PDA

View Full Version : Re: Boeing bets the house on CF.....


Dennis Ferguson
12-31-1969, 08:00 PM
On 2007-07-08, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
>> On Jul 7, 7:25 pm, "Callistus Valerius" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Boeing is building it's new plane, the dreamliner, with carbon fiber.
>>> The wings, fuselage. The cf must be consiberably more impact resistent than
>>> bike frames, or this would be suicide for Boeing. Hell of a note, if you
>>> looked out the window and saw the wing suddenly break off in some
>>> turbulence. Even though steel is real, I think Boeing skipped steel, and
>>> went straight to aluminum. Titanium, is too expensive and I think is only
>>> used in military planes. Boeing has sold a boat load of these dreamliners
>>> on contract already, but they still don't have a flying one yet. So if you
>>> fly a lot, you might have trouble finding a flight that isn't in a
>>> dreamliner when they start filling the skies.
>>
>> Not a lot of aircraft anything is steel..Too heavy. Titanium in some
>> tubing and some high temp areas. Aluminum and carbon is just a better
>> choice. Airbus has had an aircraft with a composite tail and other
>> flight surfaces for a long time. Same for military aircraft like the
>> _F-18 series. Carpet fiber on aircraft is old news and Boeing sees a
>> way to make these aircract light and strong and more
>> efficient..something that needs to happen cuz fuel prices aren't going
>> to come down anytime soon.
>
> What needs to be done is to replace the short range flights with
> high-speed rail.

I can't imagine that would effect the 787 at all, however. It is a
big, two-aisle plane and I doubt anyone would use one for short range
flights.

> The high-speed rail would be more economically
> efficient (especially an inter-modal system that could replace most
> driving on freeways), have a lower environmental impact, and would avoid
> the need to wait in line for hours to be examined by TSA goons [1].

So I guess no one ever blows up trains? The last train trip I took
(London to Paris) had a security check with a queue which would have
made the TSA proud.

Dennis Ferguson

Jasper Janssen
01-03-1970, 06:51 AM
On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 02:43:30 GMT, Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net>
wrote:

>So I guess no one ever blows up trains? The last train trip I took
>(London to Paris) had a security check with a queue which would have
>made the TSA proud.

That's not the train, it's the Channel Tunnel, which is both a higher
profile target and an easier one in terms of pounds of explosive per
casualty. The Madrid bombings were pretty damned bad, but the same bombs
inside the channel tunnel would have been a much bigger problem, with mugh
bigger economic impact and longer repair times, as well as higher
casualties.

Normal international train services are still metaldetector free.

Jasper