Door blows off Boeing 777X during stress test

Post by rntrg » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 11:09 AM UTC

macoovacany wrote: post #77

kbenson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here is another video of a 777 wing test where it broke at 154% of the normal load I really hope you mean 154% of the max load, and I hope that max load is engineered to be far above what should be seen in actual service. 50% over the normal service load is not what I would consider extreme, and not something I would expect to be acceptable in an aircraft.

Ok, I'm hijacking this thread because there's some confusion about 'limit' load. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf...

Post by Havoc » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 12:05 PM UTC

cyberferret wrote: post #16

It's a stress test. You would expect things to break during a stress test. > "They loaded it up well beyond capacity and bent its wings in an extreme manner, in a way almost certain to never happen in the real world." Here is another video of a 777 wing test where it broke at 154% of the [s/normal/maximum theoretical/] load - a bit beyond what was expected by the engineering team. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai2H…

Post by master-litty » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 12:08 PM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #83

,,Investors were disappointed recently when Boeing announced delays in delivering its first 777X model into next year.'' ,,Safety is the highest priority at Boeing." I'm not sure if both of these sentences can be true at the same time. At the same time I wouldn't be a Boeing investor after how the MAX plane was designed.

Post by fluffything » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 1:07 PM UTC

cameldrv wrote: post #80

kbenson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here is another video of a 777 wing test where it broke at 154% of the normal load I really hope you mean 154% of the max load, and I hope that max load is engineered to be far above what should be seen in actual service. 50% over the normal service load is not what I would consider extreme, and not something I would expect to be acceptable in an aircraft.

Design limit load is for an aircraft at max allowable weight, with the max authorized g loading (often -1 to +2.5g) or the worst anticipated gusts (about 50 ft/sec depending on altitude). You then need to tack on 50% to get the required ultimate load. 50% is indeed not a huge safety margin like you'd get with a bridge or something, which is why you need trained professionals flying it and regular inspections. If you…

Post by skellington » Sat, Sep 07, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #54

jussij wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The A380 was already in production at the time of the Feb 2006 test. There is more than one version of the A380. But there was no A380 Airbus with a 550 seat capacity in service at that time. The whole point of that wing testing was so this newer, higher capacity A380 could get certification. http://www.modernairliners.com/airbus-a380/airbus-a380_histo... 25 October 2007 - The first commercial flight of the A380 to…

>There is more than one version of the A380. There is only one version of the A380, the A380-800. >But there was no A380 Airbus with a 550 seat capacity in service at that time. I didn't mean "in service", I meant "in production". You're right that it wasn't in service at the time, but pieces of the plane had already been started to be produced, thus "in production". >The whole point of that wing testing was so this…