10 ms·
Getting a 787 back in the air after a diversion
- WalterBright 7y agoBack when I worked at Boeing they had the AOG (Airplane On Ground) crew to do this sort of thing. Their job was to be on call 24/7 and do whatever it took to get that airplane back in the air, and they pretty much had a blank check to do it. Naturally, they were the best mechanics Boeing had. An airplane makes money only when it is flying. When it is sitting on the ground, it loses money at a prodigious rate. A large focus of the engineering on the 757 I worked on was to keep that airplane flying as much as possible. I understand that Microsoft has a similar crew they can dispatch to any customer to get their business software working again. This is how Microsoft is able to successfully compete against free software.
- __sy__ 7y ago"Prodigious Rate" -- To put this in context, the latest numbers I saw is about $125 per min of unscheduled delay. It also doesn't take that many delays to wipe profitability to zero.
- WalterBright 7y agoA corollary is that airline operations revolve around maximizing the amount of time their airplanes are flying and loaded to the gills with payload. The word "payload" is not a misnomer :-)
- bitexploder 7y agoSouthwest had a really memorable slogan: “wheels up” and the business really rallied around that priority ruthlessly for many years. It was pretty cool and gets used in business analysis as an example a lot about how to achieve big goals.
- sokoloff 7y agoOne such (very lightweight) analysis: https://www.cnbc.com/id/43768488 https://www.cnbc.com/id/43768488 It really is a great systems thinking story. Set the overall context and goal and then figure out how to optimize for the thing that drives results.
- ethbro 7y agoThe How I Built This podcast on Southwest [0] with Kelleher (since deceased) is an amazing episode. Both for trivia and giving context to what it takes to be successful behind the scenes. Kelleher (a lawyer by training) ran a private practice while litigating a 3-year lawsuit against airline incumbents at the time... before Southwest flew its first flight in Texas. And when asked "Why?" As in, why didn't you stop, return to law, or do something easier, he basically said "Because it didn't seem fair. Or right. That they could keep us from flying." I'm sure he had his fair share of sharp business decisions, but he came across as a truly great human being. [0] https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/national-public-radio/how-i-built-this/e/48306996 https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/national-public-radio/how-i...
- CalChris 7y agoA plane sitting on the ground costs revenue. The highest revenue per hour route is JFK to Heathrow at $24,639 [1]. A 787-800 costs about $8000/hr [2]. So that's about $277/min of revenue. Yeah, $125/min sounds about right for an average route. [1] https://www.planestats.com/bhsw_2014sep https://www.planestats.com/bhsw_2014sep [2] https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1398091 https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1398091
- ethbro 7y agoWell, expected revenue looks a bit difference when you're leveraged to the hilt and have interest payments scheduled. My understanding is that very few airlines outright own their planes.
- WalterBright 7y agoEven if they own the planes outright, the interest cost of the airplanes remains the same (because the money tied up in the airplane could be otherwise put to use earning interest). For example, conventional wisdom is that owning your own home outright is a Good Thing. But if mortgage interest rates are low, taking out a mortgage and investing in something that pays more than that interest rate is a Better Thing.
- cesarb 7y ago> But if mortgage interest rates are low, taking out a mortgage and investing in something that pays more than that interest rate is a Better Thing. Yes, but there's extra risk that way. That strategy depends on either the investment returning enough every month to pay the mortgage for that month, or another funding source (like a salary) being available every month to do so. If for some reason neither are available on a given month, you risk losing your home.
- bronco21016 7y agoIt varies. Some airlines are printing money like it’s their job and have very savvy purchasing teams. Large piles of cash spent on second hand aircraft can really help soften the blow when times get tough. Although in the current market some are even spending cash on NEW airframes which is really kind of crazy. But speaking globally, I would say you’re likely right. The majority of airlines are very heavily leveraged and as soon as the economy softens we’ll see at least a few casualties again.
- sethgibbons 7y ago> I understand that Microsoft has a similar crew they can dispatch to any customer to get their business software working again. Given how much Microsoft software tends to “blue screen of death” it’s no wonder they have to keep a crew on standby.
- jvolkman 7y agoThere's an episode of "World's Toughest Fixes" that follows an AOG team during the replacement of a 767 pressure dome. https://www.google.com/search?q=Worlds+Toughest+Fixes+S01+E02 https://www.google.com/search?q=Worlds+Toughest+Fixes+S01+E0...
- dbarlett 7y agoProbably the same incident:https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/airliner-repair-247-9974457/?all https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/airliner-repair-247...
- sethgibbons 7y agoI’m not surprised Microsoft has a standby team, given how bad their software is
- _trampeltier 7y ago"Naturally, they were the best mechanics Boeing had." I know people who do this kind of work, but are they really the best? - As long you hold a screwdriver in your hand, you are No.2 in salary. - Family, your child has birthday, something to show you in school or sport? Forget it, 5 minutes before it starts, you get always a call. So you have no family (anymore). - 9 to 5 nah.. more like 9 plus 5 hours to work a day. - Friends, forget it you don't have any. But of course they have storys to tell. But why would you choose a such life?
- ethbro 7y agoBecause some people will always want to be the best. And one of the more difficult things when you're that sort of person is finding a rewarding challenge up to your skills. Or as a president once quipped, "Why does Rice play Texas?" Because it is hard.
- WalterBright 7y agoExactly right. It's no fun getting the easy jobs. It's very sweet getting something done that everyone else said couldn't be done.
- _trampeltier 7y agoIt's not about getting an easy or hard job. I talked about the social life.
- philshem 7y ago> I understand that Microsoft has a similar crew they can dispatch to any customer to get their business software working again. There is a saying that these teams are dispatched by private jet and consist of 8 executives and 2 engineers.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoI imagine these 8 executives are there to lay down suppressive fire, keeping customer's management at bay so that the engineers can go in and fix the problem uninterrupted.
- ethbro 7y agoPoint. It'd be a bit aggressive to fly trained German Shepherds in with the engineers.
- Moto7451 7y agoHehe. The comparison is both amusing and apt. I’m often in the “executive” position in this scenario and this barrier between the angry team/customer/partner and the people doing engineering work really pays in spades. The people doing the “real” work on both sides usually avoid animosity and the management teams slugging it out in conference rooms usually understand that the dance they’re doing is just business as usual and not personal. When the separation is violated you can have engineers doing shoddy work because they’re stressed or emotionally overloaded. Early in my career I was in that situation and made some very pointed comments that the company’s CEO had to smooth over. If you do a really good job at handling the communication separation the business relationship is stronger after and each side better understands one another’s needs and motivations. My foot in mouth moment ended up turning into a larger business arrangement because the CEO turned it into a positive experience. While not a universally perfect negotiating book, I’ve found “Never Split the Difference” to be an interesting tome on making the best of adversarial business situations.
- ethbro 7y agoNStD is something everyone in the business world (or who aspires to be) should read. The fact that much of what we say, especially in times of stress, isn't what we really care about is easy to miss in actual practice.
- Waterluvian 7y agoI'm going to bet those GE Aviation technicians that they charter anywhere to fix planes are unbelievably talented, experienced and well paid. I bet they've got all the best stories. Also: on the first page, second paragraph of the special coverage, what does "Check Airman" mean?
- t34543 7y agoAnecdote: My dad did this in the 70s. I believe you’re correct. He was working overseas and was frequently dispatched to countries without modern repair facilities such as Saudi Arabia. One story that stands out is he asked a local worker to warm up the APU. The worker proceeded to build a fire under the APU, destroying it. What he meant was start it up and let it run until it reaches operating temperature.
- jcims 7y agoAPUBBQ
- dehrmann 7y agoI might get some of the backstory halfway off, but my grandfather was in Alaska during WWII for the construction of the Alaska Highway. They tried to never turn off truck and equipment engines because if you did, you had to build a fire under them to get them warm enough to start again.
- acomjean 7y agoCars in northern Canada sometime have block heaters installed for cold starting. How cold should it be before you use it? Ask the internet: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/globe-drive/culture/commuting/what-is-the-benefit-of-plugging-in-my-car-to-a-block-heater-and-when-should-i-do-it/article27446878/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/globe-drive/culture/comm...
- fnbr 7y agoIn my experience, it's all cars in Canada- I've never seen one that doesn't have it (other than imports). I guess you could probably get away without it on the west coast. Most cars do start though. It’s really a maintenance issue, where it’s bad for your car to start it at -30 (as the linked article says). In my experience, a newer car in decent shape will start consistently.
- inferiorhuman 7y agoMeanwhile a month prior things didn't go so well for American: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7504393/American-airlines-flight-hell-left-passengers-stranded-Peru-THREE-DAYS.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7504393/American-ai...
- molecule 7y ago(2016)
- wayne 7y agoAh, that was back when AA and Alaska were much closer partners, before the Virgin acquisition... I was surprised when reading the article that Alaska was so helpful. https://thepointsguy.com/2017/12/last-call-alaska-american-airlines-partnership/ https://thepointsguy.com/2017/12/last-call-alaska-american-a...
- sajomojo 7y agoIt just seems like a very bad idea that twin-engine planes can fly so far from an air strip. If the #1 engine had failed as well it would have been game over. There's no possibility of gliding a 787 for 2+ hours and hundreds of miles. If the FAA wanted to prioritize safety, it would still require the use of four-engined planes, as it used to for most long ocean routes. The desire to fly twin-engine planes over the ocean is entirely driven by a desire to maximize airline profits. Admittedly, it does appear that modern twin-engine planes are reliable enough that it's not entirely crazy. But it would only take a couple of fatal engine failures to make it seem really dumb in retrospect. People are weirdly dogmatic around this ETOPs rule change by the FAA. There is almost no one questioning it and yet the entire motivation is purely monetary. The FAA and airlines continue to push the limits further and further. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- WalterBright 7y ago> If the FAA wanted to prioritize safety, it would still require the use of four-engined planes, as it used to for most long ocean routes. The desire to fly twin-engine planes over the ocean is entirely driven by a desire to maximize airline profits. That intuitively makes sense, but it's incorrect. The FAA certified twin engines over water because it's safer. Half the number of engines mean half the failures, and half the risk of cascaded failures from the failing engines. Statistics bear this out. Twin engines are safer.
- sajomojo 7y agoCan you point to the statistics? I'm sure modern twin-engine planes are more reliable than very old four engine planes but what about modern vs modern?
- WalterBright 7y agoNo. I was simply told this by the other engineers at Boeing.
- CaliforniaKarl 7y agoAs this is aviation-related, of course there is a Wendover video on this topic, and indeed covering this specific incident! Small Planes Over Big Oceans (ETOPS Explained) (2017) [video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSxSgbNQi-g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSxSgbNQi-g
- pauldelany 7y agoHad to build a runway for one take-off to get this private jet back in the air in 1983: https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/features/humaninterest/surprise-jet-arrival-left-lasting-legacy-in-town-228622.html https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/features/humanintere...
- raverbashing 7y agoI was wondering why didn't the crew elect to divert directly to Anchorage, reading the event description http://avherald.com/h?article=49f44548 http://avherald.com/h?article=49f44548 it seems they were 2h from CDB and ANC would be another hour from there. Not sure what's the ETOPS rating of that aircraft but it might not have been 180min (though even longer times are common now)
- Denvercoder9 7y agoIf you're down to one engine, you opt for the nearest safe haven, independent of how long you're rated to fly on one engine. You don't tempt fate.
- raverbashing 7y agoNot necessarily the nearest if you have a couple of airports at approximately the same distance, but in this situation I guess it makes sense to land ASAP and CDB is ok. Some emergency situations will have the plane fly back to its origin even if there are closer airports (source: have been in one), some others will have you land at the closest airport period even if might not be 100% suitable.
- ncmncm 7y agoYou can rarely be sure the failure wasn't something also experienced by the other engine. Wasn't long ago a 747 flying over the North pole had all four engines fail simultaneously. Fortunately, conditions at 20,000 ft were better, and they got them restarted. GE actually managed to figure out what went wrong and made sure it couldn't happen again. Makes me think they sort of knew it could happen, but the conditions seemed too unlikely.
- t0mas88 7y agoNo sane pilot would fly an extra hour in a twin with a failed engine if it's not necessary for safety (e.g. weather and runway length are considerations, the rest isn't really important in case of an engine failure) The plane doesn't just fly nicely with one engine, it will yaw and become much less stable. You will also usually be descending (drift down procedure) because the single engine service ceiling is lower than normal cruise. And the autopilot doesn't work so you're flying manually, for all of the diversion. You really don't want to be doing that any longer than necessary. You have also no redundancy left, so continuing means you're increasing risks. Even more so because you'll increase your remaining engine to max continuous power stressing it more than usual.
- andr 7y agoIf you enjoyed this story, you might enjoy the story of a seaplane having to get back to LaGuardia from New Zealand the day after Pearl Harbor: https://medium.com/s/story/the-long-way-round-the-plane-that-accidentally-circumnavigated-the-world-c04ca734c6bb https://medium.com/s/story/the-long-way-round-the-plane-that...
- Aloha 7y agoWhat an absolutely incredible story! https://www.amazon.com/The-Long-Way-Home-Revised-ebook/dp/B00457XJ2K https://www.amazon.com/The-Long-Way-Home-Revised-ebook/dp/B0...
- gokhan 7y agoFascinating read. Thank you.
- keyme 7y agoWow! They should really make a movie out of this
- matt_the_bass 7y agoYeah! John Bull (author of that article) has a lot of great articles.
- supernova87a 7y agoYou know, behind these on-the-surface feel-good / oh-that's-cool stories is generally a less positive tale of deferred maintenance and poor choices by AA (and other airlines) that leads to this kind of rescue flight being necessary. The article was from 2016, and the question you want to be asking is, "how often should a 2 year old 787 be having engine issues requiring unplanned diversion?" and is AA's maintenance regime causing them to encounter these situations more than is expected? What you will generally find is that because of labor costs in the US, and the thin maintenance margins that our carriers are incentivized to follow (partly also because penalties for stranding passengers is quite low), these kinds of diversions are more frequent than other airlines operating better-maintained long-haul routes. Things are always breaking on airplanes. How much proactive maintenance is conducted is up to the airline, and determines how much builds up before 1 out of many issues on the minimum equipment list rises enough to ground the aircraft. It's quite an active decision for an airline, actually. In this case, AA maintenance probably made a decision (under all the other constraints they face) to fly the 787 to Shanghai (where they don't have a full maintenance depot) with some marginally performing or slightly-overdue-for-recommended-replacement engine part. And then on the return the strategy backfired. Consider that when you wonder, "is it just me, or why does airline X seem to have so many more delays and aircraft swaps than others?"
- Aloha 7y agoYou got a source for any of this?
- supernova87a 7y agoNope. People in maintenance departments don't generally write blogs about this, and it's not like an airline is going to help publicize their issues. And judging by how even my post is downvoted, they're not likely to either.
- ryguytilidie 7y agoI like this thing people are doing where they're like, "huh, my post on Hacker News was downvoted? must not be for content, must be because, um...its DEFINITELY because airlines arent going to publish negative things about them, theres definitely a logical connection there! ...?
- joemag 7y agoI found it interesting that a town of 100 had a runway capable of landing a 787. Was it built specifically for these kinds of scenarios, i.e. as an earliest diversion point for trans pacific flights?