Do Boeing hand-make aeroplanes?

formatting link

Reply to
rbowman
Loading thread data ...

but the rivets were made in Glasgow ....

Reply to
J1MBO ...

I'd guess it's to prevent a fracture line forming if they were in a neat line.

The sad tale of the Comets square windows is a warning about metal weakness ...

Reply to
Jethro_uk

One interesting thing from the 1980s was that in Guernsey, I was walking around the chain link fence around the airport and saw two people with a pair of steps drilling holes and inserting objects just under the rear end of a group of Trilanders. I asked what they were doing and apparently due to the fact that the engine was on the tail, under certain conditions when parked the wind could tip them so that the tail hit the ground. This could result in damage due to the odd centre of gravity. it was of course fine flying and when loaded. The little holes and inserts allowed what I can only describe as a strut to be affixed that at pressure on the tail by touching the ground when it was parked. It was of course removed when you wanted to fly.

However I guess small aircraft like this are a completely different thing to what was mentioned in the photo. Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

The original 737 had a jet engine with a circular engine nacelle. When Boeing decided to re-engine the 737 they wanted to use a new "fanjet". If they had used a circular nacelle it would have dragged on the ground. They therefore repositioned various ancillary pumps and generators and ever since the nacelle has been flat at the bottom. The forward rivet line had to be repositioned as well so it was no longer parallel to the rear line.

Reply to
Graham Harrison

I toured Boeing facilities in Seattle many years ago. Aircraft assembly itself is fairly boring. It takes a year to assemble a big plane going through 12 assembly stations. Most interesting was their machine shop and I was impressed to see a wing assembled out of one piece of aluminum. We also saw their composite making facilities. They had autoclaves big enough to put in a bus. Every completed composite part was tested for flaws. Also went through their research labs and was impressed that they were still testing parts on planes that had been flying for decades to make sure a flaw would not show up. Boeing folks are very meticulous in making a good product.

Reply to
Frank

  Not so much ... the problem was metal FATIGUE due to the corners concentrating stress .
Reply to
Terry Coombs

OMFG I'm never flying again.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

And see the good old Structures book:

formatting link

Reply to
Bob Eager

I've seen all sorts of weird things on military planes and helicopters at an airbase when they're parked. Rotor blades tied down, covers over vents etc.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

See .....

formatting link

Reply to
Graham Harrison

A wing spar may be one piece but not the whole wing including the internal fuel tanks or skin.

Reply to
Graham Harrison

As is typical for you Frank, your "facts" are way off.

It takes about 53 days for Boeing to assemble and paint a 777, less than two months. Flight testing takes another 30 days, so it is about

83 days from first part to customer delivery, less than three months.

Here is a citation:

formatting link

OR

How Long Does it Take to Build a Boeing 777? - AirlineReporter : AirlineReporter

formatting link

Reply to
Dove Tail

ROTFPMSL!

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

Of course, that's where the rivets come in.

Reply to
Frank

And, IIRC, using a riveting technique involving punching through undersized holes. This might have been acceptable on a WW2 bomber which was unlikely to survive too long before being shot down anyway but certainly not on a commercial airliner designed to fly above the weather with a pressurised cabin for passenger comfort.

The lessons learned were to avoid stress concentration forces (round or oval windows) and to accurately drill the rivet holes to match the rivet shank diameter.

Reply to
Johnny B Good
[Snip]

I saw that ay Vickers in Weybridge in the 1960s, Wings for VC10s were made that way. I also went round Marshall's works at Cambridge in 1983 where they were converting Tristars (made by Lockheed) into airborne tankers for the RAF. The people there was appaled at the excessive number of holes in the fuselage spars where the interior trim hasd been fitted. Some spars had to be replaced!.

Reply to
charles

I wasn't talking about it not being parallel, but that if you follow the line of rivets, it wiggles about as though it's been done by hand.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.