Boeing 787 Dreamliner ZA002 at Paine Field on January 27, 2010 before its first flight.
For the last day there are been bits and pieces of information coming from Boeing, inside sources and different media outlets on ZA002’s sudden landing due to reported smoke in the cabin. Boeing has just released an official statement putting some of the rumors to rest and explaining what they know of ZA002’s recent emergency landing in Laredo, TX.
Boeing confirms that ZA002 did lose primary electrical power that was related to an on board electrical fire. Due to the loss, the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which provides back up power (photo of RAT from ZA003) was deployed and allowed the flight crew to land safely. The pilots had complete control of ZA002 during the entire incident.
After their initial inspection, it appears that a power control panel in the rear of the electronics bay will need to be replaced. They are checking the surrounding areas for any additional damages. At this time, the cause of the fire is still being investigated and might take a few days until we have more answers.
At the time of the incident, ZA002 was completing tests of the Nitrogen Generation System, but Boeing does not feel that test was related to the fire. Until Boeing determines the cause, they have postponed all flight tests on the other 787 aircraft. Boeing does not know if this incident will cause the first delivery of the Dreamliner to be pushed back to a later date.
Is this plane going to the US? TSA says no printer cartridges allowed -- gotta protect America.
I am angry and frustrated at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) right now. In classic form they have once again over-reacted in an idiotic fashion. I am not saying the recent mailing of bombs in printer cartridges across the world is not serious, but it demands real solutions, not knee-jerk reactions.
In a statement released by the DHS, they state that they are banning all cargo from Yeman. Okay, this makes sense. It is not like we have a lot of imported goods coming from Yemen. However, they are also banning cargo from Somalia. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they have some intelligence that we do not know about. The release also states, “No high risk cargo will be allowed on passenger aircraft.” Okay, so far I am actually with the TSA here. Banning dangerous cargo from certain places in the world until we can figure out the risk actually kind of makes sense.
When reading, I assumed we must be talking about dangerous things like explosives, flammable items and bombs right? Think again. In the next sentence they continue with, “Toner and ink cartridges over 16 ounces will be prohibited on passenger aircraft in both carry-on bags and checked bags on domestic and international flights in-bound to the United States.” Say what?
This is stupid. I hate to call anyone names, but there is just no other way to say it. This no-thought reaction actually makes me feel less safe. This is telling me that the TSA cannot detect a bomb no matter what form it takes. Do they think that terrorist will give up since they can’t figure out anything else to put bombs in? Please. Not that I think there are a heck of a lot of people carrying around large printer cartridges in their baggage, but what’s next?
Since the ban is sort of a shock, you might have missed the part where this is only for flights within and inbound to the United States. So, it is totally fine to fly with a printer cartridge on an airline departing the US, you just can’t bring any back. What sense does that make?
It is easy to ban printer cartridges since they are not common, but what if terrorists start using items that would be difficult to ban? Would the TSA start banning laptops or stuffed animals if terrorists start using them? I wish the TSA would stop wasting time and money with pointless security measures like this. They need to be honest with the public that there is no 100% solution and be smarter about bomb detection. The airline business has seen many good and horrid changes since 9/11. However, in the last nine years 0 Americans have died from terrorism on airlines. Compare that to the about 315,000 Americans who have died in automobile accidents over the same period of time. Some might say that scanning shoes and your toothpaste is related to those 0 deaths, but I say it has more to do with this not being the huge threat the TSA and the media like to play it up to be.
When I got word of this story a few days ago, I tried to contact two different TSA sources, but no one would contact me back (and I was not this snarky). The TSA is proud of their “Talk to the TSA” campaign, but I guess you can only talk to them about stuff they want to talk about. I have tried to get the TSA’s side to things, but they just don’t seem to want to talk, which is greatly disappointing to me. If you are not happy with the body scanners and their crazy knee-jerk reactions, I highly suggest you trying to talk to the TSA. If you get a reply, let me know.
Firefighters and airport officials investigate the scene of an incident involving a Boeing 787 jetliner at the Laredo International Airport Tuesday, Nov. 9, 2010 in Laredo, Texas. (The Laredo Morning Times, Ricardo Santos)
Today, Boeing’s second 787 Dreamliner, ZA002, reported smoke in the cabin and had to be evacuated after landing in Larado, TX.
“The crew continued its approach and landed safely at the airport. Emergency personnel responded. The crew safely evacuated the airplane,” Boeing 787 spokeswoman Lori Gunter said. “We are continuing to gather data regarding this event.”
ZA002 took off from Yuma, AZ at 6:30am today with 30-plus test personnel aboard. Jon Ostower via his blog Flight Blogger is reporting that a fire broke out in the aft electronics bay causing the flight deck primary flight displays (update: it is being reported now that the flight displays did not fail) and auto throttle to fail. During landing, the ram air turbine (photo from ZA003 – provides back up power) was deployed. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner was scheduled to land in Harlingen, TX but landed instead at Laredo, TX just before 3:00pm CST.
Once again, I am sure many people will start to get excited about things going wrong with the 787 Dreamliner and more possible delays, but this is all okay.
I am so happy that some media folks, like Glenn Farley, who is our local aviation specialist on KING5 in Seattle, puts things in perspective. On his report about this latest incident with ZA002 he reminds us, “The bottom line thing to keep in mind here is this is the nature of flight test. That’s why they do it, stuff can go wrong.” He also reminds us of the rapid decompression that the Boeing 777 had during its test flight phase and today most people do not remember it or care.
He is right. This is why they test the aircraft. At this point we do not know many details and should not make assumptions of further delays. I will say again that the 787 Dreamliner is the next generation of aircraft and creating the next generation of aircraft does not come without its challenges.
This will be updated as more information is known.
UPDATE: 8:45pm PST.
Directly from Flight Blogger: “Program sources say all planned flight test for Wednesday have been postponed until Thursday at the earliest. ZA001, ZA005 and ZA006 have been shifted to ground tests as a result of ZA002’s in-flight fire. ZA003 and ZA004 had been previously scheduled to conduct ground testing.”
UPDATE 8:45am 11/10.
Flight Blogger is now reporting that 42 Boeing test people were on board ZA002 at the time of the incident. Boeing is also stating that pilots did not lose primary flight displays during landing. I spoke with All Nippon Airways, whose livery is on this test 787 aircraft and Nao Gunji with ANA communications explained that, “ANA was notified of the event on ZA002 by Boeing, and we are coordinating with them. Although the airplane is in the ANA livery, it is operated by Boeing as part of the 787 flight test fleet. No ANA employees were involved in the event. ZA002 is not one of the aircrafts ANA is scheduled to receive next year.”
UPDATE 3:45pm.
Boeing gives official word on what happened with ZA002.
More: VIDEO of ZA002 on ground in Texas – PHOTO of 787 ram air turbine – PHOTOS of ZA002 first flight
Photo found via the Seattle PI
When Virgin America started to serve Toronto.
Virgin America is known for providing a unique level of service at a competitive price. However, they haven’t been known to make a profit. With today’s announcement, that has now changed.
When Virgin America first started up, many questioned if an airline with so many frills at a time of cutting back, could survive in America. As the airline kept growing, other airlines started to take notice. Could an airline with an attitude, awesome infight entertainment and competitive prices really survive against the establish carriers?
Today, Virgin America announces they have made their first profit ever, a total of $7.5million during third quarter. Now, $7.5 million is not huge a profit compared to other airlines, but it is sure a heck of a lot better than losing money. To compare, Alaska made $118.1 million, Delta made $363 million and United made $473 million. Those are some impressive numbers, but I don’t think such huge numbers make VA feel any less proud about making their first profit.
’œAs a young airline fueling growth in a tough economic climate, we’re exceptionally pleased with our performance to date,’ said Virgin America President and CEO David Cush. ’œAlthough the revenue climate improved as a whole during the quarter, our unit revenue performance still outpaced much of the industry. Our progress toward profitability in just our third year of operations remains impressive, especially given both a global recession and a historic run-up in oil prices since our August 2007 launch. The credit is due to a growing base of flyers who expect more from an U.S. airline ’“ and our teammates, who continue to deliver the best service and product in the industry.’
Virgin America has great momentum. They aren’t stopping with just making profit; they will continue to grow. They plan to expand to Dallas-Fort Worth (starting in December 2010), Los Cabos (starting December 16, 2010) and Cancun (starting January 19, 2011) along with order for an addition 40 new aircraft with options for an additional 20. If larger airlines weren’t taking Virgin America serious before, they better start paying attention.
Some of Southwest's "Bags Fly Free" advertising.
If you are an airline geek or have a TV you probably have a good idea that bags fly free with Southwest Airlines. As airline after airline started to charge for bags, Southwest stuck to their guns with no fees. More recently they have started a large advertising campaign hoping that passengers are angry at the fees and will change airlines.
Although personally I do not like paying bag fees, I understand them; weight costs money. The heavier the plane, the most it costs to fly and for now, fees are generating a lot of money for airlines. Passengers will complain about them, but are they changing airlines?
Southwest is making the bet that additional fees will not work in the long run and they will make more revenue earning more passengers than they are losing by not charging bag fees. It is a big bet, but if they lose, Southwest can always start charging bag fees.
In May 2010 Southwest completed a survey of 3900 business and leisure passengers where they could pick from 55 choices what aspect is most important to them when choosing an airline. Here are the top five “needs” for business travelers:
1. Has good safety record
2. Offers non-stop flights where I want to go
3. Has convenient flight times
4. Provides good value
5. Does not charge fees
And the top five for leisure travelers:
1) Has good safety record
2) Provides good value
3) Does not charge fees
4) Offers non-stop flights where I want to go
5) Has sales on fares
The fact that charging fees made it on the top five for business travelers is surprising to me. Most business travelers do not have to worry about the fees, since their company will pick up the charges. However, Southwest stated that even though business travelers don’t have to pay, some will have to process an expense report and explain why the additional charges are on the trip. That is annoying and takes time.
Southwest’s next step is to advertise they do not have ticket-change fees either. This won’t be as easy to get across to customers as the no bag fees. It is more obvious for a passenger to know if they have to pay for a bag. It is more difficult for passengers to know if something will come up and they will need to change their flight. Southwest feels confident they can get the message across with a series of new creative ads.
Gary Kelly, Southwest’s CEO and President, wondered out loud at their recent Media Day event, why airlines would do something passengers hate. He stated that Southwest feels lucky that almost every other airline is charging for bags and they are not.
We won’t know how successful no fees will be, but so far Southwest is reporting both growth in leisure and business travelers. I have previously stated it is not an airline’s fault for charging fees… passengers choose to pay them. If passengers are willing to pay fees, airlines will continue to charge them. If passengers rebel against the fees and choose airlines that do not charge them, you will see fees start to go away (although ticket prices will most likely go up). It is a great experiment and I think so far it is working well for Southwest.
Image by Paul Thompson with Southwest Airlines
