United Airlines is really having some bad luck with one of its newest Boeing 787-9s, which also features the carrier’s brand new interiors. The plane has had an incredible number of maintenance issues since entering service, to the point that the plane was sent back to Boeing to be repaired. After around 10 days with…
Continue reading: United’s Cursed 787 Is Still “Broken,” Even After Being Sent Back To Boeing
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Okay, so Boeing turned out a lemon. It happens. We haven't seen this occur on a fleet scale and, as said, this does appear to be isolated to this one frame. Bad timing and bad optics for Boeing, who are continually under the microscope in large part due to rabid Airbus fanboys who leap on situations like this.
This is an asset that costs well over $100 million. You don't just say oopsie when there are multiple cancelations and delays because of poor manufacturing.
And since you brought Airbus into the discussion, let us know how many Airbus wide bodies Delta has had to send back to the manufacturer.
Boeing is a great company with a long history and I certainly wish them well. Let's not sugarcoat how badly they have screwed up engineering and customer disclosure on the 737 and manufacturing on the 787
"who are continually under the microscope in large part due to rabid Airbus fanboys who leap on situations like this."
You alllllmost created an entirely lucid post, for the first time; only to screw it up in the end.
Keep trying!
And yet who did the first response to my missive? Rabid Airbus fanboy Timbits. I am proven right.
Ben, unrelated but if you need a new photo of a United plane let me know I can provide it for you for free. Lol.
How much did they have to pay those LHR passengers in UK261 compensation when the flight was canceled?
Immortal is right. There was no reason to bring Airbus into the discussion. You did and I responded. The facts are pretty clear.
Delta has nothing to do with this, TD simply wanted to bring them in because that’s all he thinks about, yet couldn’t come up with an actual example. If you want a sample of a real Airbus issue, look at Qatar’s A350 dispute. Neither manufacturer is immune to turning out some lemons now and again.
https://simpleflying.com/qatar-airbus-a350-paint-conflict-timeline/
If anyone tries to point the finger at sloppy union standards, Seattle HR practices, or the increasingly woke Boeing brand, I will be very, very upset. Because that has absolutely, positively nothing to do with this latest situation. Of that, I am certain. Or at least reasonably confident. With a touch of potential doubt, but not a deal breaker. I mean maybe it’s possible, but that would be pure speculation. Boeing has never had serious problems in the recent past, so I’m sure there’s nothing to see here at all. Any hint to the contrary would be malicious, so don’t you even think of going there.
I didn't bring Airbus into it. I brought in their rabid fanboys like you. If I did bring Airbus in, it would be a statement about how the A350-1000 is a flaming bag of elephant waste.
I thought Boeing was finally turning the corner with a competent CEO. But with this B789 issue and after just reading the unusual move made by a Latin American carrier of returning back 3 recently acquired B737Max aircraft (although exact cause of return not as yet known), once again Boeing production quality becomes a matter of concern.
Have you ever had a “lemon “ vehicle?
I have but didn’t accuse the manufacturer of going down hill
Have you ever made a mistake?
Means you can’t be competent?
Airbus has had their issues as well on some of their planes . Give me a break
While Boeing is ultimately responsible for delivering a 100% perfect aircraft, TCAS is reportedly made by Collins Aerospace ( https://www.rtx.com/collinsaerospace/what-we-do/industries/business-aviation/flight-deck/additional-flight-deck/traffic-awareness/ttr-2100-airborne-collision-avoidance-system-traffic-computer). As such, the issue may not have been specific to the 787 design or manufacturing. The same goes for the comment regarding an oven issue. Ovens are reportedly provided by Jamco Corporation and Safran Cabin.
"Clearly United mechanics couldn’t figure out what was going on, so the plane was returned to Boeing."
@ Ben - that's taking your speculation and presenting it as fact, with no real basis to support it.
New aircraft actually come with a warranty like any other product. It is possible that UA's mechanics were stumped. It's also possible that Boeing decided it was more cost effective to get the plane back in house instead of reimbursing parts and labor to UA under warranty. It's also possible there's another explanation besides "the mechanics couldn't figure it out".
There's close to THIRTEEN HUNDRED 787's delivered. One one think if its a major manufacturing issue, it would be seen on say greater than 0.1% of the frames delivered. As mentioned, maybe it doesn't have to do with Boeing but a particular vendor/manufacturer.
While there should be legitimate concern and discussion, most of these comments are a bit childish.
I was ticketed to fly on this flight yesterday but my plans changed. What a pity. I would have for sole nice EU271 compensation.
I was supposed to be on it but my plans changed and I’m flying LX instead. Drat.
There is so much software on modern planes. Could It could be one line of code in error somewhere hidden in a sea of software?
Why doesn’t Boeing just offer three people along with the plane who will sit with binoculars on each side and one in the cockpit scanning for traffic.