Skip to comments.
Boeing 787 Dreamliner Represents Composites Revolution
www.designnews.com ^
| June 4, 2007
| Doug Smock
Posted on 06/12/2007 6:48:29 AM PDT by Freeport
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
1
posted on
06/12/2007 6:48:31 AM PDT
by
Freeport
To: Freeport
When Boeing first considered extensive use of structural composites on the 787 Dreamliner, its engineers knew intuitively the epoxy/carbon fiber matrices would reduce weight significantly, allowing fuel savings and extended flying range. .............................. Hmmmmmmm? No wonder the Russians and Chinese ordered them. A little reverse engineering potential?
2
posted on
06/12/2007 6:52:41 AM PDT
by
Bringbackthedraft
(This Tagline has been temporarily suspended by order of Col. Chavez.)
To: Bringbackthedraft
I wonder how the plane will take a lighting strike. Aluminum skinned planes do ok, I wonder if this non-conductive skin will tend to splinter and crack if hit with all that energy.
3
posted on
06/12/2007 6:58:48 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading the article since 2004)
To: Bringbackthedraft
—high school physics-—gravity wins again!!!
4
posted on
06/12/2007 6:58:49 AM PDT
by
rellimpank
(-don't believe anything the MSM states about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
To: Bringbackthedraft
This material is very difficult to reverse engineer due to the proprietary curing tech that is used. The autoclaves used for this type of manufacturing are immense and not easily manufactured. I’m not saying it can’t be done, I just know it will not be an easy thing to do.
5
posted on
06/12/2007 7:03:39 AM PDT
by
7thOF7th
(Righteousness is our cause and justice will prevail!)
To: Abathar
I wonder how the plane will take a lighting strike. Aluminum skinned planes do ok, I wonder if this non-conductive skin will tend to splinter and crack if hit with all that energy. They've accounted for that and Boeing has a lightning lab for testing.
6
posted on
06/12/2007 7:06:32 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Abathar
Early composite airplanes like the Beech Starship had a layer of lightweight conductive material imbedded into the composite. It was similar to honeycombed aluminum foil. Lightning strikes left a hole no larger than a quarter, and a few scorch marks. Lightning strikes were easily repaired and basically harmless. I imagine the 787 will use something similar.
7
posted on
06/12/2007 7:10:18 AM PDT
by
kylaka
To: Abathar
Implanted in the Carbon-Fiber is a very thin mesh layer of copper(?) that would conduct away ant electrical discharge from any contact points.
8
posted on
06/12/2007 7:10:43 AM PDT
by
ExcursionGuy84
("Jesus, Your Love takes my breath away.")
To: Abathar
Since the composites are inherently non-conductive, lightning damage prevention systems are incorporated into them... i.e. They run wire in the matrix during the fabrication process. For design details you'd have to chat with the Boeing designers... Good luck... ;-)
9
posted on
06/12/2007 7:16:37 AM PDT
by
Freeport
To: Moonman62
I know they must have taken it into account, it is a very important issue. I just wonder if a plane is hit if there has to be a repair of the strike site, or if like now the plane gets inspected but usually there is no damage to repair.
That is another question, repairing the carbon fiber vs. aluminum skin. Since it is baked and essentially one big solid piece lets say some moron runs the forks of a forklift through the body of the plane, what is the repair cost and structural integrity afterwords compared to just replacing and re-riveting the aluminum skin of aircraft now?
10
posted on
06/12/2007 7:26:05 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading the article since 2004)
To: Freeport
I can do that, my roommate’s old fiance works there, has a PhD in aerospace engineering. She was really big in composites too, I think I will search her out and ask her.
11
posted on
06/12/2007 7:29:42 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading the article since 2004)
To: Abathar
That would be great!
Don’t forget to get permission to post comments from her... We wouldn’t want to get her in trouble.
12
posted on
06/12/2007 7:46:05 AM PDT
by
Freeport
To: Freeport
Not much of an aviation expert, but will this be a better alternative for airlines than the new Airbus behemoth that doesn’t even work right?
13
posted on
06/12/2007 7:47:49 AM PDT
by
RockinRight
(Our 44th President will be Fred Dalton Thompson!)
To: RockinRight
As with the 747, most current infrastructure in place today can’t accept the Airbus. That will change. Airbus, contrary to popular opinion, will, unfortunately, get its act together and crank those planes out.
Boeing will respond at some point after the 787 gets going with a larger 747 in a similar way that they did with the 737-800 (Really a new airplane flying under the type certificate of the existing airframe... Which Airbus REALLY hates.).
I’d say in 5-7 years the 747x (650-750 passengers) will resurface as more airport infrastructure is built to handle the larger aircraft.
After that, Boeing will have the kinks worked out of their cargo variant of a blended wing-body aircraft. Say in 10-15 years expect an aircraft that can haul 1,000 people, yet able to fit into the infrastructure of a 747...
14
posted on
06/12/2007 8:22:27 AM PDT
by
Freeport
To: Freeport
expect an aircraft that can haul 1,000 people, yet able to fit into the infrastructure of a 747...Bet that'll be a comfortable ride...NOT!
I already insist that only people weighing less than 110 pounds can be truly comfortable in coach class as it is.
15
posted on
06/12/2007 8:37:54 AM PDT
by
RockinRight
(Our 44th President will be Fred Dalton Thompson!)
To: RockinRight
"
I already insist that only people weighing less than 110 pounds can be truly comfortable in coach class as it is."
Not only less than 110 pounds -- but also less than 5'10" in stature.
To: RockinRight
According to my buddy at Boeing who works in the loads group, there will be more room actually on a per person basis; width wise...
Their biggest issues are:
- Loading & Unloading
- No Windows
- Non circular pressure vessel (Elliptical)
- “Different” factor - People don’t like different...
17
posted on
06/12/2007 8:42:33 AM PDT
by
Freeport
To: Abathar
This
PDF presentation should answer most of your questions.
I find it interesting that the 787 can defer repair to the damage from a lightning strike, but an aluminum skinned aircraft has to be repaired right away.
Also remember that Boeing has experience with the composite tail on the 777.
18
posted on
06/12/2007 8:44:48 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: RockinRight
"........Airbus behemoth that doesn't even work right?"
Well, there are several 380's flying, and are route qualified on most routes early delivery customers will use.
If that's not working, I don't know what is.
As for composites, it wasn't long ago that the Airbus bashers were throwing a fit about it's use of composites, and praising Boeing for not.
They have completely reversed their positions now, convinced that composites are wonderfuuullll.
To: RockinRight
Infrastructure. As in:
- Runways
- Jetways
- Maintenance Bays
- etc.
20
posted on
06/12/2007 8:45:09 AM PDT
by
Freeport
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-32 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson