Latest Boeing News
Report of 787 falsification of inspection records in Charleston by workers
Article on Airbus vs. Boeing after AB Quarterly Results
Both on AP newssite
Article on Airbus vs. Boeing after AB Quarterly Results
Both on AP newssite
Guest
787 Progress
LNs 1194, 1193, 1192, 1191 (ZE641/787-10 ZE514/787-10 ZC109/787-9 ZC025/787-9) are undergoing final assembly in 4 slots in gthe Charsletown factory - These are meant for (Singapore Airline, British Airways, Lufthansa and American Airlines) and they all carry the Trent-1000 except the American Airlines 787-9 that carries the GenX-1B
LNs 1194, 1193, 1192, 1191 (ZE641/787-10 ZE514/787-10 ZC109/787-9 ZC025/787-9) are undergoing final assembly in 4 slots in gthe Charsletown factory - These are meant for (Singapore Airline, British Airways, Lufthansa and American Airlines) and they all carry the Trent-1000 except the American Airlines 787-9 that carries the GenX-1B
I see the manned Starliner flight has been postponed again - quoting a suspect oxygen relief valve just two hours before lift off. No indication of how it was found, last minute supplier recall or BITE failure or whatever, but another visible failure. Surely the basic oxygen system in spacecraft is well understood and not a high risk system these days ?
It's new - and small glitches have always been very common on any manned mission.
The valve is part of the rocket, not the capsule. In particular, part of the Atlas V upper stage - Centaur. It's not that new. There remain only 17 more Atlas V launches.
The overall launch vehicle is the responsibility of ULA which is two segments of Boeing plus two segments of Lockheed-Martin. Centaur propulsion appears to be largely the engineering responsibility of Aerojet Rocketdyne. The booster appears to have been designed with the partial goal of absorbing engines from Russia to keep Russian rocket scientists from going to high bidders elsewhere. This became a problem when Russia invaded Crimea.
This should be launch 100 for Atlas V design with 0 launch failures in the previous 99, and 2 anomolies in the upper stage failure to deliver to full altitude. The satellites were in slightly lower than desired orbits, but still usable from the first and the second simply used more Centaur fuel that was intended for de-orbit of the upper stage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_...success_record
The overall launch vehicle is the responsibility of ULA which is two segments of Boeing plus two segments of Lockheed-Martin. Centaur propulsion appears to be largely the engineering responsibility of Aerojet Rocketdyne. The booster appears to have been designed with the partial goal of absorbing engines from Russia to keep Russian rocket scientists from going to high bidders elsewhere. This became a problem when Russia invaded Crimea.
This should be launch 100 for Atlas V design with 0 launch failures in the previous 99, and 2 anomolies in the upper stage failure to deliver to full altitude. The satellites were in slightly lower than desired orbits, but still usable from the first and the second simply used more Centaur fuel that was intended for de-orbit of the upper stage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_...success_record
Last edited by MechEngr; 7th May 2024 at 11:09. Reason: booster->upper stage in last sentence.
https://www.reuters.com/science/boei...on-2024-05-06/
Oops, sorry. Didn't see MechEngr's post.
@ Claybird
The charts with the colour background and details about aircraft production and et cetera: where are these published, please, if it is a publicly available source? If it isn't available publicly, could you please give descriptive information about where these are found? They are quite interesting charts, .... or whatever would be the proper nomenclature.
The charts with the colour background and details about aircraft production and et cetera: where are these published, please, if it is a publicly available source? If it isn't available publicly, could you please give descriptive information about where these are found? They are quite interesting charts, .... or whatever would be the proper nomenclature.
Whistle-Santiago Paredes worked at Spirit for 12 years until 2022
Given the crap that Spirit is allegedly shipping to Boeing, I have to wonder why Airbus is so steadfast in keeping Spirit as a supplier (including steps to make it harder for Boeing to re-acquiring Spirit...)
Thinking out loud but is it possible that Airbus has a better QA program and more inspection so they aren't have the same issues as Boeing?
From BBC
Spirit has a major operation in Northern Ireland, which manufactures the wings for the Airbus A220. It is one of Northern Ireland's largest and most important manufacturing businesses with more than 3,000 employees.
https://www.spiritaero.com/company/programs/
The most I see is
They don't attribute a location for the wing front spar and fixed leading edge, but maybe Kinston as well?
The most I see is
The Airbus A350 is a key program for Spirit. The central section panels are built in Kinston, North Carolina, then incorporated into the fuselage (Section 15) in Saint-Nazaire, France. Spirit also manufactures the A350 wing front spar and fixed leading edge.
"AFAIK the division of Spirit that makes Airbus parts is in Ireland."
yes - the old Shorts/Bombardier now Spirit operation in Belfast
Think it also does work for Airbus on the A.220 - it would make sense to sell the whole thing to Airbus TBH
yes - the old Shorts/Bombardier now Spirit operation in Belfast
Think it also does work for Airbus on the A.220 - it would make sense to sell the whole thing to Airbus TBH
AFAIK the division of Spirit that makes Airbus parts is in Ireland.
From BBC
From BBC
Spirit has a major operation in Northern Ireland, which manufactures the wings for the Airbus A220. It is one of Northern Ireland's largest and most important manufacturing businesses with more than 3,000 employees.