Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3458 times:
The Boeing Co. has revealed new details about required maintenance -- or the lack of it -- for its 787 Dreamliner.
The company is so sure that the composite structure, including the fuselage, of the plane formerly known as the 7E7 will require far less maintenance than anything flying today that Boeing has made maintenance "guarantees" to customers, said Justin Hale, deputy chief mechanic for the 787.
He also said that Boeing has worked with its airline customers to beef up areas around the cargo and passengers doors of the 787, where most "ramp rash" occurs. It is fairly common for jets to be dented and damaged on and around doors when they are hit by ground carts and bridges.
Boeing could take a substantial amount of additional weight out of the 787, Hale said, but airlines wanted those areas reinforced. The savings from less maintenance to repair ramp damage will far outweigh the higher costs of operating a slightly heavier 787, he said.
For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines. Reinforcements in critical areas (as I suggested 1/2 year ago & was bashed for) and now maintenance (cost) guarantees. Now they launch it as a selling point. Smart marketing IMO.
Expect some critical info / assumptions / pre conditions in the Airbus/Boeing information to be missing, this is sales talk after all...
Milan320 From Poland, joined Jan 2005, 866 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3318 times:
Thanks for that info Keesje. Not really surprising though. I seem to recall when the 787 was announced, maintenance was one of the concerns amongst the airlines - given the amount of composites the plane was going to have and it seems this concernt hasn't changed much.
But it seems like perhaps Boeing is taking a page from Airbus when it comes to support - and are improving their customer support and marketing.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3235 times:
Quoting Keesje (reply 0): Expect some critical info / assumptions / pre conditions in the Airbus/Boeing information to be missing, this is sales talk after all...
One assumption Boeing slants is the number of additional cycles the 787 will be capable of (versus the A332) due to less scheduled maintenance. Boeing's prediction of 180 additional revenue flights over 12 years is dependent on 3-hour segments, which IMO, few 787 will find themselves on.
Quoting Keesje (reply 0): For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines.
IMO, it's also a confrimation of Boeing's confidence in the technology, not just composites but the bleedless systems and open architechture. At this point, I suspect Boeing view the composite fuselage to be a non-issue and now they are going on the offensive to tout their advantage.
The composite fuselage concept well predates the 7E7 concept, including full-scale examples of widebody cabins in 2002. IMO this is old news:
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 39 Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3193 times:
Quoting Keesje (reply 0): For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines. Reinforcements in critical areas (as I suggested 1/2 year ago & was bashed for) and now maintenance (cost) guarantees. Now they launch it as a selling point. Smart marketing IMO.
Wait a minute. Boeing is guaranteeing a improvement in maintainability in comparison to older aircraft which would lead to reduced maintenance costs.
You don't offer guarantees unless you expect you won't have a signficant liability.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5150 posts, RR: 49 Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3108 times:
The reinforcement came at the request of the airlines, not because Boeing felt that those areas were especially vulnerable to more damage compared to metal airplanes.
MxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 40 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2904 times:
What this shows me is that Boeing is finally starting to listen to their customers again (something they had stopped doing in the past few years) with regards to aircraft design. I see it as a good thing for Boeing and its airline partners.
MxCtrlr
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.
DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2884 times:
Quoting MxCtrlr (reply 5): What this shows me is that Boeing is finally starting to listen to their customers again (something they had stopped doing in the past few years) with regards to aircraft design.
Oh bull, more airlines were consulted for the Working Together group than any previous aircraft. The "Boeing lost touch with the world" mantra is being so exaggerated...
Airgeek12 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2869 times:
Nice. That should make the 787 appaeal a greater deal to more airlines. I think the goals and 'features' mentioned in here are the kind-of thing wanted with the 717 a.c.
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 13 Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2863 times:
Here Here DFW,
Any aircraft manufacture will consult airlines when making a new aircraft. They're not making the a/c just for the hell of it! Just b/c a select few airlines didn't get their goals met and have a louder voice than most doesn't mean that the a/c itself is not made for airlines. There are add on's and other accessories to a/c that will help the a/c be molded perfectly to a specific airline but to say they only now they are starting to listen, bull $hit!
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2861 times:
Quoting Keesje (reply 0):
For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines.
How surprising that Keesje would draw such a conclusion. A more reasonable interpretation (or what Keesje would have said had this been an Airbus press statement) is that they are drawing attention to the advantages of this aircraft's new technology.
As Atmx2000 points out, Boeing is not going make guarantees that are going to end up bleeding the company of cash. If anything, Boeing is exuding a bit of confidence in their product.
Nudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 20 Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2742 times:
Quoting Keesje (reply 0): For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines. Reinforcements in critical areas (as I suggested 1/2 year ago & was bashed for) and now maintenance (cost) guarantees. Now they launch it as a selling point. Smart marketing IMO.
Keesje, as you write stuff like if you are on Airbus Marketing payroll, who is surprised by your conclusion?
What is your conclusion on the issues the 380 has? The gear stuff people were talking about?
The 787 is farther away from flying than the 380, so let's just wait until the reveal or the first flight, before you post your weird conclusions here.
The 787 design will be changed a couple of times, this is called "designing a plane", you might have heard of that.
Iwok From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1106 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2723 times:
Quoting Keesje (reply 0): For me this is a confirmation airlines have serious doubts about the maintainability of an all composite aircraft. Boeing is/has taken drastic measurements to convince the airlines. Reinforcements in critical areas (as I suggested 1/2 year ago & was bashed for) and now maintenance (cost) guarantees. Now they launch it as a selling point. Smart marketing IMO.
Interesting, but somewhat questionable conclusion, drawn by Keesje. First of all, looking at performance cars, power boats, sail boats, military jets, armor plating etc, composites and in particular graphite composites are the material of choice. They offer outstanding stiffness/weight and strength/weight ratios, and do not suffer from mechanical fatigue as badly as do metals. Additionally, they are not susceptable to corrosion. Boeing has just figured out how the make the composite plane in a cost effective manner. In the future all planes will be made primarily of composites, the 787 is just the first out of the gate.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10661 posts, RR: 100 Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2655 times:
Boeing does seem confident... but maint. guarantees have been common with sub-contracted components for a long time on both Boeing and Airbus aircraft. (Engines are a big example, pardon the pun.) So its past time for it to go to the full airframe. This form of guarantee is probabably required before airlines will reduce the mx cost in their models (and thus make the 787 more attractive to potential buyers before entry into service).
Funny how on the picture, next to the 787 bar, a footnote exists stating that it is 'targeted'. Can't guarantee.
Acutally, its typical that early aircraft are pulled at the airframer's expense for verification of the maint. models. It usually takes a few aircraft making it to a "heavy check" milestone before that milestone becomes standard (aerospace engineering is big into "stage gating"). So stating this as a "target" wouldn't surprise anyone familiar with standard entry into service of a new airframe.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2629 times:
I'm not so sure it is a good idea to make this type of claim. I'm not so sure how it would affect maintenance, would those that work on 787 get lazy because they won't have to do much or have carriers simply hire less crew?
Quoting DfwRevolution (reply 6): The "Boeing lost touch with the world" mantra is being so exaggerated...
There was this plane a while back being the origin of 787; ever hear of the Sonic Cruiser...?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
PlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 739 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2526 times:
Fewer maintenance checks, a response to B's confidence and airline caution.
Still to be answered, is precisely what is included in the scheduled maintenance in terms of additional/new tests and test equipment, if any, and projected man hours.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2507 times:
Still to be answered, is precisely what is included in the scheduled maintenance in terms of additional/new tests and test equipment, if any, and projected man hours.
IMO Planesmart hits the nail here. Add skills / training & certification.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Poland, joined Jan 2005, 866 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1106 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 2103 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 739 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
