So Sah Ree.
Also in aviation news, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner caught fire while parked at London's Heathrow Airport yesterday. As you can see from this photo, the fire burned through the composite skin of the fuselage. This follows a recent 3-month grounding of 787's due to problems with their lithium-ion batteries which caused several on-board fires. Something isn't right here, folks.
Methinks Boeing just might have gone a little too far, a little too fast with this revolutionary (not evolutionary) new aircraft. To save weight they used light/strong composites instead of aluminum, fully electric controls instead of hydraulics, etc. This all looks good on paper, but apparently still has some kinks in it.
If they don't get it right and lose one in flight with major loss of life, the flying public might lose confidence in the type and refuse to fly it. Check out the history of the deHavilland Comet back in the 1950's and the Lockheed Electra in the 1960's. A series of crashes doomed both aircraft.
And if Boeing starts losing major orders for 787's* their financial viability as a company will be on the line. They've pinned their long-term future on this aircraft. While 737's and 777's are their bread and butter, the Dreamliner was to be their meat and potatoes for decades to come.
Boeing had better be very careful here.
*Twin-engined aircraft are given an ETOPS (Extended-Range Twin-Engine Operations) certification based among other things on their reliability. The more reliable they are, the more of a straight line they can fly away from land over long water or polar routes.
If a plane's ETOPS certification is limited they have to fly closer to coastlines (and divert airports), making for a longer flight that uses more fuel. If the 787 is "restricted" for questionable reliability, airlines will be dropping out by the drove as it's fuel efficiency is it's reason for being. The FAA is looking at this issue right now.