Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 2  
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9118 posts, RR: 76
Posted (5 years 6 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 33898 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Part 1 is close to 300 posts now.

Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight (by Pilot21 Jun 23 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Please continue here and stay on topic and within the rules.

Thanks.


It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
284 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 33917 times:

Re-posted from part 1:

When you are under as much public scrutiny as Boeing is with the 787 project, it is standard practice to announce a problem and in the same sentence announce the solution. I wonder why hasn't this happened in this case. If Boeing noticed the problem in the static tests in April, how come that two months later, when they finally had to announce the problem (because they can't meet the July 1st milestone), they weren't yet ready to announce the exact solution, with implementation plan, schedule, etc.? I think it's weird, and, as we see, it leads to wild speculation, which goes against Boeing's interests.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31417 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 33894 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing didn't announce a solution because they as of yet do not have one.

They announced they had a problem because they had previously announced the plane would fly by next Tuesday and now it will not. If they had not stated why it would not be flying per plan, then that would have just fueled rampant speculation as to why.


User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33758 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Boeing didn't announce a solution because they as of yet do not have one.

But that's exactly what I find weird: that after two months they still haven't come up with the final solution.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineKL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5300 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33646 times:

Not to start A vs B, but is this helping the sales of A350's and damaging the 787 AND 747-8?
(747-8 damage for unreliability of manufacturer? )

I hope not, i want to see them all fly..


User currently offlineAirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33645 times:

Speculation and rumor is what drives this forum. It's sad, but I guess it's necessary, though I can't see why it has to get so out of control.

As mere enthusiasts, or employees of an airline or aircraft manufacturer, we get pumped over this kind of thing. But unless we work for Boeing, an airline, or are a shareholder, whether they fly ontime or not has absolutely no bearing on our lives. The financial issues only effects the customers of said aircraft, Boeing, and investors. The thing will fly when it's ready and safe to fly. I can live with that, excuse after excuse or not. I don't know why more people can't. Since I worked in the industry for almost a decade, I can understand the delays and issues at hand.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 1):
I think it's weird, and, as we see, it leads to wild speculation, which goes against Boeing's interests.

Everything that has happened since the delays began, up til the day it goes EIS, is against Boeing's interests. And the only reasonable explanation I can see in a forum like this that rumors run rampant is when people "think outside of their paygrade". Keep things in perspective and relax. When the thing rotates and takes flight for the first time, just enjoy the moment, bask in the euphoria, and quit trying to reinvent the wheel. Boeing has already tried that with the 787 anyway. LOL


User currently offlineAirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33621 times:



Quoting KL911 (Reply 4):
(747-8 damage for unreliability of manufacturer? )

I seriously doubt that, since teh 747 line has been in the air how many decades now? The only thing it may hurt is the 7478-8 sales.


User currently offlineAirTran717 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 746 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33592 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 3):
But that's exactly what I find weird: that after two months they still haven't come up with the final solution.

You know, with some things in life, it's no so simple to just say here's my problem and here's my solution. "I'll do THIS... " Sometimes it takes a lot of brainstorming and/or redesign before a problem can be definitively solved.

[Edited 2009-06-24 10:06:00]

User currently offlineKL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5300 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33533 times:



Quoting AirTran717 (Reply 6):
The only thing it may hurt is the 7478-8 sales.

Sorry, that's what I meant....

KL911


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12961 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33494 times:

Am bringing over quotes from #243 in the last thread:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 243):

A few things from ATWonline http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=17018 :

Commercial Airplanes President and CEO Scott Carson said the manufacturer determined Friday that without reinforcing the areas, the 787 would have to be operated in "such a small envelope" that it "wouldn't be worth it" to start a flight test program that would "not [be] particularly useful to prepare the aircraft for certification."

That's a bit of a clearer quote than I had before. Before all I had was one of the bloggers saying "plane is airworthy" or some such.

So in theory it's flyable, but in reality it's not flyable.

They should just say that.

To me it's not that they can't get certification data, they are saying the risks of exceeding this small envelope are high enough that they won't risk flying the plane.

Fine, but just come out and say it: The risks are such that the plane is not flyable.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 243):

"When we were at Paris last week. . .we were of a mind that the aircraft could enter the flight test program," Carson told analysts and reporters yesterday. ... until Friday "we thought we had a solution that would allow us to move to the flight test program."

Looks like someone should be looking for a new job. If I made my bosses look this stupid in public, I know I'd be looking for a new job.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 243):

"We're talking about a relatively small number of parts and a relatively simple modification," Fancher said, ... He noted that "several solutions" are being considered.

Then why the delay of several months? Must not be relatively simple, right Scott?

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 243):

Once developed, the new parts first will have to be put on the static test aircraft and then on the flight test aircraft. Boeing will need to "proceed with additional [ground] testing" with the new parts before first flight,

So:

1. They thought they could still fly as of last Friday (supposedly).
2. They are now looking at several alternatives.
3. That decision, and the subsequent retesting, will take an as-yet undetermined time.
4. The fix is relatively "simple", but won't happen overnight.

So take it how you wish. You can believe that Boeing lied. You can believe that Boeing doesn't have a clue. You can believe that Boeing is hiding larger problems. Or you can believe Boeing. There was a problem, it's going to need a workable solution before flight testing, once they devise a solution they'll have a better idea of a new testing schedule, and we can all grab the Pepto and hope for the best.

I'm going with the "Boeing doesn't have a clue" category.

Seems they knew of the problem in April, they put some people on it, and they didn't get the job done. Now it seems "several solutions" are available, but presumably these same solutions were available months ago too. Hindsight is 20/20, but it's clear they didn't identify the critical nature of this issue and didn't have enough people working on these "several solutions" in parallel in advance and now this single issue is sliding the entire program out 2-3 months, costing the company millions if not billions of dollars.

Of course, this one issue could be being used to mask others as well.

In any case, I would think someone's losing their job over this, if not, they're being reassigned.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineKL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5300 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33391 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 9):
In any case, I would think someone's losing their job over this, if not, they're being reassigned.

If it would happen it would be Carson himself, he's responsible.....And in charge...


User currently offlineChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4164 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 33298 times:



Quoting UALWN (Reply 1):
If Boeing noticed the problem in the static tests in April, how come that two months later, when they finally had to announce the problem

Well, if Boeing is on a calendar fiscal year, April starts a quarter and June ends it. So it is altogether plausible that this was your typical 'Wall Street Delay,' as disingenuous of Boeing as that sounds.


User currently offlineBizFlyer From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 33272 times:

I think, we all should stop to holler about either Boeing or Airbus having either this delay or that delay.

With projects such as the B787 or A380 or A350 or what ever else will come up, it is amazing, that they get these birds flying at all and then even at such a safe level, that almost any of us would dare to sit in them and fly with them.

I wish for all makers (no exceptions!) that they can make the best possible planes and as close as possible to planned schedules. Oh, and as an afterthought: "Good Sales!!!".

Greetings,

BizFlyer



Stay belted as long as you can!
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 33176 times:



Quoting ChrisNH (Reply 11):
Well, if Boeing is on a calendar fiscal year, April starts a quarter and June ends it. So it is altogether plausible that this was your typical 'Wall Street Delay,' as disingenuous of Boeing as that sounds.

I actually think the logic was more like: "We have this problem, we will announce it as soon as we have worked out the solution." But two month later, they still don't have a solution, which I find strange. And they had to announce the problem now because the plane isn't going to be ready for first flight at the end of June, as scheduled.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2304 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 33128 times:



Quoting AirTran717 (Reply 5):
Speculation and rumor is what drives this forum. It's sad, but I guess it's necessary, though I can't see why it has to get so out of control.

As mere enthusiasts, or employees of an airline or aircraft manufacturer, we get pumped over this kind of thing. But unless we work for Boeing, an airline, or are a shareholder, whether they fly ontime or not has absolutely no bearing on our lives.

You have to realize that most of us are airplane enthusiasts. We love to look at airplanes flying, and we love to fly in airplanes. We're tired of looking at assembly line pictures of the 787, and the Boeing promises concerning the plane makes us want to fly in one of them as soon as possible. So, we're just getting a little impatient, but behind this impatience lies a love for the airplanes.

It's just like when you order food in a restaurant and haven't seen even the first course an hour after making the order. You're mad at the waiter and mad at the cook, not because you don't like food but because you love it!!!  Wink



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineKL911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5300 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 33097 times:



Quoting RedChili (Reply 14):
So, we're just getting a little impatient, but behind this impatience lies a love for the airplanes.

ANA is gettin really impatient as well, and not out of love for an airplane...there's the danger....


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12961 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 32862 times:



Quoting UALWN (Reply 13):
I actually think the logic was more like: "We have this problem, we will announce it as soon as we have worked out the solution." But two month later, they still don't have a solution, which I find strange.

But he thought he had a solution:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 9):
"When we were at Paris last week. . .we were of a mind that the aircraft could enter the flight test program," Carson told analysts and reporters yesterday. ... until Friday "we thought we had a solution that would allow us to move to the flight test program."

So either he misunderstood, or it was miscommunicated, or the fix itself was bad.

In either case, shame on all of them for not having worked out Plan B in advance and costing the company tons of money.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 32800 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 16):
In either case, shame on all of them for not having worked out Plan B in advance and costing the company tons of money.

Isn't plan B what they are doing now? Delay first flight?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32673 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 16):
But he thought he had a solution:

Yes, apparently they thought so, but at the end they don't have the final solution. And I find this strange, given Boeing's resources and the relative simplicity of the problem, at least as it has been presented by Boeing.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineCosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32616 times:

Boeing said it takes several weeks to sort things out before making new announcement. Delays can be 3,6 or unknown months. Will a quick 767XWB with Gnx2B make sense to fill the gap if 787 will take a loooooooooooong time to fix?

User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32482 times:



Quoting KL911 (Reply 4):
Not to start A vs B, but is this helping the sales of A350's and damaging the 787 AND 747-8?
(747-8 damage for unreliability of manufacturer? )

The A350 is still years from EIS, and nothing tells us that it will be on time...



אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4857 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32438 times:



Quoting Cosmofly (Reply 19):
Will a quick 767XWB with Gnx2B make sense to fill the gap if 787 will take a loooooooooooong time to fix?

First and foremost it would send a catastrophic signal to their 787 customers.


User currently offlineJambrain From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32416 times:



Quoting AirTran717 (Reply 5):
But unless we work for Boeing, an airline, or are a shareholder, whether they fly ontime or not has absolutely no bearing on our lives. The financial issues only effects the customers of said aircraft, Boeing, and investors.

There are a lot of folks in the extended supply chain for B feeling "sick as a parrot" right now, even down as far as IT consultants who have been committing emotional energy to develop new software that now won't be required for another n weeks / months. This goes far outside the direct workforce. Next time Boeing demands you must bust a gut to deliver to a commitment how how much motivation and or capital (both human and $) will that sub tier throw at the problem?

JamB



Jambrain
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5793 posts, RR: 28
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 32386 times:



Quoting Revelation (Reply 9):
I'm going with the "Boeing doesn't have a clue" category.

I think a great many people would agree. I tend to think that there is truth within what is being said, rather than simply outright lies. I can't say that I agree with how they've handled it along the way, but I'm not sure without the benefit of hindsight of what I personally would have done differently as an outsider looking in.

I do know one thing, and that is that this has become a sad soap opera, and I can only hope that it finds an end one day.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10240 posts, RR: 97
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 21 hours ago) and read 32196 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LY777 (Reply 20):
The A350 is still years from EIS, and nothing tells us that it will be on time...

To be fair, there's nothing that says it won't either, at this time....

Rgds


25 Revelation : That "Plan B" would lead to people getting fired, at least where I work. Remember (see below) they are now saying things that "several solutions" are
26 Post contains links ArabAirX : Just found an interesting tidbit that I think wasnt picked up in the previous thread, but has been picked up by most analyst downgrades on BA today: "
27 Ikramerica : This is a transcribed conference call. I believe that the real statement is "gages" not "gauges" in that the strength of the gage of material (thickn
28 JayinKitsap : From the conference call I believe Boeing indicated that strain gauges in this area had different readings than anticipated. With some of the other i
29 Zeke : Very true, at this stage according to Leeham.net, "Morgan Stanley now predicts entry-into-service in 2011, slipping from March 2010", the same year t
30 Post contains links Tropical : Apologies if this has been posted already as it's difficult to keep track of it all. This article by the Chicago Tribune mentions the dreaded D word (
31 AirNZ : From the interesting article in the link provided above by ArabAirX, can someone help me understand the following? If this has flaw has been known sin
32 Flighty : Or how about this, maybe the executives who run Boeing from Chicago actually have little contact with the people who actually handle aircraft design a
33 Flighty : Let's just say this... it took several attempts to build jet powered aluminum passenger aircraft safely (ahem... Comet I). Lessons were learned and m
34 Post contains links Flood : Jon posted an update to help explain the issue: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...er-look-understanding-th.html#more eta: how accessible is this
35 UALWN : Yes, but how long did it take for Airbus to come up with a definite plan to correct the issue?
36 Scipio : I don't want to nitpick, but the strength was 2% lower than modeled. It broke at 147% of peak load, whereas 150% was targeted. The 3 percentage point
37 A380900 : Agreed. If the plane keeps having problems, it will prove that CFRP was a bad idea. Airbus said so and a lot of people on A.net thought they were wim
38 Gisors : Six months, Feb through September 06.
39 Post contains images Stitch : If your opinion does become true, this would mean the A350XWB is Dead on Arrival.    Of course, for both Boeing's and Airbus' sake, I hope you are
40 A380900 : Why is he using the 145% figure instead of the 147% I had heard about? Wasn't the first flight of the A380 already made? Isn't this comparison a litt
41 Stitch : So the length of the delay to getting ZA001 in the air is related to repairing ZA997, installing the fix and then testing it to be sure it works. So
42 A380900 : True, and that Airbus, against their better judgment, screwed up in being taken in (like so many others) by the Boeing hype is really a disappointmen
43 Post contains links Revelation : No, if it has severe enough problems in service, it'll be a bad idea. So far, most of the problems seem to be related to Boeing's program management,
44 Post contains links Stitch : Per this article in Engineering News dated last month, the A350XWB was expected to be 53% composite material (though not necessarily just CFRP, of co
45 A380900 : How come they hadn't gone through the limit load test before first flight (April 2005) ? Were they reasonably sure of the structure before?
46 A380900 : I stand corrected... So the only difference between the technical choices of Airbus and Boeing is that in one case the fuselage is in 3 cylinder part
47 Racko : I'm by no means an expert, but this problem occuring at 120-130% doesn't sound too good. Slightly off topic, regarding first flights in general: The F
48 Gisors : Yes. Actually the issue arose long after maiden flight, during the certification process. It didn't prevent Airbus however from extensively testing t
49 Cosmofly : In the old days, over design is a given and manufacturers have the luxury to work the wights off gradually after EIS. Nowadays, driven by marketing an
50 A380900 : WTH ? The post has been removed from Ostrower's blog! I have it in print!!! It may have come to close to a death sentence to the project. I mean 120%
51 Flood : Indeed, that's odd. To be fair, it was said to have been between 120-130%.
52 Cosmofly : Hi Jon, can you explain to us why the article is removed?
53 UALWN : September 2006? By the end of June 2006 the modifications were already in place. And they had been announced long before that.
54 Post contains links 757GB : I don't know why but this link is working right now: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...-closer-look-understanding-th.html
55 Flood : Would they possibly subject the fix to ultimate load to avoid further potential surprises down the road?
56 757GB : I agree that would make a lot of people feel better...
57 Post contains links Zeke : Airbus just said it broke between 145-150%, "within 3% of the 1.5 target". The other significant difference is "static test airframe has the first se
58 Post contains links IAD787 : Back up now. Sorry about that guys. Had to make a tweak for accuracy. Reviewed a couple of things and made the timeline more accurate. My 63 day asses
59 IAD787 : Also, one more thing. The 145% number came from another article in Flight that I crossed checked against another one on the wing rupture and I confirm
60 A380900 : What is missing from Ostrower's new post: The text was obviously modified to accomodate Boeing's susceptibilities that may well find roots in their le
61 Ikramerica : Yes, you do want to nitpick. But unfortunately, this isn't first grade math class. This is engineering and certification, which involves factors of s
62 Flood : Jon, your article now suggests the damage didn't originate from the 120-130% load testing done on April 21st, but appeared during a flex test in late
63 MillwallSean : I am still wondering why Boeing have told the airlines that they expect a delay of approximately three months but will return with more info and publi
64 Scipio : Certainly they could, but it would mean significant delays. Undoubtedly there will be some doublechecking of calculations in Toulouse, Hamburg, Filto
65 IAD787 : Yeah, I did change that. I crossed my wires on something and misunderstood the timing from two sources the actual date. It was closer to the late may
66 ArabAirX : Most folk on that investor call will be thinking the same thing - i was quite surprised to hear that being said too.
67 Theredbaron : I guess all the suppliers of this Airplane must be MAD, systems integrators and outside made parts delayed for WHO KNOWS HOW LONG. If I were lets say
68 Post contains links Castillo : Just some food for thought since I see a lot of different posts with different interpretations of the ramifications of “damage”, “rupture”,
69 ScrubbsYWG : so does anyone know what the test was that actually caused the problems? If it wasn't the Limit load test, but a wing flex test, what is the differenc
70 Astuteman : And the A380, of course.... I guess Airbus could always migrate to GLARE2 for the A350XWB.... Rgds
71 Baroque : This part of Jon's post suggests a name for the problem. WHAT EXACTLY IS THE PROBLEM? The issue centers around the wing-to-body join that mates the w
72 Dynamicsguy : Limit load is 100%. Ultimate load is 150%. The test in which the wing broke was approaching ultimate load. I imagine that, like Boeing, Airbus would
73 Post contains links Scipio : >> "Last night Plane Talking received confirmation that the fault Boeing discovered in April cannot be patched as easily as suggested by the company w
74 Burkhard : The real catastrophy is that the 747-800 doesn't need the help of the 787 to be damaged - that project is in a critical state of another delay by its
75 GBan : I think one of the most important lessons in this story is how crucial testing still is. A very small flight envelope translates for me into significa
76 RedChili : I think I can remember somebody from Boeing claiming that they would theoretically be able to bend the wings until they would touch each other above t
77 DocLightning : And yet this is Boeing's 8th (9th if you count the 717) jet-powered airliner, not including variants and upgrades. In other words, they are professio
78 Dynamicsguy : I wouldn't take that statement literally. The whole reason for the test is to verify the simulations. That's why they did this test before the first
79 MillwallSean : The 747-800 and the 787 are two completely different animals. The 747-800 isn't selling because its economics aren't convincing enough. The 787 promi
80 Pylon101 : We all agreed that Boeing PR department is not worth of our a.netters' trust. And actually we have no access to ANY PROVED INFORMATION. All my friends
81 Dynamicsguy : 3-4 weeks from finding the problem, working out what was causing unusual strain gauge readings, detailed analysis of a complex area of structure, und
82 Decoder : Do the difficulties experienced in the development of recent new aircraft, such as the A380, 787, A400 and the JSF, reflect the incompetence of the pe
83 Astuteman : Probably reflects the (misguided) view that seems prevelant in the modern world, that computers are actually engineers (AND commercial experts). Inte
84 Bongodog1964 : I realise that the US stock exchange code for Boeing is BA, but here on A net it is normally used for British Airways, and if you run your cursor over
85 Post contains links EbbUK : I am aware of some discrepancies in your blog on the 787 and of Boeing's accounts of events. Would you clarify? Date 12/12/08. http://blog.seattlepi.
86 UALWN : There is something I don't understand: if the failure occurred beyond 130% of maximum load, why is it that, according to Boeing, the available test e
87 NCB : Guys, give Jon a break, he's only doing his job and he's feeling alot of pressure on him. Let's be happy that he got those 120-130% numbers out of Boe
88 NCB : 2 factors: -margin for fatigue (when aircraft gets older...) -margin for fail-safe principle: if aircraft experiences sudden unexpectedly high loads
89 Kmz : concerning FE model validation at B for the B787: Has there been some kind of a CFRP wing demonstrator prior the real wing in order to validate the FE
90 A380900 : Agreed that trying to tell the "very bad liars" from the "very very bad liars" in financial markets is kind of unfair. Yet, Boeing is in the uncomfor
91 EbbUK : No! Cheerleaders never get a break and neither do investigative journalists. I for one will not lazily ingest facts provided, I wanna pick at it. Put
92 RedChili : While this is true, take a look at the timeline of events according to Flightblogger: So, Flightblogger claims that sources told him that the plan in
93 UALWN : I understand this, but my question remains the same. Boeing said the findings in late April (or late May) would limit so much the flight envelope of
94 A380900 : Many bloggers rise to fame on the side of "truth to power" and "the little people". Then, they are offered stuff to start speaking on behalf of the p
95 Dynamicsguy : As well as requiring a factor of safety of 1.5, it is not clear from publicly released information at what point in the load the damage occurred. Tho
96 Dynamicsguy : So you will blindly believe an anonymous post with no detail and nothing to back up the claim instead? Maybe if there was some detail in it, but anyo
97 Post contains links Rheinwaldner : Dramatic events!! I dare to speak out the likely consequences: The static test frame will require new wings before testing will continue! Why? The win
98 Post contains links Keesje : A link I posted yesterday in another thread holds IMO explosive material. It's about the review Qantas finished on its fleet / order portfolio. Howeve
99 UALWN : Thank you very much, I think I understand this better now. What you say makes perfect sense, at least qualitatively. In his blog, Jon says that the f
100 SEPilot : And you believe that Bombardier or Embraer would be able to flawlessly design and assemble the most critical and one of the most complex machines eve
101 Castillo : This is not really the right definition of the fail-safe principle as it applies to aerospace design. Fail-safe design refers to the ability of the s
102 RedFlyer : Interesting post Rheinwaldner. But I think from reading it someone could get the impression that a repair would result in a weaker structure. But don
103 SEPilot : Absolutely. Another reason why the static test will probably require at least a new center wingbox, as from what I can gather that is where the damag
104 Post contains links Rheinwaldner : Yes, thus I concluded that no patch would suffice. A new undestroyed part has to be in place. Which in reverse means that the complete belonging CFRP
105 Haggis79 : 707,720,727,737,747,757,767,777,787,(717) - I count one more than you do? Or did you count the 720 as a 707 variant? IMHO, and IMHO only, Boeing woul
106 Astuteman : Probably because the old timers used to talk to each other, rather than to a computer screen (they didn't have much choice, of course.. ) You're not
107 RedFlyer : I think something far more serious is going on here. Although I've been a Boeing fan, the incredible number of mis-steps by the company over the past
108 Blackknight : It seems the Boeing of the Last Century is dead and instead of calling them just B here we should call them 2B or Boeing the Next Generation. Even my
109 SEPilot : Interesting possibility. Maybe we're both possessed by the same alien....
110 DocLightning : I did. You may not. Either way, they've made a lot of different types of jet transports. We expect better of them.
111 Ebbuk : don't be silly. Of course I won't. However, the post in Dec was remarkebly on point. Boeing snuffed it out and then 6 months later we are told by Boe
112 Astuteman : We'd better have a conversation about the A380's long-term sales prospects, just to be sure... Rgds
113 Michlis : A bit extreme wouldn't you say not to mention premature? I am as disappointed not to see it fly as anyone here, but this is not the end of Boeing or
114 SEPilot : It could be that that alien doesn't have exclusive control. There could be others hanging around the fringes.
115 BlackKnight : I did not say it was the end of Boeing or the 787. I said it was the end of Engineering first, bean counters second and a move to promise the moon an
116 Post contains links Hawkercamm : Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 1 (by Pilot21 Jun 23 2009 in Civil Aviation) So as confirmed by Jon @ http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...-
117 Trex8 : The CEO knew but with his back to the wall was hoping/praying for a fix which didn't come in the timeframe needed. Airbus may have known and what the
118 HawkerCamm : Don't confuse delamination with disbonding..... The skin panels are co-cured with the stringers. Disbonding can be fixed by adding addition fasteners
119 HawkerCamm : I do wonder how much longer Jimmy Boy and Scottie can survive. The axe must be out the box, cleaned, polished, and raised ready for the deadly act...
120 Flighty : BK, maybe that rumble in Europe was the true info. Sometimes true info can travel to colleagues at another firm more easily that the top executives an
121 Michlis : Of course it's bad, but one has to recognize while there is an engineering perspective to these types of projects there is a managerial/business aspe
122 Post contains links BestWestern : Oh dear... There is a deep and disturbing divide between the fantasy of the Dreamliner as enunciated by management, and performance figures that bear
123 Post contains links LifelinerOne : Hence the quite long time to EIS. Airbus isn't rushing into developing the A350XWB, some milestones in the development process have been reached late
124 Post contains links HawkerCamm : http://www.lonelyscientist.com/ CaptainX?
125 Ikramerica : Again, you are simply making things up. This is the issue. For safety, the envelope would be about 85%. That's fine for flying on a nice day, useless
126 Stitch : Just finished reading the draft. Mr. van der Zanden takes both Boeing and Airbus behind the woodshed for the A380, A400M, A350XWB and 787. Not an avi
127 Castillo : Not exactly. While the bending moment at the root is the highest along the wingspan, the wingbox bending stiffness is also the highest there so the a
128 RedFlyer : A CEO, especially one heading up a Fortune 100 company, does not "hope" or "pray" for a fix. They take positive, proactive steps to make sure the goa
129 HawkerCamm : I've only skimmed it but my initial thoughts are that its not all BS.
130 Haggis79 : the point is having met the milestone of "first flight in Q2 2009" - even if it's only met for PR. But from a PR standpoint, an abbreviated first fli
131 BlackKnight : Boeing has bet much on many programs. This has been the case for the 747, 755/767, 777 and 787. They each have been a bet on the success of the compa
132 M27 : And face the crap they have for the last two years on the rollout? It would have been just as bad either way, so they made the right decision.
133 Revelation : Computers are more complicated than pen and paper, so there's always wastage purely related to learning how to use the computer, maintaining the comp
134 Flood : I agree. If anything, they could have let her fly to send a signal to their customers and suppliers, boost morale internally, and ease the market tha
135 RedFlyer : I'm not sure that is completely on the mark. They could've executed this program the old-fashioned way, but I believe Boeing's thinking with regards
136 Stitch : The general gist I am getting is the 787 and A350XWB are both aircraft just way too ambitious for their time using materials that are either not read
137 Decoder : You guys do realize that all-composite aircraft have been flying since the 70's, albeit in much smaller scale? Fundamentally what Boeing is having her
138 AirNZ : What commercial all-composite airliner has been flying at all, let alone since the 1970's? At this stage it's looking to be a little more than just a
139 Flood : Let's just agree on a mis-managed technical issue
140 AirNZ : yeah, I can easily go with that!
141 Stitch : More and more I am of the opinion that the 787, the 747-8, the A400M, the A380 and the A350XWB were all driven by the Marketing Department, not the En
142 SEPilot : What I have seen is that people fail to take advantage of the full capabilities of the computers. Example: I was working at a company making mining e
143 Astuteman : Far too many people underestimate the effect that scaling can have on complexity. Rgds
144 Osteogenesis : Could not agree more. I work for a large corporation. Here we have exactly the same problem with a project as large as the 787 project. The problems
145 Kire : Go and visit the Vasa Museet in Stockholm (another story where the CEO and his marketing department made the rules ... sorry, determined user requirem
146 A380900 : Well I work in finance and I can guarantee you that things are really thouroughly thought through before we do anything. We are setting standards for
147 Dynamicsguy : It appears on point because it is such an ambiguous claim. There's nothing remarkable about that. What would be remarkable would be even if there was
148 Ikramerica : Exactly. The plane is made with composites. There was bound to be some form of separation during testing, that needed to be corrected. This is why th
149 ScrubbsYWG : i was about to write a post similar to this. Although still fairly young, i do work in product development as an engineer. It is a CONSTANT battle wi
150 Stitch : It does indeed. When the 787 launched, it launched big and the rate at which it scored orders was, at the time, unprecedented for a commercial airlin
151 SunriseValley : Reminds me of the Sydney Opera House. The architect came up with this wonderful pictorial concept, everyone bought in to it and away they went. A neig
152 Haggis79 : well, but at least in the case of the Sydney Opera House it was well worth all the hassle and money. It is really one of the things that makes Sydney
153 GBan : Stitch, thanks for turning this into a very interesting thread! Being CEO of a smaller company I spend a lot of time aligning our sales promises (I ha
154 Revelation : In an ideal world, "marketing" determines the characteristics of a product to meet a market demand, and gauges the size of that market. "Sales" are t
155 Ikramerica : As a landmark, sure. As an Opera house, it's marginally executed. Heck, the hall they currently use for Operas is so limited in wing space that they
156 Aircellist : That is very funny! Thinking is clearly outmoded indeed... Not only in engineering, alas. Very interesting thread, many thanks, gentlemen.
157 Zeke : Actually the first aircraft to ever fly had more composite content in it than the 787, composites have been around since the start of aviation.
158 Mariner : When the ballet companies perform there they have to have stagehands standing in the wings to catch any dancers coming off stage at speed so they don
159 Astuteman : Your models are as good as the input data...... Probably the single biggest mistake on the A380 (and probably the driver of the 5t overweight..) The
160 Post contains images Scipio : I'm faily certain that A380900 was being sarcastic. His post should be read in the context of the global financial crisis... In economics and finance
161 Dynamicsguy : As someone raised in Sydney and living in Melbourne, I couldn't agree more. I can't see myself returning to live in Sydney.
162 RedChili : So, should we thank Qantas, Singapore Airlines and Mr. Udvar-Hazy for "destroying" the original 350? After all, it was probably the lost QF order and
163 Astuteman : It should have been flying about now, from memory... Rgds
164 StressedOut : This is a great discussion. One trend I find very disturbing in companies like Boeing is that management positions more and more seem to be filled wit
165 Trent900 : I seem to be under the impression that the XWB will have a completely different manufacturing process then the 787, Airbus is going to use CFRP panel
166 RedChili : Please understand that I'm in no way trying to condemn neither the 787 nor the XWB to doom and gloom and failure. As far as I know, both airplanes ma
167 MillwallSean : Well the composites vs other materials are something I guess many will argue about for a long time. Few have the knowledge to understand the issue ful
168 Baroque : Why were you not around earlier this year when Utzon was being canonized? I think it is still the case that his original design cannot be built and t
169 Trent900 : RedChili, Sorry if you were under the impression my post was aimed at you. I was just pointing out that the XWB will be built differently then the 78
170 RedChili : No problem, I didn't take it personally. It's just that I've been around this forum long enough to realize that misunderstandings are quite frequent,
171 Scouseflyer : I used to work for a software house and our salesman was called Jeff. At least once a month it would be "all hands to the pump" because of a "Jeff Sa
172 SEPilot : I was fortunate; actually. I did not intend to be an engineer; my father, grandfather, and great-great grandfather were all engineers, and I was dete
173 AirNZ : You could be right, but I find it interesting that such 'facts' or 'possibilities' were never mentioned here before and, indeed to the extent that I'
174 SEPilot : I suspect what has happened is that Boeing has been trying to shave the maximum weight possible everywhere, and have reduced safety margins in the pr
175 Rheinwaldner : I have read both terms in the course of that delay. I know they are not the same and I dont' know which one it is. For my conlusion it doesn't matter
176 Dynamicsguy : To correct every misconception in this topic thus far would be impractical. There is not enough detail in the public domain at the moment for a stres
177 Ebbuk : please let me know one thing. Would this issue with debonding only be uncovered so late in the design and build of the 7l8r7? You talk about rejectin
178 Kmz : Exactly. This is why I had asked the (unanswered) question earlier, if there has been some kind of a 'wing demonstrator' build by B before building t
179 Post contains links Dynamicsguy : There was a wing box section which was tested to beyond ultimate load - see this site with video of the test. What is unclear from that is where the
180 Dynamicsguy : It is a fact that someone made an unsubstantiated claim with no detail. It is a fact that there is a design flaw in the wing. That says nothing about
181 Rheinwaldner : With what model? The one used beforehand? That was proved wrong by several dozen percent! Not knowing how right the model is and not knowing how the
182 Burkhard : A missed oportunity, to have the A330NG in the air before the 787 - a 787 that has a hard time to compete with the A330 current gen...
183 Dynamicsguy : It depends on why the model didn't predict those limited areas accurately, and that's something none of us here can answer. All models are approximat
184 A380900 : Bingo! Exactly my thoughts Indeed That is one boeing success in this all fiasco. I would argue that Boeing was forced by Airbus competition to go for
185 PITingres : The only thing it "speaks for" is that you have made a wild leap of illogic. An unsubstantiated claim remains just that, guessing or rumor-mongering,
186 Slz396 : Hey, they still can, you know, its just that they will tear off at the root... It think that this controversial point has been around for a couple of
187 EbbUK : indeed. So without detail it cannot be so? Or you choose not to believe it? I ask the same question to you? Boys I get it, really I do.
188 Abba : It is indeed not reasonable to compare the delay of the 787 to that of the 380. The 380 could in fact benefit from the delay as it were flying all al
189 Stitch : Yup. And while it might have had sluggish sales to date, I think that once it flew, it would have started to see a huge in-rush of A330 conversion or
190 Abba : Why do you think that? I have seen nothing indicating that the engineers at Airbus didn't want to build the 350XWB. A significant amount of the probl
191 Stitch : Because I've talked to them and listened to them and they were of the opinion that CFRP, used in the amounts the 787 and A350XWB do, causes more prob
192 Scipio : Don't forget the A400M, which is the most composite aircraft yet built by Airbus. Not that this is a flawless program, but neither is there evidence
193 JoeCanuck : It seems they are dealing with serious weight issues so it does in fact look like composites are part of their problems. Strength is easy if you don'
194 DocLightning : OK, that was a wood composite. I don't think that's what we're talking about.
195 Scipio : Possibly, but the extent of the weight problems is still unclear (some, including Airbus itself, suggest it is quite manageable), and I have not seen
196 AirNZ : On what basis are they doing that? I mean, if the A350 design still has to tied down and finalised, much less anything built yet, what exactly are th
197 Post contains links Stitch : Reports have suggested that some of the issues Airbus Military have had with adapting the "Europrop" engine to the A400M is due to how the CFRP wing
198 Abba : Are they not supposed to struggle? I mean, if a new design is to be better than what came before, borders need to be pushed! I don't know what the OE
199 Stitch : That last number that I have seen them publicly state was 116t, back in 2008, which they said was 2.2t more then they had planned (and was why they r
200 Bongodog1964 : I find this very hard to believe as a major delay on the A400M, the europrop engine didn't fly on the C130 until December 17th 2008. This being years
201 PlanesNTrains : Airbus didn't have a lot of choice. It was the customers who wanted something "more", and until they provided it, there wasn't a huge rush of orders
202 Revelation : It's surreal how hard it is to get different groups to talk to each other. In my work, our software is installed by manufacturing onto several differ
203 Dynamicsguy : Without detail there's no reason to believe it. Sure, it's possible, but there's no evidence. Do you believe everything you see, regardless of any ev
204 Clickhappy : ZA001 is headed back into the factory - I wouldn't expect it out before your kids are back in school.
205 Cosmofly : Not even some taxi test?
206 PlanesNTrains : Our kids, or our kids' kids? -Dave
207 CPHGuard : If just half of what he is saying is true, the 787 still has a VERY long way to go before EIS: After reading the report, I am quite concerned about t
208 Slz396 : Compared to the common "unknown unknowns" of aviation today like risk of missing performance targets, higher than expected CASM, maintenance cycles w
209 PlanesNTrains : I find it very easy to agree with someone who is reasonable and unbiased in their presentation. I'll just leave it at that. -Dave
210 Astuteman : The missing element in your comment is the demise of the A340NG in the marketplace. Because it's imperative that we completely dismiss the notion tha
211 Dynamicsguy : I'll agree with you on the division of problems along the lines of safety/reliability/efficiency. However, I wouldn't call these elementary. Elementa
212 Abba : That seems to be related to them wanting to make the 350 as a more or less improved 330 rather than a clean sheet. I see no indication that this has
213 Scbriml : The original A350 very quickly garnered 200 orders, some of those from the very people who said they wanted more. It certainly wasn't the dog that ma
214 Revelation : You said most of what I was going to say, but I'd add that the Airbus software issue and the Boeing fastener issue seem to be people problems vs. tec
215 Baroque : Thanks for the link Stitch - I think!! As has been said, "ouch" if only half true. Then again a quick look at the chapters (even that took a fair whi
216 Kire : Are you serious? If we German speaking folks want to hide engineering work from the French, we do not encode it in a different versions of (French) s
217 WAH64D : We have no evidence, but we can imagine???????????? Yes, we can indeed imagine. I imagine that if my uncle had boobs, he'd be my aunt I've read this
218 Revelation : I'm sorry for upsetting you by being the first person on a.net to use my imagination instead of producing irrefutable evidence! Ok, let me restate. W
219 WAH64D : Not at all sir, just a little tongue in cheek reference to your earlier reply to Slz396 which I quote: Wasn't he using his imagination too? The point
220 PlanesNTrains : "See no indication" is not the same as fact. The fact is that they repeatedly chose not to go to an all-new composite airframe. Am I the only one who
221 Abba : They were not so much dragged to a clean sheet - but rather dragged away from using the 330 as the backbone for the 350. The reason for that is rathe
222 Rheinbote : Sounds more spectacular than it is. Looks like the delamination is not in the wing skin, but in the stringer cap that is co-bonded to the skin. For t
223 Stitch : I can't believe it would impair further testing because Boeing first has to verify the fix on ZA997 through additional testing to verify it can handl
224 Revelation : The quute I was reacting to was: My reaction was mostly due to the emphatic nature of the post. I have no idea if he was using imagination or if he f
225 WAH64D : There was one main issue that tainted the introduction of that aircraft and slipped the program goals by quite some time. That was the one he referre
226 Prebennorholm : There are a few things which bothers me. With the previous delays in mind, caused by various issues, one would have imagined that basic strutural inte
227 Stitch : Some tests were, but not the test of the wing-body join area. The simple answer is because ZA997 wasn't assembled two to three years ago to perform t
228 Starrion : So ignoring the ever fascinating debate over A VS B, what are we realistically looking at here? a couple weeks to think out and design a fix, then cra
229 Dynamicsguy : There's no such thing as perfect in engineering. It's a compromise between all of the conflicting requirements. But hopefully we'll see a plane which
230 PITingres : Don't get too focused on the structural fix itself. I suspect that's the least of the issues here. I think that the bulk of the delay will be a) repa
231 Rheinwaldner : I agree with that though I cannot see how a fix would work that would avoid a new wing or a new wing box. If material is damaged that material has to
232 Post contains links Blrsea : Looks like some analysts are saying that the first flight won't occur till last quarter of this year, the failure of the computer models is worrying t
233 Theredbaron : OUCH !!! Delivery till 2011... OUCH !!! If the economic downtur is still going in 2010 and 2011 then Boeing will have trouble and PR to do but if the
234 Post contains links 757GB : Some good information on NYC777's blog, in turn linking to Aviation Week: http://nyc787.blogspot.com/
235 HawkerCamm : We known now that there is structural weakness at 120-130% of maximum load. Since the testing was stopped at this point I am quite worried what lies a
236 Stitch : The Aviation Week article said "deflection and delamination occurred inside the fuselage when a titanium fastener didn't transfer the load of that ben
237 Tdscanuck : What's wrong with reinforcement? The center wing box issue didn't require a new wing box. The load capability of the material has to be replaced...it
238 PGNCS : I agreed with most of what you said, but disagree with this: the 787 will, like every other aircraft, be imperfect. It may one day be very, very good
239 RedChili : A new wing is certainly not the fix, but if the ZA997 wing has been damaged (as some reports claim), it would be safe to say that the FAA would not a
240 DocLightning : I said 1Q2010. I'm sticking by it! Everyone pooh-poohed me! But I'm not wrong yet!!! I said I wouldn't believe it until the second AFTER the wheels l
241 BoeingVista : Yep, and replacing not repairing all damaged structures. You cannot run load tests on a repaired and reinforced structure and then extrapolate these
242 Stitch : If Aviation Week's information is correct, while the structure did fail, it failed because it was exposed to loads beyond what it was designed to han
243 Tdscanuck : No, it would not be safe to say that at all. All Boeing would need to show is that the production wing (whatever that ends up looking like) is strong
244 SEPilot : The only problem with that is that being stronger in the wrong place can cause the mating piece to fail sooner than it would otherwise. Seeing how th
245 Dynamicsguy : Those areas may or may not be higher stressed, but they're far simpler to analyse. How about not making statements with such certainty if you don't k
246 Baroque : Extrapolation always causes the twitches in most with a background in experimental anything. This gives me the chance to ask something that has been
247 Rheinwaldner : I agree fully with that. That's exactly what I meant. His paragraph has three "would's" and one "probably". Where is a strong certainty? Very moderat
248 RedChili : That would indeed be welcome news for the program. Hmmm. This sounds kinda fishy, since this failure happened because the predictive models failed. I
249 Burkhard : 120-130% is a low number. So either the modelling of the exact geometry in the software must have been wrong, the titanium fastener was in a differen
250 Blrsea : The airbus A380 wing load test failed at 145% load, and it was around 3.3% of the designed value. So their model was pretty close with a margin of err
251 Tdscanuck : How do you figure? The failure condition is a flight condition. By definition, all testing leading to first flight is ground testing. So this issue d
252 AirbusA370 : They stopped the test immediately after the strain gauges showed abnormal values. If they had pulled any longer, I'm shure that ZY997 would have no w
253 Rheinbote : We're getting into pure conjecture here. Who actually said that the damage occured at 120-130%? Fact is that the wing was tested to 120-130% of limit
254 SixtySeven : I wanna see this thing fly as soon as it's safe to do so. I met with a boeing employee at a equipment meeting late last year, who would be privvy to m
255 Michlis : Better safe than sorry. The way I understand it, the 787 is full of innovations and a mishap during the first flight would 1) promote more of media f
256 Ken777 : That assumes it was a Boeing SNAFU and not one of the two "partners" that are involved. As I recall, the MX cost benefits of composites was the decid
257 RedFlyer : If true, interesting that we're back to the issue of fasteners causing massive headaches on this program. It would have been better. And Boeing knows
258 Rheinbote : That quote by Aviation Week doesn't make any sense. I think they got it wrong.
259 EPA001 : That might be true, but so is the A380, especially at the technology level at the first flight. Though not that long ago, technology is constant on t
260 Haggis79 : exactly what I have been saying all along... IF they could have flown it (with a neglegible amount of risk that something goes seriously wrong), they
261 Stitch : Doesn't make sense in what way? If the titanium fastener transmitted too much load to the structure, it seems conceivable to me that it would have ov
262 Dynamicsguy : I did. Every derivative does not require a new test. Every structural modification does not require a new test. Every repair does not require a new t
263 Kire : I should have known it. My humble posts are written on a Mac as well ...
264 Banjo76 : Ok, transitive relation applies to structural tests and certification, though, would it be safe to think that the FAA would require Boeing to also sh
265 AirNZ : But surely Boeing have not yet announced the fix needed, or whether a new wing is needed or not......how then can you, based on lack of Boeing inform
266 Rheinbote : Well, to begin with according to all other sources, the issue is in the wing, not the fuselage. The delamination is likely to be a result of the "def
267 757GB : If it was up to me, even with an airplane ready, I would not have gone through a short first flight to park the airplane again. It would be the same
268 Stitch : But it is still at the wing-fuselage join, right?
269 Ken777 : At least your taste in computers is better than your diction . . . Why? First, any problem in the air would have been a major hit and simply isn't wo
270 Dynamicsguy : I should have known that I'd trip myself up. I would still bet my house on Boeing not having to install a new wing on the static test airframe for th
271 Dynamicsguy : That Aviation Week article was disappointing. There was enough in it to suggest that he'd been told what the problem was, but didn't understand what
272 RedChili : The problem with this whole thread is that Boeing hasn't given us very much information (which is partly because Boeing doesn't know yet exactly what
273 Dynamicsguy : You have to take that with a grain of salt. And that means what I say as well. I think there is only one poster who has commented on this question wh
274 UALWN : I'm sorry but this is still a Boeing plane. Boeing chose to outsource work to MHI, FHI and others. They have to monitor the progress with outsourced
275 Revelation : Yes, but as Tom says above, you are comparing apples to oranges. During the A380 test, there likely WAS damage at a similar point. In the ultimate lo
276 Art : Mmmm... CaptainX. I remember him or her appearing on the scene and being branded a hyper-pessimist by the 'Boeing is infallible brigade'. Starting to
277 Ken777 : It is, but it is also a plane built by a lot of companies - just like planes form Airbus. And, just like Airbus, partners and suppliers can cause hit
278 PITIngres : I don't know about branding him a hyper-pessimist; but I do recall, and still agree with, branding him or her as a troll. I don't recall that any of
279 Michlis : Agreed, but if an accident had happened 1) the media would be zeroing in on the composite structure, i.e. the "plastic airplane"; the investment hous
280 Aerodog : Not sure I agree. It was reported early on that the 787 decision to go plastic was hardly a unanimous one within engineering. Some advocated sticking
281 Post contains links Keesje : I remember tow Airbus engineers questioning the maturity of composites technology for the applications proposed on the 7e7. Colin Stuart, Airbus vice-
282 Tdscanuck : That may not have come across quite right...the requirements are that you have no permanent deformation (which basically means no damage) up to the l
283 AirNZ : In ignorance, call him whatever you want......except all those who did and ridiculed certainly aren't laughing as loud now, are they? Plus, he was co
284 Post contains links Srbmod : Please continue the discussion here: Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 3 (by Srbmod Jul 1 2009 in Civil Aviation) Per Forum Policy, any posts tha
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing: 787 First Flight "Within 3-5 Weeks." posted Wed Apr 1 2009 00:37:44 by DocLightning
Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight posted Wed Jan 16 2008 06:12:22 by OyKIE
Boeing 787-8 First Flight posted Thu Apr 5 2007 01:11:35 by AeroplaneFreak
787 First Flight Today 6-10-09? posted Wed Jun 10 2009 15:04:24 by Sunking737
Pay To Watch 787 First Flight posted Wed Jun 3 2009 07:46:53 by LY4XELD
ATW: 787 First Flight Q2 2009 & Other Developments posted Fri Dec 5 2008 00:49:27 by Oykie
787 First Flight Delayed To 1Q2009 posted Wed Oct 8 2008 17:09:31 by Observer
787 First Flight Slips Ahead Of Strike Vote posted Tue Sep 2 2008 16:06:58 by IAD787
Boeing 777 Freighter First Flight 7/14 10:00am PST posted Thu Jul 10 2008 17:09:05 by UAL747-600
787 First Flight Delayed Another 3 Months? posted Mon Feb 4 2008 10:54:46 by Heavierthanair
787 First Flight Today 6-10-09? posted Wed Jun 10 2009 15:04:24 by Sunking737