NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 4340 posts, RR: 48 Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 25875 times:
Breaking news. There was structural damage caused to the 4th flying 787 (LN 4) when an Alenia employee improperly installed the wrong fasteners in one of the 787 sections. All indications are that this was a bad mistake but Boeing is keeping the section in Charleston. It has been repaired but I suspect they're trying to see if there are any structural integrity issues.
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2020 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25691 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter): There was structural damage caused to the 4th flying 787 (LN 4) when an Alenia employee improperly installed the wrong fasteners in one of the 787 sections.
So is there a proper way to install the wrong fasteners?
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 4340 posts, RR: 48 Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25612 times:
Quoting Keesje (Reply 4): I think I noticed this before on aircraft #1, comparing close up fragments photos taken on 07-8-07 and during the media tour in May.
It seem to be red taped bigger holes where equally sized temporary fasteners were used. I discussed it at Tech-Ops
Ok before Keesje spreads some disinformation...there is no structural issues with LN 1. That airplane is fine structurally. In fact Keesje's picture is not even of section 44 where the issue with LN 4 is but of the rear of the airplane section 47/48.
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2020 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25571 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6): Ok before Keesje spreads some disinformation...
My understanding is the subject fasteners used on LN #1 were used intentionally to make the rollout as opposed to the unintentionally installed fasteners in #4.
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 4340 posts, RR: 48 Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25511 times:
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 7): My understanding is the subject fasteners used on LN #1 were used intentionally to make the rollout as opposed to the unintentionally installed fasteners in #4.
That's correct. Later on those non flight worthy fasteners were removed and the flightworthy fastners were installed.
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 6316 posts, RR: 58 Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25495 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter): There was structural damage caused to the 4th flying 787 (LN 4) when an Alenia employee improperly installed the wrong fasteners in one of the 787 sections. All indications are that this was a bad mistake but Boeing is keeping the section in Charleston. It has been repaired but I suspect they're trying to see if there are any structural integrity issues.
In order to actually scrap a section that would have to be the mother of all wrong fastner choices...like sticking 3" Hilti anchor in a 0.125" Hi-Lok hole. Unless this is really spectacular, an oversize fastener repair seems like the way to go...maybe a doubler if too much net section loss.
Keesje From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10189 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25478 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6): Ok before Keesje spreads some disinformation...there is no structural issues with LN 1. That airplane is fine structurally. In fact Keesje's picture is not even of section 44 where the issue with LN 4 is but of the rear of the airplane section 47/48.
Not need to get so defensive. I just mentioned it as prove it was not the first time incorrect fasteners were installed improperly, as you assumed.
Osiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3134 posts, RR: 26 Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25306 times:
Quoting IAD787 (Reply 2): Boeing can't swap in the center fuselage from LN5. Each aircraft is tailored with unique flight test equipment for their role. LN4 stays with LN4.
Fair enough. I hadn't realized any of the meaningful bits would have been in it already.
Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 9): In order to actually scrap a section that would have to be the mother of all wrong fastner choices...like sticking 3" Hilti anchor in a 0.125" Hi-Lok hole. Unless this is really spectacular, an oversize fastener repair seems like the way to go...maybe a doubler if too much net section loss.
Doesn't sound like it should be too major a fix unless someone REALLY cocked it up.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
Revelation From United States of America, joined exactly 5 years ago today! , 4457 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 25289 times:
I don't read it the same way:
Quote:
"An Alenia Aeronautica employee had an issue not following proper procedures, we've had a production issue that has resulted," said Boeing. "The repair has been completed and the issue has been resolved."
Boeing is currently assessing the schedule situation adding that, "we will know soon" when the center fuselage will be delivered.
So what's with the "indefinite delay"?
The damage has been repaired, but the repairs have put back the normal work that needs to be done to the section. Since the amount of time that takes should be bounded these days, I don't see an indefinite delay, just an unevaluated delay.
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3613 posts, RR: 30 Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 25010 times:
I find it interesting that so much detail is making its way into the media with regards to the 787. It must be the most closely scrutinized and publicly accessible aircraft model ever put into production.
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 4340 posts, RR: 48 Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 25009 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 13): The damage has been repaired, but the repairs have put back the normal work that needs to be done to the section. Since the amount of time that takes should be bounded these days, I don't see an indefinite delay, just an unevaluated delay.
My guess is they eant to make sure that the structural integrity of the section is not compromised and that the repairs have done the jobs.
Revelation From United States of America, joined exactly 5 years ago today! , 4457 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 24859 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 15): My guess is they eant to make sure that the structural integrity of the section is not compromised and that the repairs have done the jobs.
I suppose, but IMHO if they are saying "the issue has been resolved" then the issue has been resolved, period. As an engineer, I would never say an issue was resolved till the proper testing has been successfully completed.
Also,
Quote: Boeing added that Global Aeronautica would have met the commitment of the completion of assembly and on-time delivery had the incident not taken place. As a result, the center fuselage is being held in Charleston for continuing assembly work to meet the level of completion originally committed to Boeing by Global Aeronautica.
So, I think the repair is good, and now they're doing all the stuff they would have been doing if the damage had not happened.
I can only imagine the phone calls flying around between the parties involved! It must be embarassing for Alenia to have the wrong fasteners being used AND it not be detected by quality assurance!
No disrespect intended but any delay without a recognisable time frame for resolution is, by definition, an indefinite delay (i.e. by their own words of "we will know soon" it is as yet undetermined) irrespective of what way you spin it by using fancy words such as "unevaluated".
Quoting Revelation (Reply 16): I suppose, but IMHO if they are saying "the issue has been resolved" then the issue has been resolved, period. As an engineer, I would never say an issue was resolved till the proper testing has been successfully completed.
In which case, if "the issue has been resolved" how can the delay equally be "unevaluated"?
If it's resolved, then surely it's consequences (any delay caused by it) must then be already evaluated, and thus known.
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 6594 posts, RR: 87 Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 23330 times:
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 14): I find it interesting that so much detail is making its way into the media with regards to the 787. It must be the most closely scrutinized and publicly accessible aircraft model ever put into production.
The A380 pretty much got the same level of attention after it was delayed. Of course Flightblogger wasn't in on the case back then like he is today.....
Blrsea From India, joined May 2005, 969 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 23099 times:
Is this barrel a write-off? If during production, one of the barrels runs into this kind of problems, will Boeing have to write off that barrel? wouldn't that be pretty costly?
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 18610 posts, RR: 59 Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 22932 times:
It's fixed, and they are just trying to see how many days behind this puts the delivery as they catch up with what they should have been doing instead of fixing the problem.
Don't take Keesje's alarmism too seriously...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 9015 posts, RR: 51 Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 22283 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 14): I find it interesting that so much detail is making its way into the media with regards to the 787. It must be the most closely scrutinized and publicly accessible aircraft model ever put into production.
As Astuteman says, the A380 was pretty much at the same level of scrutiny after the first delay was announced.
Boeing's current "openness" on the 787 is very good, but it's in stark contrast to their approach earlier in the program.
Slz396 From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 2522 posts, RR: 21 Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 21769 times:
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 5): So is there a proper way to install the wrong fasteners?
Actually , Boeing demonstrated there is indeed.
I wonder if they had test runs pulling LN1 out of the hangar to make sure it didn't break in two during the official roll-out scam?
Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 7): My understanding is the subject fasteners used on LN #1 were used intentionally to make the rollout as opposed to the unintentionally installed fasteners in #4.
ROTFL...
25 Keesje: No I don't think so. If the temporary fasteners would have been installed properly they could have been removed properly without damaging the surroun
26 Parapente: This thread puts into perspective recent threads about "should Boeing build a 77W-plus or -a 777 replacement,or a BWB, or a 787-10,11,12. No they have
27 Dragon6172: Does anyone know what this fella is talking about? How you are comparing two photos of two different resolutions accurately is beyond me. Red tape see
28 Revelation: By my reading, what remains unevaluated is the knock-on effects caused by the successful repair. I agree I am mincing words, but IMHO the thread titl
29 Legoguy: I feel the thread title is slightly misleading as there is only a small delay to 787 #4. Thankfully it should have no impact on first flight of #1. I
30 Keesje: Don't take it personally Dragon6172. Don't you see the holes are even bigger the the fastener heads? It indicates that the orginally fasterners or th
31 JAL: It shouldn't affect the entire 787 program.
32 AirNZ: Yes, again I would agree somewhat in that it could be a little clearer, and more defined.
33 NWAJettjockie: Tom, I didn't literally mean EVERYTHING. But didn't Boeing decide to go to alot more outside vendors this time than they have in the past?
34 Dragon6172: Sorry but with the poor quality of the photo I find it hard to say definitively that any of those fastener holes have been damaged. If you have a pic
35 Nomadd22: I don't think Boeing is worried about one barrel being repaired as much as the fact that an assembly worker would have that kind of attitude in the fi
36 NA: When I raised doubt wether the 787 might be harder to repair due to its new material, and that there is some concern among airlines because of it, I g
37 JBirdAV8r: You're assuming it will take a few weeks to "fix the problem"--i.e. it'll take a long amount of time just to execute repairs. I'd assume that, especi
38 NYC777: Whoa, where was it ever said it was a major problem. Boeing repaired the damage and are just evaluating before sending the section to Everett. You're
39 Revelation: It's not clear to me that it's an issue of worker attitude. The worker could have been issued the wrong part and just soldiered on, forcing the wrong
40 NYC777: Just to clarify, the improper work took place in South Carolina and was discovered in South Carolina. The improper work didn't take place in Italy. T
41 Revelation: Thanks for the clarification. I read "Alenia" and assumed (incorrectly) that it was done in Italy, not SC. I am glad the improper work did not leave
42 Pygmalion: Keesje, look at your photos... there was no hole damage, no scarf repairs... a scarf repair would have removed the paint around the holes.... no pain
43 Scbriml: This is the plant affected when Boeing announced they were buying Vought's 50% of Global Aeronautica, has that deal been completed yet?
45 Eatmybologna: Interesting Pygmalion. I'm curious, are the head of the bolts socketed with a hex or other shape to accept a drive wrench? If not how are they drawn
46 Ikramerica: Objection, assumes facts not in evidence… Seriously, where do you come up with this? Had the various composite parts used in the A380 been attached
47 Eatmybologna: I'm curious how they fixed this. Considering the nominal sized holes were splintered, probably with small cracks that could propagate further, wouldn'
48 Ikramerica: Again, that's just an assumption. We don't know what the damage was, only that a too large bolt was used. If it was very marginally too large, you ma
49 Pygmalion: These are standard aviation style fasteners. Hex drive socket is on the thread end, so you hold and torque from the thread end. Common name is hilok.
50 Osiris30: That would seem likely.. I mean we don't even know how many bolts we're talking about here.. it could be 10 bolts and then everyone just went 'whoa'.
51 Scbriml: The article says "When installed, each fastener "splintered out the hole" causing significant enough damage to postpone delivery of the center fusela
52 NYC777: Ok just out on Bloomberg. Alenia said that a temporary worker put the wrong fasteners in 11 holes in the midbody fuselage which damaged a 30 cm area.
53 Ikramerica: That's harsh for a mistake, unless the worker knowingly did something wrong or had other problems at the company. Yes, but that doesn't mean that "cr
54 Revelation: The Seattle-area unions will have a field day with this.... Kelly Girls leave Dreamliner in Splinters - I can see the headlines now!
55 NYC777: Well the worker may have been a new hire who was hired on a probabtionary basis (i.e. let's see how you do in 6 months then we'll hire you). I think
56 RedFlyer: Respectfully, I disagree. The "mistake" fell within his/her basic job function. If he/she couldn't follow procedures for performing their core functi
57 Atmx2000: Well, before they jump on it, they should remember their legacy of intentional sabotage of aircraft, including rather recent episodes.
58 Scbriml: Has anyone claimed it did? Without a photo, it would be impossible to make even a half-educated guess as to the consequences. Spot on. If I'd trained
59 814NAS: More of the Bloomberg story at this link... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...20601103&sid=ayZxfypUSuVc&refer=us
60 NYC777: Jon Ostrower got a message from ALenia. HEre is what they said: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...lenia-north-america-statement.html
61 Stitch: So looks like the person wasn't some new-hire off the street. And always being the , Boeing is getting plenty of experience patching CFRP structures.
62 Luv2cattlecall: Sometimes you have to fire an employee that made a high profile mistake in order to make it known that such incidents will not be taken lightly, and
63 Tdscanuck: Yes, there is a lot more outsourcing on the 787 than before. But it's the degree, not the fact of outsourcing, that's new. That's all I was getting a
64 Pygmalion: yep, "cracks" in CFRP don't propagate or grow. The material may tear but one of the nice things about CFRP is that cracks don't grow. That is why the
65 474218: If cracks don't propagate or grow in CFRP then any cracking found during the life of the airframe had to have been there since build. So if Boeing do
66 MedAv: The thing that struck me was that the worker was a contractor to Alenia, who itself is sorta contracted to Boeing. It's like no one works for a compan
67 Babybus: This is terrible news. Any profits that could have been made are being swallowed up in delay payments.
68 Keesje: Thats what I thaught. Saying composites inspections and repair on the 787 will be easy and allready a daily routine is not how the operators feel abo
69 Art: From Bloomberg: "The worker put wrong fasteners into 11 holes in the midbody fuselage of the fourth of six flight-test planes, damaging a 30- centimet
70 Bringiton: Do you know the exact nature of Delay payments in $$ Also do you know how much profits in $ boeing may have made in selling these 900+ Dreamliners.
71 Nomadd22: Nobody claims the stuff is indestructible. Cracks can still be caused by bad maintenance, impacts, hard landings or anything else that can also damag
72 Revelation: It's not like every aircraft is becoming 100% CFRP overnight. Even 10 years from now, aluminum aircraft will far outnumber CFRP ones. There will stil
73 Stitch: They evidently feel the 787 and A350 are worth it.
74 474218: Cracks in metal structure don't grow on there own either. There has to be some force that causes them to grow: such as pressurization of the fuselage
75 Stitch: For those who have insinuated that the FAA might give Boeing lee-way or a "free pass" on the 787 certification front... Boeing 787 supplier halts work
76 Scbriml: I appreciate Boeing's buy-out here was only recently completed, but given their now significant involvement at the plant, this is a little surprising
77 NYC777: At least they're being proactive but I'm sure that during this standdown, managers will not only talk about FOD but also take some time and go over p
78 RedFlyer: It's also worth emphasizing that the training shutdown is unrelated to the event that is the subject of this thread.
79 474218: This is fairly standard for the FAA, rather than hitting the company with a fine, requiring all employees attend a training class does the same thing
80 Revelation: It's about complying with both the letter and the spirit of the law.
81 NYC777: Looks like the LCFs are on the move again: http://nyc787.blogspot.com/2008/07/l...ove-possible-delivery-flights.html
82 Stitch: Yes, but I felt it wasn't worth opening a new thread just about it since we had an ongoing discussion about training and production at supplier plant
83 RedFlyer: Stitch, my comment was not meant to imply your post didn't belong here. I just wanted to clarify the reason for the shut-down so that people (in part
84 Tdscanuck: CFRP does crack, and the cracks can grow, but the mode is very very different than the growth of fatigue cracks in metal, which is why CFRP (and most
85 RedFlyer: I'm sure glad the airlines didn't listen to that argument at the dawn of the jet-age when they had to switch from pistons and high-octane to turbines
86 Astuteman: Soon to be "slightly" longer... Rgds
87 Revelation: I buy this, but why the "indefinite delay" complete with press releases from Boeing and Alenia, and (some seem to think) negative impact on stock pri
89 Beaucaire: Above a certain size of the dammage i'd suspect the scredder... In an A350 incident of the same magnitude than the one on the picture ,you change the
90 Stitch: They must have one, since I cannot believe that all those airlines assume such damage will never happen to their 787s. I'd hazard a guess that Boeing
91 Rheinwaldner: That means that the replacement parts can only be fabricated by Boeing. I can only imagine that it also requires tooling like an Inside-Lay-Mandrel t
92 NorCal: Changing one of the panels on an A350 is no simple task since those panels are enormous. Airbus will probably have a very similar, if not the exact s
93 Stitch: Boeing doesn't fabricate the parts to build the plane, so they would not do so for replacements, either. Toray provides the CFRP used by Boeing's sup
94 Rheinwaldner: IMHO the fuselage shell always gets the strength to support mechanic and dynamic loads during normal flight operation. These loads are equal for both
95 NorCal: I agree, I think we'll find that like the old 707s, 727s, and DC-9s the 787 will be a "tank." Later generation of CFRP aircraft will be lighter as we
96 Pygmalion: that MD skin panel is not just a sheet of 2024-T3 that can be shop made. Those panels are chem milled with tear straps and padups at the stringer line
97 PITIngres: I don't believe this is a valid conclusion. Flight loads and impact loads (from ramp rash) are very different things. Just because both Al and CFRP s
98 Alessandro: How many bolts are into the fuselage of the B787? Could this has led to decompression?
99 Stitch: Shedloads, based on the pictures. An individual bolt? No, as they're far too small to allow any appreciable atmosphere leakage through the hole.
100 Scbriml: Indeed. I don't have an official conversion table for "shedloads", but I think it's a lot! While less than a conventional Aluminium design, this pict
101 Brendows: Then again, the nose isn't really the most representable section to show a picture of, since it's probably the part of the fuselage with the highest
102 474218: By bolts can I assume you mean fasteners (rivets, hi-tigues, hi-locks, bolts, screws, etc.) the 747 has between 3 and 4 million. So taking in to cons
103 Ikramerica: Ah, the joys of train travel. Seriously, there are so many people on this thread just looking for a smoking gun, it's laughable. Dudes, it was a mist
104 JoeCanuck: One big difference is that those fasteners aren't there to hold pieces of skin together. They mostly connect all those things you see on the inside,
105 Brendows: Boeing claimed early on that they could reduce the number of fasteners in a barrel section compared to a normal aluminum structure by up to 80%, so t
106 Pygmalion: 3-4 million in a 747 is too high unless they are counting all the non-structural ones in the interior, floor panels, wire clamps etc. but consider the
108 474218: Can you name one aircraft that uses fasteners to hold "pieces of the skin" together. All the skins I have seen were are either a single thickness or
109 Nomadd22: Uh....All of them? Last I saw not too many aircraft had the skin made in one piece.
110 Ikramerica: I think you two are not talking about the same thing.
111 474218: I don't think so either. I know what I am talking about. Aircraft skins are either a solid sheet (one layer of material) or bonded sheets (more the o
112 Nomadd22: I kinda doubt anybody else had any trouble understanding what JoeCanuck was talking about. I was wondering if the 787 might have some fasteners throug
113 Keesje: Regarding the inspection, maintenance procedures, repair, training etc of (serious) composites fuselage repairs I sense a kind of staunch denial not u
114 Pygmalion: Keesje, I wish I knew what you were actually trying to say here... it makes no sense. Did you just find a FAA file with the words composite in it and
115 Zeke: I am not sure exactly where the damage is, but with composites it is sometimes better to remove and replace the damaged part than repair it, this is
116 Nomadd22: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/332205_air19.html This is what I dug up from an old PI article, which everybody knows is always 100% accurate.
117 Pygmalion: Removal and replacement is often done not in lieu of repair... but to allow the part to be repaired on a bench. Flaps are hundreds of thousands of do
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 4340 posts, 
From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3134 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10189 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 6316 posts, 
, 4457 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3321 posts, 
From India, joined May 2005, 969 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 2522 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
