASA research pilot Fitzhugh (Fitz) Fulton from the NASA Dryden Remotely Controlled Vehicle Facility.

Hmmm...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #21)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:20 PM

25. B-720 wasn't a 'jumbo'.

Sorry, but just for the sake of accuracy...it was a smaller (shorter) version of the workhorse 707.
Both 'narrow-body' aircraft.
And yeah, I flew the 707.
I'm REAL old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:33 AM

36. What's there to hmmm about?

The Dryden tests offered invaluable data about how to design a safer aircraft.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:00 PM

3. Fascinating.

Thanks for posting, Trof.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:49 PM

6. Day-um!

No circuit breakers in cockpit! Electric cabin air compressors! Nitrogen generating system! Auto-drag (a souped-up 55 Chevy?) and cruise flaps! Gust suppression!

Captain Trof, it sounds like a lot of stuff to go wrong. Know what I mean?

Captain DemoTex (envious of the young pilots who will fly this marvel)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemoTex (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:00 PM

10. And a 1,000 KVA electrical system

with variable-speed starter-generators - you even start the thing electrically (there being no pneumatic system except for engine anti-ice). There are things that look like circuit breakers but they are computer reset buttons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemoTex (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:12 PM

14. You ain't gettin ME on one-uh them things!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemoTex (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:23 PM

26. Screw it. I want circuit breakers. Not 'virtual' circuit breakers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:55 PM

8. First computers replaced Flight Engineers and pilots didn't complain,

 

Then computers replaced Navigators and pilots didn't complain,
Then computers replaced Pilots and there was no one too complain,
Except Flight Attendants!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jody (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:11 PM

13. They'll use vending machines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:58 PM

9. 1.4 gigawatts of power

Wow, I guess that is how they can afford to put 120V AC outlets at every seat.

That's awesome that the plane can still be flown in a rudimentary way without hydraulics and on battery power. The engineering going on here is stunning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to high density (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:01 PM

34. I think that is supposed to be 1.4 Megawatts .....

 

1.4 Gigawatts is a bit much. See my posts below.

Still, that is a BUNCH of electrical power for a thing that flies through the air.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:05 PM

12. It is hard to fathom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:22 PM

17. .

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:05 AM

38. Nice one!!! Excellent!! Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:22 PM

18. Another cool thing: the electronic checklist.

When you do something to comply with the checklist that appears on one of the displays, the airplane knows you did it and checks it off. IIRC (it's been a few years), it won't let you continue until it knows you did everything on the checklist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:25 PM

20. I'm having fun picturing how, say, the Wrights would react to something like that. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:16 PM

22. Just to keep things in perspective -

Just in case you needed a laugh: Remember it takes a college degree to fly a plane, but only a high school diploma to fix one; that's reassurance to those of us who fly routinely.

After every flight, UPS pilots fill out a form, called a 'gripe sheet,' which tells mechanics about problems with the aircraft.
The mechanics correct the problems, document their repairs on the form, and then pilots review the gripe sheets before the next flight.

Never let it be said that ground crews lack a sense of humor. Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by UPS pilots (marked with a P) and the solutions recorded (marked with an S) by maintenance engineers.

By the way, UPS is the only major airline that has never, ever, had an accident....

P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.
*
P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.
*
P: Something loose in cockpit
S: Something tightened in cockpit
*
P: Dead bugs on windshield.
S: Live bugs on back-order.
*
P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute descent
S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.
*
P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
S: Evidence removed.
*
P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
S: DME volume set to more believable level.
*
P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
S: That's what friction locks are for.
*
P: IFF inoperative in OFF mode.
S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.
*
P: Suspected crack in windshield.
S: Suspect you're right.
*
P: Number 3 engine missing.
S: Engine found on right wing after brief search
*
P: Aircraft handles funny. (I love this one!)
S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right and be serious.
*
P: Target radar hums.
S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.
*
P: Mouse in cockpit.
S: Cat installed.
*
And the best one for last
*
P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding on something with a hammer.
S: Took hammer away from the midget

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SharonAnn (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:45 PM

28. Yes, UPS has had at least one crash with fatalities.

UPS Airlines Flight 6 was a cargo flight operated by UPS Airlines. On September 3, 2010, a Boeing 747-400 flying the route between Dubai International Airport and Cologne Bonn Airport crashed close to Dubai airport, killing the two crew members. The aircraft had departed Dubai International earlier, but returned after reporting smoke in the cockpit. It was the first fatal air crash for UPS Airlines.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines_Flight_6

Qantas, I believe, has never had an accident with fatalities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SharonAnn (Reply #22)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:49 PM

29. Also, EVERY airline has an aircraft logbook where discrepancies are wtitten up.

Ar TWA we just called them 'write ups'.
'Safety of flight' items had to be repaired before the next flight.
Less important items could wait until the aircraft was at one of our designated maintenance bases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:30 PM

23. Always fascinated by American aviation innovation

Sounds like the 787 is a marvel!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:26 PM

27. Bookmarked to read later.

You always have some real interesting stories!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:03 PM

30. Sounds like all the delays were worth the wait

Engineers have done much to make it the safest bird in the air. Hope to travel on one day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:46 PM

31. Absolutely fascinating! But I have to question one thing ....

 

"Electrics - Though a smaller plane, the 787 has 4 times the electric generating power of the 777 - 1.4 gigawatts."

1.4 Gigawatts? Is that for real, or a typo? That is a LOT of power, like a good sized coal plant or nuclear plant.

I haven't taken the time to run the numbers yet, but my little engineer pea brain suspects that the engines cannot produce that much power. And the copper in the generators would weigh more than the aircraft.

Please tell me that the 1.4 GW is actually 1.4 MegaWatt so I don't have to do the math.

Otherwise, what a great article for us technology buffs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippie (Reply #31)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:58 PM

32. Aviation Week review of 787 confirms .......

 

.... about 1.4 Megawatts of power. That sounds more reasonable.

Each engine has two 250-kva starter generators in contrast to the single 120-kva integrated-drive generators on each engine of the 777. In addition, the auxiliary power unit (APU) has two 225-kva starter generators, thus there is a total 1.45 megawatts of power available


http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_12_10_2012_p46-522072.xml&p=2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oldhippie (Reply #31)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:59 PM

33. Well, you need 1.21 GW for the flux capacitor, so you need a touch more for everything else. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:13 AM

35. There's a very good reason to need 1.4 GW of electric

Boeing asked one million air travelers what they hated most about air travel."Late arrivals" was number three.

Boeing realized it couldn't fix "being groped by the TSA" or "eight-dollar bad coffee," so they went to work on what they could.

It seems that just behind the throttles on this plane are the controls for time travel. If you're running late, you dial in when you were scheduled to arrive, push a button, and you'll never have to read customer complaint cards again.

And thanks to a massive federal grant, the flux capacitor on the 787 can shove a whole airliner back in time using only 190 megawatts more than it took to do the same thing in a one-ton DeLorean in the 1980s.

It pisses the FAA off considerable when you land an hour before you entered the pattern so we don't recommend you use this, but it's nice to know you have it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #35)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:28 AM

51. Very Nice

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:36 AM

37. Wow trof! Gives new meaning to the term "bird brain"!

...except this bird has several! thanks for posting this!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 02:22 PM

39. fun fact of the day

 

After the two minute shutdown period for the APU, the APU control switch should be placed back in the "on", positon, to open the inlet door.
Failure to do so within twenty minutes, requires you to wait another 100 minutes before re-starting the APU.
If you do remember to open the APU inlet door within the twenty minute window, the APU can be re-sarted at any time.
The switch may be placed to "off", after 40 minutes, without incurring the wait period.
The APU can also be re-started in the first 20 minutes, without penalty.

The RAT. Electrical output is 10KVA. Not much considering how power hungry the beast is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to canonfodder (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 07:37 PM

40. Yeah, I need to memorize that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to canonfodder (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:07 PM

41. Trufully the RATs primary purpose if hydraulic pressure.

On a plane that size, you aren't moving flight control surfaces by hand (in flight) unless you have Schwarzenegger size muscles or better (and even then it's a maybe). On a 757 or 767 you can't move the surfaces by hand (no direct connection as I remember).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #41)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:28 PM

44. strictly fly-by-wire

 

You remember correct.
No physical connect to controls.
Inputs end up at the appropriate flight control, where hydraulics move the control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to canonfodder (Reply #44)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 11:41 PM

46. On a 757/767 it's still a cable but the cable is connected to the hyd package.

777 & 787 are pure fly-by-wire, 757 & 767 have fly-by-wire spoilers but cables for everything else. On the 737s I'm currently working on the cable has a direct connection to the surface (elevator/rudder/aileron only).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:08 PM

42. THAT... Was Fantastic, Thank You !!! - But I Do Have A Humble Question...

My Old Man learned to fly for the Navy (WWII), training on a Stearman, and was then task to fly for the Marines in the South Pacific Captaining a B25- H.



My question...

How in the hell does one fly the plane (the Captain/Pilot was the guy that fired the 75mm Cannon while flying) and stay concentrated on the mission ???

Naive I guess... but would love to know.

Dad never talked much about his time there.



And thank you again for the fascinating post !!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:10 PM

43. The more I hear about this plane the more I dislike it.

Keep in mind I'm going to have to work on these things in about 5-10 years when their inspections come due. The worst part I'll have to deal with isn't even in trof's post (electrical grounding).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #43)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 06:31 PM

45. The CRN?

 

CRN=Current Return Network
It's no big deal, just follow the green cabling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to canonfodder (Reply #45)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 11:44 PM

47. Think 10 years from now. How many of those connections will still be tight?

We'll be expected to get into places that no human was ment to get into with a bonding meter too big to fit in the hole to check every single connection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 12:49 AM

48. I understand...

 

I work on them now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to canonfodder (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:20 AM

49. Where at?

I'm at ATS in Everett WA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #49)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:04 AM

50. Texas

 

I'm not with BAC or a sub-contractor.
I work for an operator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 09:37 AM

52. Great read!

 

Thanks from this USAF maintainer. We're a few hardware generations behind, it seems...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:40 AM

53. "Qatar Air 787 grounded on same electrical fault as United’s"

(Trof, thanks for that post and I sent it along to my pilot relative. It's interesting that the 787 is having some problems. I guess it's just a glitch that needs to be worked out but there was an earlier article about some part in the engine that malfunctioned and spewed parts on the runway in Charleston, SC on one of it's test flights that caused India Air to delay getting it's first 787. Now there's this about another electrical problem)


--------------------------------------------

Qatar Air 787 grounded on same electrical fault as United’s
By Kari Lundgre

LONDON — Qatar Airways said a 787 jet received from Boeing this week has been grounded with a faulty generator, a problem similar to one that forced the emergency landing of a Dreamliner operated by United Continental.
Qatar Air’s third 787 exhibited the failure on its delivery flight from the United States, CEO Akbar Al Baker said Thursday. The plane has been grounded since Dec. 9 and may remain so for at least four days while Boeing sends spare parts and a recovery team

“These problems are unacceptable because this aircraft has been flying for the last 14 months,” Al Baker said, referring to the Dreamliner, which entered commercial service late last year. “They have to get their act together very fast because we at Qatar Airways will not accept any more defects.”

A United 787 was forced to land on Dec. 4 following the failure of one of six generators. The 787, the world’s first composite-plastic airliner, saves on fuel with a Hamilton Sundstrand system that doesn’t divert air from the engines for power, instead using five times as much electricity as older jets.

“Two aircraft having the same problem — the same major problem — so quickly is a cause of concern,” Al Baker said, adding that Doha-based Qatar Air will ask Boeing to cover its losses. “Definitely we will demand compensation. We are not buying airplanes from them to put in a museum.”

More at:
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20121214/PC05/121219668/1165/qatar-air-787-grounded-on-same-electrical-fault-as-united-s

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #53)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:05 PM

54. 787 problems should only occur in "new" airplanes.

Al Baker is correct. The 787 electrical system was started on the drawing board over 9 years ago then, major parts of the generator system were designed and tested over over the next few years by Hamilton Sundstrand. HS has had many, many years to uncover "new" glitches. I believe Boeing is misleading the media, their customers and the public when they try to make us think that the 787 was "new" just last year. If new, that would be a reasonable excuse.

Here is my take on the generator problem:
I have worked for several firms which designed electrical products for the 787. The amount of engineering worst-case-analysis (WCA) was huge compared to any aircraft I have worked on before. At each company which designed these products, there would be like 3 engineers working for 4 months straight analyzing every single transistor to find What is the effect if each part was too hot? too cold? bad tolerance? etc etc.

THE BIG PROBLEM that I saw though was that, often the equations the engineers were ordered to use were just simply incorrect. If the tier-2 supplier had never heard of tail-loss in an IGBT for example, then you weren't allowed to use tail-loss in your equations. Reliability equations for some parts were based on failure modes which were only common in 1942, now they're completely different (example: failure modes for transistors are NOT the same as for old fashion tubes).
Try to bring up this madness to the tier-2 supplier? They would get angry and say, "Schedule!"

The effect was that we got paid (and paid well) to create huge documents with the word, "quality" stamped on the front of each page.

Our mission was NOT to create a quality airplane. Our mission was to create quality paperwork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread