7 ms·
So this plane has : a different fuselage, different wings, and different engines than the "regular" 777 but somehow is still called a 777. Has Boeing learned a
by IMTDb 7y ago
So this plane has : a different fuselage, different wings, and different engines than the "regular" 777 but somehow is still called a 777.
Has Boeing learned anything from the past 12 month ?
- threatripper 7y agoIt just needs to behave like a regular 777 and you can partly do that using software emulation.
- aritmo 7y agoJust like the 737MAX?
- unethical_ban 7y agoNo, wrong. The MAX did not behave like its predecessors.
- akie 7y agoNot sure why you're being downvoted because this is exactly what went wrong with the 737MAX.
- Gwypaas 7y agoThe 777 is Fly-By-Wire so it never felt like anything other than what it was programmed to feel like.
- p_l 7y agoActually the opposite. Had 737MAX gone the way of 777, there would have been no MCAS - but it would involve significant rework of control system, new avionics, and a lot of training. The core difference is that even the original 777 is a Fly-By-Wire system with programmed behaviour, in fact it was a well known case study in building civilian safe FBW systems. Because of that, there's no need to "patch over" differences like it was done with MCAS, as the minute adjustments can be done across the whole flight envelope protection system that is already there since first 777. In fact, 787 controls are derived from that and use software adjustment extensively in order to make control surface generate less drag yet still be usable.
- heisenbit 7y agoIt is very easy to make a new thing behave like the old thing for the standard use case. The problems lie all the corner cases. In some cases making the standard case even more perfect can make the corner cases even worse (737 MAX). These airplanes are complex and flying exposes them and their crew to wide variety of stresses. Just the fact that these planes are getting longer and longer will have some side effects on how they handle. Maybe more caution is required when taking off, maybe the body vibrates very differently. While weight may be the same it is also further out which changes the handling dynamics. These make be small matters which may not matter until they do.
- Gwypaas 7y agoNot really. The 777 has Fly-By-Wire controls with all the envelope protection and redundancies that comes with that. I.e. failing safely but step by step offering less protections to the pilot the more it fails, until you are down to the few essentially mechanical ways of controlling the aircraft. The only reason a 777 felt like 777 is because it was programmed to be one. Compare this to the 737 MAX which still relies on mechanical linkages and two different flight computers with the pilot supposed to be the safety when they disagree, there any change introduces differences in the feeling and handling at the pilots hands. Question Boeing's recent engineering and similar all you want, but this is completely different.
- zweep 7y agoImagine rewriting Microsoft Windows in Java and making it behave like old Windows. It just isn’t ever going to happen.
- mantap 7y agoThe issue is not the name, it is the comprehensiveness of the training required. The MAX had iPad training only, and MCAS wasnt even in the manual, let alone the differences course. Besides, the 777 wasn't designed for low loading at small airports.
- 3ar3ar 7y agoIt’s their risk minimisation strategy. If they call it something new, it would be perceived as a higher risk development. If they keep the existing name, it’s viewed as a mere improvement on the existing model.
- toohotatopic 7y agoThe people who buy planes, are they not informed enough to notice the difference?
- seanmcdirmid 7y agoPilot retraining and recertification is a significant expense, but it’s a gamble that Boeing and their customers failed big time on.
- dahart 7y agoTo be fair, one of the primary reasons to use the same name is to minimize the training, among other things.
- l31g 7y agoIn reality, the only parts that are different are the wings and the engines. The rest of the systems are essentially the same. The fuselage has the same diameter and design (just slightly longer). Most people would not be able to tell the difference between a 777-9 and a 777-300ER.