The virus is quite useful for this kind of thing. As the old saying goes, never waste a good crisis 
It’s pretty bad for Boeing. Norwegian ordered some 100 Boeings and some 100+ Airbuses. The 787 has been a disaster, they had to use long range 737 instead. The 737-MAX is a disaster of unprecedented proportion. Norwegian used to be 100% Boeing. Within a year or two it will be 100% Airbus. More airliners will follow for sure.
LeSving wrote:
The 787 has been a disaster, they had to use long range 737 instead.
What was wrong with 787?
arj1 wrote:
What was wrong with 787?
From the news item LeSving linked to: “Norwegian’s Rolls-Royce Trent 1000-powered 787 aircraft have suffered from long-running reliability issues that have affected reliability and resulted in premature and unplanned maintenance”
Sounds like it’s what’s wrong with Rolls-Royce Trent 1000s, rather than the 787.
The aircraft can fly again but EASA and the UK CAA has specified that no RNP-AR approaches can be flown.
SafetyDirective2021001_pdf
20210127ADG20210001_pdf
This is rather weird! Why would the avionics disable guidance on an RNP-AR procedure upon the failure of one AoA sensor?
The failure of an AoA sensor may well effect the autopilot as well as increasing the crew workload.
I think this restriction is based on the ability of the aircraft to stay inside the mathematical chances of system failure criteria rather than the likelihood of any likelihood of the aircraft straying outside approach limits if flown by a well trained and vigilant crew.
