[Frank_Discussion]

No margin, eh? Stoopid froggies.

[farlander]

To be fair, yes there is margin - 47%. They just didn't get to the planned 50%. Doesn't mean I'll fly one tho, but that's an economic decision.

[MichaelP]

Add fatigue over a few thousand hours....poof!

Mike

[jettester]

When we we're testing the C-17's wing, a similar occurred but at a slightly lower value. Structural mods included beef-ups on both forward and aft spars and a reduction in the chem-milling of the skins around the failure area. All in all, these kind of fixes are relatively easy to implement unless you have many of the parts in the production cycle already.

The real proof in the pudding is when they (and if) they do a full scale fatigue test under flight loads to find out if the wing and wing root connections will withstand the stress. My guess is that there will be some future beefing up to do - they just won't admit it publicly.

[Bender2]

[Gator113]

First the wine.....now this......it must suck to be french. Blahahahahahah

[China Clipper]

My idea of a nice 380

Sorry, just had to do it!!

[Robert A Cook PE]

No margin?

Not exactly: The required load (before breaking) "margin" was 1.50 times design loads, but they didn't quite get there.

Surprised the EU is going to regulate EVERYTHING (including outdoor sports, the number of eggs in a carton, and the size of wineglasses... but will "accept" a structural airplane test that came close but still DIDN'T meet specs.

I'd think they would have to repeat the test on a new wing.

[Kozak]