What would be the fatality / injury rate if the Heathrow crash landing had happened with a 787 ?

Question

Do you recon the "Plastic fantastic" "Dreamliner" ???? will stay mainly intact & will not put many more passengers towards permanent dreaming if similar incident were to happen with that aircraft ?

Answer 1

I am sick of people dissing the 787 before anybody rides on it.  The 787 is made from carbon fiber composites, not plastic. Its much more durable, lighter, and stronger then aluminum. It would be the same effect as the triple 7.

Answer 2

In order to be certificated as airworthy, aircraft need to pass stringent testing and crash analysis standards.  If it had been a 787 rather than a 777, the rate of injury would probably have been about the same.  A few serious injuries, a few more minor injuries, and no fatalities

And its not made of plastic, its being constructed of high-density carbon fiber composites which are actually quite strong.  Stronger than aluminum in fact.  The injuries that happened were not the result of the airplane falling apart, but rather the result of what happens to you if you hit the ground at 150 knots.  Keeping the airplane together wont change the impact forces felt inside it.

Answer 3

All airliners have to undergo rigorous structural integrity tests before being certified. If the B787 is commercially flying, then it would have the same or better survivability as the B777 that crashed. Certification standards dont go down.

Dont get the term "plastic" misguide anyone. The B787 is a composite aircraft and some composites are several times stronger than steel (let alone aluminium). Plastic Fantastic maybe be sarcastic, but then it not the plastic as in a cheap breakable toy.

Its easy to be sarcastic with these wordplays, you can ask what good can fabrics be? Ask that again when the fiber is Kevlar and you are in a hostile environment.

Answer 4

landing short of the runway was the major factor. The landing gear sunk into the mud and when they hit the face of the concrete it ripped the landing gear off the aircraft.  This will happen to any aircraft no matter how strong you build it . If the concrete was tapered up instead of a flat face , min. damage would of happened.  The thing to look into is why the pilot landed short of the runway. Nothing on that . i wonder why .

Answer 5

the same

Answer 6

it probably would have bounced off the grass and onto the rwy.

Answer 7

The results would have probably been the same,the composites used in the construction of the 787 are pound for pound are structurally stronger than the steel and aluminum used in present day airliners. And besides there are a great deal of composite structures used on the 777.

Answer 8

I guess it would have been a catastrophe.

Answer 9

Since the 787 is lighter than the 777, in all likelihood it would have made the runway, and no crash.

Answer 10

The composites used in the aerospace industry are pretty rugged... people were skeptical about the composite fan blades on the GE90 engine for the extended range versions of the 777, and they have proven to be very reliable.  Mechanical design with composites has come a long way in the last 5 years... I don't think it would have been too much worse with a dreamliner... maybe worse disintegration of the underbelly.  I suppose someday we'll find out unfortunately.... although not until at least 2009 with the recently announced delays.