Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-05-2012, 07:48 PM   #21
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Yes, mommy.
__________________
Advertisement

Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:43 PM   #22
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Yep. Back to arguing about boats.

No hard feelings Marin. I'll bet we've crossed paths somewhere. If you filmed at Harbor Point, I was there at the time. I'll buy ya a coffee if we run into each other somewhere. Gimme a shout next time you're in Everett.
__________________

SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:54 PM   #23
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Sounds good, but we don't do much in Everett anymore. Mostly Renton, Longacres, BFI, Charleston, and overseas.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 07:01 PM   #24
Guru
 
BruceK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,567
Marin, Can you post a photo of Air NZs new 777-300, in Lord of the Rings "Hobbit" paint job?
__________________
BruceK
Island Gypsy 36 Europa "Doriana"
Sydney Australia
BruceK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2012, 07:27 PM   #25
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by RT Firefly View Post
Greetings,
Mr. 4445. (From Inflatable Boats thread)... "auto exhibition in..??? Peking maybe?" Beijing hasn't been Peking since Oct. 1st 1949. You go back a long way!
sorry i dont know the names of current cities over there but it was in about 2000 when they unveiled their new van for the chinese market. Must have been Bejing. Peking sticking in my mind because of a book i have been reading that was printed in 1936 on Japanese expansionisum in China
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 01:38 PM   #26
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceK View Post
Marin, Can you post a photo of Air NZs new 777-300, in Lord of the Rings "Hobbit" paint job?

According to the web we had no role in the special paint job. In fact it's not paint but decals applied over a standard ANZ livery on an existing 777. It appears the application was done in NZ. There are a lot of photos of the plane on the web.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 11:36 AM   #27
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
... they mix this up to conclude that that beautiful things are much more likely to be good design than ugly things.
I judge engineering design on the simplicity of the solution with regards to the complexity of the problem.

As mentioned earlier, the 787 wing design is an amazingly simple and elegant design. Hugely efficient and very striking to eye.

SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 01:02 PM   #28
Guru
 
alormaria's Avatar
 
City: Trenton
Country: USA
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 902
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeSailor View Post

I judge engineering design on the simplicity of the solution with regards to the complexity of the problem.

As mentioned earlier, the 787 wing design is an amazingly simple and elegant design. Hugely efficient and very striking to eye.
I always admired the 757. It looks like a woman I was close to for a while.
Long, thin, with a beautiful face and two very large "engines" .
I still get aroused driving past Newark airport.
__________________
Al Johnson
34' Marine Trader
"Angelina"
alormaria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 01:18 PM   #29
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by alormaria View Post
I still get aroused driving past Newark airport.
Serious over-share / party foul.
SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 03:20 PM   #30
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by alormaria View Post
I always admired the 757.
The 757 is the only jetliner Boeing made with an asymmetrical nose, like a DC-8/9. While this gave the plane a more aesthetic look in a lot of people's eyes (including mine) it was not done for aesthetics. It was done so the 757 and 767 could have identical flight decks so they could have a common type rating. The only way to fit the 767's flight deck into the 757 was to install it lower. So that's why there is a step down into a 757's flight deck and it's why the nose is "drooped." While it was in production if you asked our flight department pilots what their favorite plane to fly was, almost all of them said the 757 because it was so overpowered and had faster control response than any of our other planes.

Eric-- The 787 photo SomeSailor posted was from a photo/video air-to-air session we did with the prototype 787 a couple of years ago. The photos were shot by Ed Turner, Boeing's top still photographer. Here's another angle on the wing. As SomeSailor says, it is a very elegant design, although the reason for it is aerodynamics. The wing on the new 747-8, which is based on this design, is even prettier in some ways.

BTW, the scallops or chevrons on the trailing edge of the cowl are a noise-reduction system patented by Boeing and they bend in flight to alter the mix of the air blasting back from the fan and the slipstream air flowing over the outside of the cowl. Like thunder, the shear between these two moving masses of air is what makes a lot of the jet noise we hear. The chevrons vary their "bend" on their own-- there are no actuators. We did a bunch of videos about this when our engineers were coming up with the idea and then making it work. Very clever and simple system.

Engineers may not be very creative aesthetically, but they sure are smart.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	787 Wing.jpg
Views:	59
Size:	53.5 KB
ID:	14738  
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 07:19 PM   #31
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
Engineers may not be very creative aesthetically, but they sure are smart.
I'd have to disagree. All of the aesthetics you're enamored with were still done by Engineers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
So that's why there is a step down into a 757's flight deck...
Hence the expression... "Fall down and you're in a 757... Fall up and you're in a 767". Nearly identical flight decks. Also... the 777 has the same 41 section as a 767 for that same reason, but they migrated to an entirely different layout for the interior. From the outside, they are identical.
SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 08:50 PM   #32
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeSailor View Post
I'd have to disagree. All of the aesthetics you're enamored with were still done by Engineers.
Right. Design engineers. Not structural engineers or electrical engineers or systems engineers or propulsion engineers or tooling engineers or manufacturing engineers. They're the ones who take a beautiful design from a design engineer--- like the 7E7--- and totally wreck it until all you're left with is something boring if you're lucky--- like the 787--- or something really atrocious if you're not, like the Pontiac Aztec.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2012, 09:45 PM   #33
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Eric said--- I have no idea if they put any effort into making them [airplanes] attractive. Hardly any reason for it. When a person books a flight I don't think he or she cares one twit what the airplane looks like.
Yes, passengers do care about what a plane looks like. Survey after survey proves this and it's why the 747 is still the most recognized and favorite plane among passengers even if its era is over. It's why the highway sign symbol for an international airport in the US and other countries is a 747 silhouette. It's why the initial design for the 787 had a streamlined hump in the forward body, to capitalize on the recognition factor that the 747 has proved is there among the flying public.

The CEO of Qantas told me back when that airline started ordering its 737s with winglets that one of the reasons that influenced their decision to get winglets on all their 737s even though the ones in short haul service didn't benefit from them all that much was that passengers were commenting over and over that the winglets made the planes look "cool" and "sophisticated," "modern," and "high-tech." This was a huge branding and image boost for Qantas and the CEO said that this made it well worth the extra cost of putting winglets on all their planes.

So yes, we put a hell of a lot of effort into making the plane look attractive, particularly the interior.

And aesthetics are fiercely contested at times. There were major knock-down-drag-out fights between the marketing and sales people, the airlines, and the design engineers on the final shape of the 787. Some of them, like the elimination of the hump, were won by the design engineers. Some of them, like the shape of the tail, were won, or at least partly won, by the marketing and sales folks. And some of them, like the dimensions of the cabin, were won by the airlines. We video taped a lot of these meetings and it was absolutely fascinating to hear the reasons--- both practical and psychological, objective and subjective---- given by all sides in support of their arguments. Probably the most interesting and educational thing I've ever been witness to.

I even had a teeny, tiny role in it. I'm the reason the flowing speed stripe in the company livery goes over the top of the horizontal stabilizer instead of under it.

There are aesthetics, too, in the shape of flight deck windows, the fairings, even the look of the wing light assemblies. There are certainly aerodynamic and structural considerations, too, with these things. But there are a lot of ways to meet those requirements with a wing light assembly, for example. You can make them look ugly or you can make them look nice. They will be functional either way. But the design engineers generally try to make them look nice for their own satisfaction if nothing else.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 08:59 AM   #34
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
They're the ones who take a beautiful design from a design engineer--- like the 7E7--- and totally wreck it
I think you need to get to know the job role better then. DE's are in every field and every function at Boeing. There is no "hand off" like you're describing where some DE's vision is shattered by some "non" design engineer. They are all DE's. If you see something you don't like, 99.9% of it came from concept like that. It wasn't changed on the floor somewhere. Conceptual design is complete LONG before any DE gets a drawing checked out.

You certainly seem to have a low opinion of the folks that do all this great work. I guess it takes more to appreciate the way an engineer thinks.
SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 03:58 PM   #35
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeSailor View Post

You certainly seem to have a low opinion of the folks that do all this great work.
I didn't used to. Certainly not on the 75, 76, 77, and 73 programs. But the 787 and 747-8 programs have altered a lot of people's (and customers') opinions about the ability of not just our own engineers but the entire US engineering field these days. This subject is a major concern at the executive levels of a lot of companies right now, not just ours.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2012, 07:53 PM   #36
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
I didn't used to. Certainly not on the 75, 76, 77, and 73 programs. But the 787 and 747-8 programs have altered a lot of people's (and customers') opinions about the ability of not just our own engineers but the entire US engineering field these days.
You've lost me there. The 747-8 is a very economical way to jump into the last remnants of the A380 market with limited re-tooling. The 737-Max is gonna be another workhorse, and the 777-9X will also be a very economical update to the 777 series. The next airplane design will be a game-changer... I promise you that.

The stodgy Boeing design philosophy also keeps us much safer. It's the discipline of Boeing engineers whose concern about side sticks controllers lack of visual and physical feedback that's kept us from having Air France type tragedies with our fly by wire aircraft as well.

We're a very conservative company, with very disciplined and time-proven engineering methods. It's one of the main reasons we are the leading producer of commercial and military aircraft in the world.
SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 05:08 PM   #37
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
The 747-8 Intercontinental is a great passenger plane who's era is over. It's too bad, as I think it's by far the best of the 747 lineage, but the market is voting with its feet, most of which are walking the other way. If we'd have done this program 15 years ago it would probably have been a very different story.

On top of the market shift, the 747-8 suffered from engineering mistakes that resulted in costly delays, mistakes that should not have happened given our long experience with the basic airplane.

Perhaps the sole value of the 747-8 program will have been the elevation of Elizabeth Lund to the position of program director. Based on my experience with her, if she moves on to become BCA CEO that will be a Very Good thing.

The 787 is well on it's way to becoming the program that never made any money. Its engineering and manufacturing screw ups have made it unlikely that anybody will see a profit from this thing, at least anybody alive today. And in stark contrast to the 76, 75 and 77, which entered revenue service with scarcely a hiccup, the 787 continues to act like an experimental flight test plane after delivery. In the "old days," I don't think Boeing would ever have allowed a plane at this stage of development to be delivered into revenue service, but that's just speculation on my part.

I know a fair number of people who fly it, and this seems to be their opinion, as well.

The 737 MAX will be a great plane simply because it's based on such a great plane and it's a plane of the type the market can't get enough of now and for the foreseeable future.

I have no doubt our next airplane concept will be a game changer, just as the 787's concept was a game changer. But unless the company can do something about its ebbing engineering base, the next program may be doomed to follow in the same footsteps as the 787. Jim Albaugh recognized this threat and was actively trying to do something about rebuilding our engineering core. His stated philosophy and goals ran quite contrary to what we had been hearing from HQ for a long time. But it's a very long-term undertaking and whether his efforts will continue now that he's gone is anybody's guess at this point.

And it is not a problem exclusive to Boeing. It's a problem faced by just about every manufacturing company that depends upon engineering expertise for its success.

The alternative is to do what we did with the 787 and farm it out to companies they think have the engineering expertise to pull it off. Is that the future of product design and manufacturing in this country?

Only time will tell.

It's interesting that Airbus is announcing delays with their A350 program, too. Couple this with the inability to bring complex projects from airplanes to bridges to tunnels to you name it to completion on time, on budget, and working properly, it makes one wonder if we have simply reached the point where our imagination is far greater than our abilities. Particularly our engineering abilities as that's where all the problems in these big, complex projects seem to be rooted.

So to answer your earlier comment, you're right. My regard for engineers of the kinds that create airplanes and bridges and tunnels and buildings and so on has been dwindling steadily since the mid-1990s as the news is filled with more and more stories of screw ups, delays, and massive cost overruns. Some due to poor program management and decisions, no question. But more and more due to design and engineering mistakes. Particularly in this country and in Europe.

Software engineers are a different story, or course, because that's where the interest and attraction is these days.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 06:04 PM   #38
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
what does a 757 have to do9 with boating?
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 06:28 PM   #39
Scraping Paint
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Vessel Model: CHB 48 Zodiac YL 4.2
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,804
They look nice when they fly over the boat.
RickB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2012, 07:13 PM   #40
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfloyd4445 View Post
what does a 757 have to do9 with boating?

Nothing. Because this thread has nothing to do with boating.
__________________

Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012