@@wambugukingoriYes it will, but only because no-one else is using bigger engines, has more seats, or has folding wing tips on a commercial jet. Whether it’s still desirable to purchase though is really debatable
Does anyone know if that FMS panel (at 2:57) has actual 'hardware' keys or only virtual keys? They look like virtual keys to me and I'm wondering how users find these - in comparison to the physical 'chiclets' where we would have tactile feedback when we find and activate them... Thanks.
This is AWESOME! My favorite aircrafts new variants are finally being tested Once again and will be airborne with airlines next year! Can’t wait to see the out come!!!!
Easier said than done. Boeing has a lot of problems, the least of which are the union strikes in Everett. The FAA has also seriously put its foot down on the 777X program AFAIK. They really aren't happy that Boeing deceived them over the 737 Max affair, and are justifiably clamping down. Things will be done right this time, but it's going to take a while.
@@camhusmj38 Indeed they would, but IMHO the response would have been relatively tame, as a fair bit of work was done by Boeing and the mutual trust likely would have been there in a way it isn't there right now. Killing 346 People and using technical aspects of regulations to avoid excessive scrutiny does that.
It's the connection between the engines and the wing of a plane, taking and transferring the load of the engine thrust, hence its called thrust link. This part has to be strong, taking the load of the engines. It has to be durable holding up for many flights. And they have to be lightweight at the same time. These conflicting requirements are making it challenging to come up with reliable and cost effective designs for planes.
Does this mean that the issue has been fixed, or just that they are replacing the thrust links more frequently? Going by the wording, I suspect the latter.
Good question, half a year for a design fix is quite short. Maybe they simply accept a more frequent replacement schedule, increasing maintenance costs in the long run. Not necessarily a deal breaker, many parts are replaced regularly on planes anyways.
@thetruthbehindplanes Your comment makes no sense. The article did not specifically state what the issue was or whether the replacement links were the final solution. The language used could be that the author did not know or was also unsure, so worded accordingly, or that Boeing hadn't fixed it completely. It could even have been as a result of something so embarrassing that they would rather not say! It was a simple question, asked out of curiosity, nothing more. Apart from the obvious concerns regarding the failure of the component, I would have thought that the impact elsewhere would be minimal or non-existent, and that every avenue to allow certification to continue should be explored, even if it is only a temporary solution.
It's entirely possible they accepted more frequent maintenance on the TL for launch airframes, with an improved part coming out down the line and being separately certified. As long as Boeing engineers are sure the design change would not require extensive modifications to the aircraft, honestly it seems the best way forward to me, considering how desperately the airlines need these planes yesterday
It's crazy that airlines still want anything from Boeing after everything that's been going on. Sadly, I'm positive that 777X will have issues even after it's been "certified" and in use.
they have no option left, there are only two, airbus n Boeing, in production of this kind of airplane.Making an aeroplane is not easy . so whatever its taking time , good for human kind.
Haven't seen any news about the thrust link and how it got fixed. Tightened exchange schedule increasing maintenance costs? A design fix within half a year on the most stressed structural components? Sounds unlikely.
they have been replaced with better ones I think. FAA/Boeing have agreed to say what caused them to fail but have been silent on this. So I guess they are improved ones
@@nickolliver3021 Well, I give you credit for being the first to introduce this news (of which I was aware), under the comments of a previous video, and am sure more info will eke out over time.......
As a European Airbus fan, biased, WE NEED Boeing to return but clearly NOT under the current Board or Management. Despite a token CEO change it appears that Boeing have not understood the enormity of Leadership change needed. Q. Should ALL of Boeing Commercial Aircraft division be taken away and split into 1) 737/737 Max and 2) 777, 787 and each? FAA have made it clear they are NOT PLEASED with the slow progress Boeing is achieving in its QC then should these Aircraft be taken over by another US Aircraft manufacturer thus allowing production to increase and creating competition to Airbus?
@@jantjarks7946Neither of them have experience with widebody's and Embraer doesn't (to the best of my knowledge) have any experience with Max/Neo class narrows as well. It would be a long, painful process. I welcome competition in the space as it brings a ton of innovation (just think back when Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, etc all competed against each other) but Boeing going under now would be an extremely painful thing EDIT: Also Airbus shouldn't be sleeping on their laurels. For how much we point the finger at boing for not releasing a 797, Airbus hasn't released a cleansheet either since the A350. The A220 doesn't count, and the A320/330 Neo are a direct match for the Max and 777X. Everybody's sleeping at the yoke/sidestick right now
For them it's not about a wide body, at least not at first. But a bread and butter plane. Both designed planes close to the 737 and 320. But due to competitive reasons, not technical reasons. Especially Embraer are more than capable of creating a larger plane design, as the transport plane already showed. The issue both face will be financial, for Bombardier however it would require a lot of engineers too, as Embraer has them due to the transport plane they made. Once one of them would have such a design in the market, a widebody would become an option. But certainly not before as even more finances have to be secured then. As said, unlikely, but not impossible.
Come on Boeing how many jets are flying with thrust links that are not cracking and you can't design one the won't crack That's what happens when companies are run by accountants and not by engineers
No worries, after another half a year delay the FAA certainly will check the plane thoroughly during certification. They can't afford to look like best buddies right now, as such it's quite likely that another issue will be found, which is a good thing, especially with Boeing.
Ortberg seems to be the right person to get them back on track. But the question is how many setbacks he will have to deal with. After all it is a plethora of issues that we had witnessed with Boeing. How many issues are still hidden somewhere, even from Ortberg?
I wouldn't write the aircraft off as a failure just yet, as some do. People are still in the pandemic mindset, the fact that it's the largest aircraft on the market doesn't hurt it, it's the main selling point. It's the most straightforward replacement to the 777 (most successful widebody airliner ever), the 747 and the A380. And by the way, it already has significantly more orders then the A330 Neo (515 vs. 374). The only year where they lost orders in total was 2019. If they can just deliver on the expectation, I think it will be a mild success.
That's a good question, but basically, the more stress the thrust links have to endure, the stronger they are built. As such, technically it's not impossible to design something reasonable. The real question is how Boeing fixed the flawed design now and which implications will it have? Are the thrust links simply exchanged more frequently? Increasing maintenance costs. Have they been made stronger, without a design change necessary? (optimal solution) Have they strengthened the connections, but increasing the weight of the thrust links and / or the connectors to the wings and engines? Did they have to change the wing structure, possibly increasing weight? We don't know any of it and will have to see what Boeing might publish. But that too leads to the question how far the design of the X has been changed and in fact been compromised?
@@jantjarks7946 Look they agreed to state why but have not published to the public why they failed. Kept hush or they just got on and fixed the problem
Bring it on. I was very disappointed with A350 after all the spin. I found that competent but far from excellent. Whilst I remain committed to wanting a new design 747 twin combining the environmental, financial and passenger benefits with pax and freight loads suitable for resurgent hub and spoke as well as beautiful design and leveraging the emotional tie many frequent flyers still have for the queen of the skies. The new 777’s will be a good interim solution until the 747X can be developed.
My man I love me some 747 but a twin 747 would not be the same, just like the overture - if it ever came to fruition - wouldn't be the same as the Concorde. Excited for both prospects though, at least one of them is not completely outside the realm of possibility
All the way. As a frequent long haul flyer the 777-300er is my #1 choice. On long haul Boeing still delivers. Airbus do well in the narrow body market.
By the time the 777x delivered I would have graduated 💀
More importantly, will they still be 'state of art' for 2026?
@@wambugukingoriYes it will, but only because no-one else is using bigger engines, has more seats, or has folding wing tips on a commercial jet. Whether it’s still desirable to purchase though is really debatable
And it'll definitely have problems once it's already in use. 💀
does it matter to any airliners?
It's a compromised design anyways. The question only is, how much more has been compromised for the thrust link fix, affecting maintenance costs.
At this point, I just want any good news from Seattle
Starbucks have double stars this weekend.
@@911HRW But still just half a bean in the coffee? 😉
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂@@911HRW
Still a 777 lover...
It's a Boeing
@fjp3305 what is 777? Are you mad...😂
Come on Boeing you’ve got this
Keep it up🔥
I can’t wait for 2050
Cope harder
Awesome looking aircraft. I'm hoping to experience her soon.
Does anyone know if that FMS panel (at 2:57) has actual 'hardware' keys or only virtual keys? They look like virtual keys to me and I'm wondering how users find these - in comparison to the physical 'chiclets' where we would have tactile feedback when we find and activate them... Thanks.
All the best to Boeing, we could all use good news about now.
This is AWESOME! My favorite aircrafts new variants are finally being tested Once again and will be airborne with airlines next year! Can’t wait to see the out come!!!!
MY FAV TOO!!
Just get it built and delivered. Airlines that have ordered these must be pulling their hair out
And they have no alternative as Airbus is booked out for years.
Easier said than done. Boeing has a lot of problems, the least of which are the union strikes in Everett. The FAA has also seriously put its foot down on the 777X program AFAIK. They really aren't happy that Boeing deceived them over the 737 Max affair, and are justifiably clamping down. Things will be done right this time, but it's going to take a while.
@@michaelmoses8745 To be fair, I think that even the pre-MAX FAA would object to thrust linkages breaking in flight or cracking.
@@camhusmj38 Indeed they would, but IMHO the response would have been relatively tame, as a fair bit of work was done by Boeing and the mutual trust likely would have been there in a way it isn't there right now. Killing 346 People and using technical aspects of regulations to avoid excessive scrutiny does that.
@@michaelmoses8745 Yeah.
What is a thrust link?
It's the connection between the engines and the wing of a plane, taking and transferring the load of the engine thrust, hence its called thrust link.
This part has to be strong, taking the load of the engines. It has to be durable holding up for many flights. And they have to be lightweight at the same time.
These conflicting requirements are making it challenging to come up with reliable and cost effective designs for planes.
As a 777 I am glad to hear this
This plane will be epic….watch!
Does this mean that the issue has been fixed, or just that they are replacing the thrust links more frequently?
Going by the wording, I suspect the latter.
THEY FIXED IT DAILY MAIL JOURNALIST!!!!!!!!!
Good question, half a year for a design fix is quite short.
Maybe they simply accept a more frequent replacement schedule, increasing maintenance costs in the long run. Not necessarily a deal breaker, many parts are replaced regularly on planes anyways.
@thetruthbehindplanes Your comment makes no sense.
The article did not specifically state what the issue was or whether the replacement links were the final solution.
The language used could be that the author did not know or was also unsure, so worded accordingly, or that Boeing hadn't fixed it completely. It could even have been as a result of something so embarrassing that they would rather not say!
It was a simple question, asked out of curiosity, nothing more.
Apart from the obvious concerns regarding the failure of the component, I would have thought that the impact elsewhere would be minimal or non-existent, and that every avenue to allow certification to continue should be explored, even if it is only a temporary solution.
It's entirely possible they accepted more frequent maintenance on the TL for launch airframes, with an improved part coming out down the line and being separately certified. As long as Boeing engineers are sure the design change would not require extensive modifications to the aircraft, honestly it seems the best way forward to me, considering how desperately the airlines need these planes yesterday
Better late than never.
Why not call it the 777-MAX?
Good
Boeing can't seem to catch a break.
🚨⚠daily mail journalist alert⚠🚨
@thetruthbehindplanesoh dear 🙄
It's crazy that airlines still want anything from Boeing after everything that's been going on.
Sadly, I'm positive that 777X will have issues even after it's been "certified" and in use.
they have no option left, there are only two, airbus n Boeing, in production of this kind of airplane.Making an aeroplane is not easy . so whatever its taking time , good for human kind.
ANd might never hold a candle to the reputation of the older B777-300 ER
Boeing aircraft have carried more passengers than any other manufacturer in complete safety...
They need a replacement for their aging 777 fleet.
Resting on and bragging about past laurels is never a good sign.
So does this thing that Boeing thinks they've found a solution to the thrust link issue?
OF COURSE YOU DAILY MAIL JOURNALIST!!!
Haven't seen any news about the thrust link and how it got fixed.
Tightened exchange schedule increasing maintenance costs? A design fix within half a year on the most stressed structural components? Sounds unlikely.
You are 2 optimistic 😂😂😂
The gta 6 of airplanes 😂
Have the thrust links been redesigned, or have they got away with replacing them more often? I guess we will find out in due time..........
they have been replaced with better ones I think. FAA/Boeing have agreed to say what caused them to fail but have been silent on this. So I guess they are improved ones
@@nickolliver3021
Well, I give you credit for being the first to introduce this news (of which I was aware), under the comments of a previous video, and am sure more info will eke out over time.......
@artrandy tbh it should have been out there by now but we shall see if they do eke out the information that we don't know.
As a European Airbus fan, biased, WE NEED Boeing to return but clearly NOT under the current Board or Management. Despite a token CEO change it appears that Boeing have not understood the enormity of Leadership change needed. Q. Should ALL of Boeing Commercial Aircraft division be taken away and split into 1) 737/737 Max and 2) 777, 787 and each? FAA have made it clear they are NOT PLEASED with the slow progress Boeing is achieving in its QC then should these Aircraft be taken over by another US Aircraft manufacturer thus allowing production to increase and creating competition to Airbus?
There's no need for Boeing. Embraer or Bombardier are capable of replacing them if really necessary. Unlikely, but not impossible.
@@jantjarks7946 yes there is a need for Beoing
@@jantjarks7946Neither of them have experience with widebody's and Embraer doesn't (to the best of my knowledge) have any experience with Max/Neo class narrows as well. It would be a long, painful process. I welcome competition in the space as it brings a ton of innovation (just think back when Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, etc all competed against each other) but Boeing going under now would be an extremely painful thing
EDIT: Also Airbus shouldn't be sleeping on their laurels. For how much we point the finger at boing for not releasing a 797, Airbus hasn't released a cleansheet either since the A350. The A220 doesn't count, and the A320/330 Neo are a direct match for the Max and 777X. Everybody's sleeping at the yoke/sidestick right now
For them it's not about a wide body, at least not at first. But a bread and butter plane.
Both designed planes close to the 737 and 320. But due to competitive reasons, not technical reasons. Especially Embraer are more than capable of creating a larger plane design, as the transport plane already showed.
The issue both face will be financial, for Bombardier however it would require a lot of engineers too, as Embraer has them due to the transport plane they made.
Once one of them would have such a design in the market, a widebody would become an option. But certainly not before as even more finances have to be secured then. As said, unlikely, but not impossible.
Come on Boeing how many jets are flying with thrust links that are not cracking and you can't design one the won't crack
That's what happens when companies are run by accountants and not by engineers
777 views. Let me break that
Nice B777x with cracks 😂😂😂. RIP.
like airbus cracks!
GTA 6 has a higher chance of arriving compared to B777x
LETS GO!!!!!!!!!
Finally, boeing gets back on their feet, well, i hope it does 😓
@@Plab1402 they will
@thetruthbehindplanes let's just see, last year was a disaster for them
No worries, after another half a year delay the FAA certainly will check the plane thoroughly during certification.
They can't afford to look like best buddies right now, as such it's quite likely that another issue will be found, which is a good thing, especially with Boeing.
Ortberg seems to be the right person to get them back on track. But the question is how many setbacks he will have to deal with. After all it is a plethora of issues that we had witnessed with Boeing.
How many issues are still hidden somewhere, even from Ortberg?
I wouldn't write the aircraft off as a failure just yet, as some do. People are still in the pandemic mindset, the fact that it's the largest aircraft on the market doesn't hurt it, it's the main selling point. It's the most straightforward replacement to the 777 (most successful widebody airliner ever), the 747 and the A380. And by the way, it already has significantly more orders then the A330 Neo (515 vs. 374). The only year where they lost orders in total was 2019. If they can just deliver on the expectation, I think it will be a mild success.
Just a A330neo comparison? 🤔
If it is Boeing I ain't going!
by the time this comes out i will be flying a 777
Stunning looking aircraft, the sheer size and power of those engines must be an engineering nightmare to control.
Boeing 777X running on Elon Time
I’m tired of Boeing’s woes!
so are everyone else
At this point we’ll be walking on Mars before passengers fly on this 35 year old heap of junk
It never said what was the cause of the issue…perhaps the engines are too powerful…??
They hold the record, but operationally they’re rated less than the GE90-115’s on the -300ER and -200LR
That's a good question, but basically, the more stress the thrust links have to endure, the stronger they are built. As such, technically it's not impossible to design something reasonable.
The real question is how Boeing fixed the flawed design now and which implications will it have?
Are the thrust links simply exchanged more frequently? Increasing maintenance costs.
Have they been made stronger, without a design change necessary? (optimal solution)
Have they strengthened the connections, but increasing the weight of the thrust links and / or the connectors to the wings and engines?
Did they have to change the wing structure, possibly increasing weight?
We don't know any of it and will have to see what Boeing might publish. But that too leads to the question how far the design of the X has been changed and in fact been compromised?
@@jantjarks7946 Look they agreed to state why but have not published to the public why they failed. Kept hush or they just got on and fixed the problem
Be interesting for a pilot to see an engine overtake mid flight 😅
Yeah, don't need another 191....
Looking forward to seeing EK’s new 779s at my home arpt DFW.
Hell, at this point, I just wanna see a 779 in airline livery 🎉
Unfortunately if the 777X comes to MSFS it will only be for MSFS 2024.
very elitist, but very real problem!
Bring it on. I was very disappointed with A350 after all the spin. I found that competent but far from excellent. Whilst I remain committed to wanting a new design 747 twin combining the environmental, financial and passenger benefits with pax and freight loads suitable for resurgent hub and spoke as well as beautiful design and leveraging the emotional tie many frequent flyers still have for the queen of the skies. The new 777’s will be a good interim solution until the 747X can be developed.
My man I love me some 747 but a twin 747 would not be the same, just like the overture - if it ever came to fruition - wouldn't be the same as the Concorde. Excited for both prospects though, at least one of them is not completely outside the realm of possibility
BOEING IS BEST
After Airbus they might be, but then again, there are Bombardier and Embraer to consider.
Airbus
Embraer
Bombardier
Dassault
Gulfstream
Boeing
Cessna
A not complete ranking, just my opinion.
All the way. As a frequent long haul flyer the 777-300er is my #1 choice. On long haul Boeing still delivers. Airbus do well in the narrow body market.
@ airbus fan
@ You put Cessna at the bottom???
you are at flight level -11000
AIRBUS STILL HAS NOT FIXED THEIR SIDESTICKS YET!
And the prize for the most irrelevant comment in the thread goes to ... wait for it ... drum roll please ... thetruthbehindplanes
Not first not second 😂
Just sad
@911HRW who cares
I will never fly in a 777x. I'd rather walk.
then dont fly
GET THIS VID TO 777 777 LIKES!!!
first
Sad
Second