Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 First Flight Delayed At Least One Year? Part 2  
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 14438 posts, RR: 45
Posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 51385 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Please continue the discussion from Part 1 here. Thanks.

Part 1
787 Firstflight Delayed At Least One Year? (by Rheinwaldner Jul 22 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
307 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 51401 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So where we stand is Boeing continues to develop a fix for the issue and as yet has not released publicly any details, though off-the-record claims and rumors are circulating.

User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 5617 posts, RR: 40
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 51328 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
So where we stand is Boeing continues to develop a fix for the issue and as yet has not released publicly any details, though off-the-record claims and rumors are circulating.

All in all to me that is very disappointing. But there is not much we here on A-net can do about it. I hope they get the program on the right tracks. Because that is where it belongs. Hope (though I am not confident) that Boeing will give a clear and honest update soon.

User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 990 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 51252 times:

There are 3 parts to the wing in a Boeing design. The center wing box and the two outboard wing boxes. They are all part of "the Wing" The wing sections are connected on either side at the "Side Of Body" SOB rib joint. This is the production break. Look at all those prior images of the sections. Per all the releases, no one has said there is any reason to suspect the fuselage to wing integration, therefore there is no reason to take the wings off.

You can not say that anything has changed from a month ago just because a Times reporter can't use the same terminology right twice.

And for the engineers out there... did any of you really think that Boeing could only fix one side of a joint?? Really? Any free body diagram of any joint says if you beef up one side, you beef up the other to match.

Reporters don't take basic statics... engineers do in their first year of college classes.

I don't care if its Boeing or Airbus... basic engineering says this is not a new discovery, no matter what some interiors engineer says to the press.

User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 22466 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 51120 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
So where we stand is Boeing continues to develop a fix for the issue and as yet has not released publicly any details, though off-the-record claims and rumors are circulating.

A clear, concise, unbiased, and accurate statement in this discussion.

Wow, that was lovely!

OK, carry on!

User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 50923 times:

After reading a blog about the B787 delay in Seattle Times I wonder if maybe Airbus' approach to compsites on the A350 using panels is the best way to go for now.


" You have to remove and replace the whole damaged skin (because it is hard to repair composites), not just trim the stringer web at the ends which might not work (if not causing more damages.) This means you have to remove hundreds even thousand fasteners common to the panel. "

User currently offlineTomcat From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 50818 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 5):
After reading a blog about the B787 delay in Seattle Times I wonder if maybe Airbus' approach to compsites on the A350 using panels is the best way to go for now

This has nothing to do with delamination at the 787 wing root. The panel or barrel design relates to the fuselage, while the A-350 wing design will most probably look very similar to the 787 one. The A400M wing is already a composite wing, with CFRP stringers and panels, just like the 787 wing. Expect the A-350 wing to include even more composite parts.

User currently offlineGlbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 970 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 50565 times:

Some additional details from Seattle Times http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2009565319_boeing30.html

Key points include:

- Damage occurred at limit load, not ultimate load
- Damage occurred at both sides of wing body join
- Fuselage damage means fix is harder
- Responsibility was Boeing's, not suppliers
- Total cost overrun on 787 is now $11B
- First flight unlikely until next year

including this graphic:

[Edited 2009-07-30 15:58:45]

User currently offlinePlaneInsomniac From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 807 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 50477 times:

Quoting Glbltrvlr (Reply 7):
Some additional details from Seattle Times http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html


"The [787's] wing damage [...] occurred under less stress than previously reported — and is more extensive."

"[it] happened when the stress on the wings was well below the load the wings must bear to be federally certified to carry passengers"

That should be interesting for those people who keep claiming that the 787 would "practically" have been capable of starting the flight test program, but Boeing decided to postpone as a mere "precaution".

Am I cured? Slept 5 hours on last long-haul flight...
User currently offlineGlbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 970 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50429 times:

Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 8):
That should be interesting for those people who keep claiming that the 787 would "practically" have been capable of starting the flight test program, but Boeing decided to postpone as a mere "precaution".

It's also the first time I question the announcements in Paris. Given Boeing knew they had wing damage at limit load (i.e. at 100% of normal/routine loading) several months before Paris, it's hard to see how they could say first flight was "imminent".

I sense an investor lawsuit now...

User currently offlineKL911 From Netherlands, joined Jul 2003, 5496 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50405 times:

I've asked this before, but it got deleted, but how close are the A350 and B787 programs getting together now? I have no knowledge on the A350 status, but is it possible it will fly before the B787?

Is this harming sales, or helping sales in this economic climate?

User currently offlineCastillo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50388 times:

Quoting Glbltrvlr (Reply 9):
at limit load (i.e. at 100% of normal/routine loading)

Limit load is not normal/routine loading, it is the maximum load anticipated on the aircraft at least once during its service life.

User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4494 posts, RR: 27
Reply 12, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50360 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 5):
After reading a blog about the B787 delay in Seattle Times I wonder if maybe Airbus' approach to compsites on the A350 using panels is the best way to go for now.

Boeing's woes have nothing to do with their approach to how they construct their CFRP airplane, but it has everything to do with how broken their organization and, in particular, their leadership has become. I haven't lost faith in CFRP as the future of aviation; I have lost faith in Boeing's executive management team.

Quoting Glbltrvlr (Reply 7):
- Total cost overrun on 787 is now $11B

Cost overrun of $11 billion? I cannot fathom how no one in their C-Suite has taken a fall for this. What the f*** ever happened to accountability????

Quoting Glbltrvlr (Reply 7):
- First flight unlikely until next year

Well, it didn't take a genius or an insider to figure out that was going to happen.

My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4887 posts, RR: 19
Reply 13, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50325 times:

Quoting KL911 (Reply 10):
I've asked this before, but it got deleted, but how close are the A350 and B787 programs getting together now? I have no knowledge on the A350 status, but is it possible it will fly before the B787?

Possible? Yes. Likely? No.

It's a bit of a guessing game as Airbus is very quiet about the A350 at the moment (probably not a very good sign) while Boeing, which has lost a lot of it's scheduling credibility, hasn't even put out a new schedule one might or might not believe.

Official A350 statement from the conference call was "on track for the time being".

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50273 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 12):
Cost overrun of $11 billion? I cannot fathom how no one in their C-Suite has taken a fall for this.

Because it's still less than what the Board of Director's signed off on as a maximum figure?

Plus I cannot believe the cost-overrun is $11 billion unless they're counting all the inventory as an "overrun", which is a bit disingenuous, IMO. Total spend to date of $11 billion? Sure.

User currently offlineGlbltrvlr From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 970 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 50231 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
Plus I cannot believe the cost-overrun is $11 billion unless they're counting all the inventory as an "overrun", which is a bit disingenuous, IMO. Total spend to date of $11 billion? Sure.

While it was an analyst estimate, it did not include inventory or total spend. The exact quote is


In a note to clients, Campbell estimated the total cost overrun of the Dreamliner program so far — extra startup and engineering costs, penalties owed to customers for delivery delays and contractual obligations to suppliers for engineering changes — as "in the vicinity of $11 billion."

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (6 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 50128 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Glbltrvlr (Reply 15):
While it was an analyst estimate, it did not include inventory or total spend.

Well I think his estimate is full of "weapons grade balonium" and I don't say that just because he is talking about Boeing or the 787. He's projecting a cost overrun equal to the entire program cost and I find such a thing both fanciful and farcical.

User currently offlineDynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 923 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (6 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 50079 times:

Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 8):
"The [787's] wing damage [...] occurred under less stress than previously reported — and is more extensive."

The statement about the level of load at which the damage occurred is an error in the Seattle Times' reporting, as it states in the article, not a change to what Boeing has said. Boeing has only stated that the damage occured during the limit load test, and they have only stated publicly that the test went to limit load. The figure of 120-130% is from Flightblogger's sources. The damage happened at some point below that load, but I don't believe Boeing has stated how far below.

Publicly Boeing has given very little information about exactly what the damage was, so it's impossible to say with certainty whether the change in the extent of the damage reported is due to more information coming out or is an actual change. Certainly at the original announcement they downplayed the work required. My belief is that the change between this week and last is more information not more damage, but that what is being reported now is definitely more than Boeing let on at the delay announcement.

User currently offlineEcuadorianMD11 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 50038 times:

Does anybody have any indication of espionage between the 2 companies?
For argument´s sake, Airbus is behind on Boeing with regards to this particular type of plane so isn´t an insider very handy to look at the wing problems etc Boeing is facing?
Or if we assume the 787 won´t be flying for a while yet, wouldn´t a pair of Boeing eyes in Toulouse not be very convenient?

Just asking.........

Ecuadorian MD11.

User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6954 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49923 times:

Quoting Castillo (Reply 11):
Limit load is not normal/routine loading, it is the maximum load anticipated on the aircraft at least once during its service life.

Not entirely correct.

No airliner is *anticipated* to be treated to limit load during its service life.

But it happens from time to time that limit load is exceeded. Then that particular plane must not fly until it has passed a relevant structural inspection.

In other words, as long as you don't exceed the limit load, then you go and can fly the plane again. Instead of putting it into a hangar for days or weeks of inspection work.

For certification the manufacturer must prove 150% of limit load. Those extra 50% shall cater for safety margin, production inacuracies, and fatigue developing during service life.

Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49908 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EcuadorianMD11 (Reply 18):
Does anybody have any indication of espionage between the 2 companies?

Both keep eyes on each other and generate internal reports on where they think the other's program progress is.

User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2652 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49880 times:

I have to agree with Red Flyer, well said. This plane will fly and I'm sure it will ultimately be successful. But there's no question Boeing bit off way more than it could chew with a new material type, a new construction method and new supplier network/relationship structure. All in all this one will go down as the worst blunder in Boeing's history, and I'm sure it'll be the stuff of legends in the Harvard Business Case library. My guess is that McNerney and several others will be gone by year-end and we may see a hard play to get Mullaly back from Ford. That alone would go a long way to restoring some confidence in the employee base and the customers as well.

All this said Boeing isn't alone in its misery. Airbus has back to back new airplane intros of 2 years for the 380 and 4 years running on the A400. So it's not like Boeing is alone in the Hall of Shame. But I do agree with Red Flyer, Boeing's management team should be sacked immediately and a team of hard-nosed engineers with decades of experience putting planes together brought in the clean up this mess. Mullaly would be a start.

User currently offlineContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1475 posts, RR: 44
Reply 22, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49868 times:

Quoting Racko (Reply 13):
Official A350 statement from the conference call was "on track for the time being".

Chuckle, chuckle. I am the architect/technical lead on a project at my current client, and this is what our PM tells inquirers even when we already know we have troubles that we cannot solve during the project's remaining scheduled time. What we do is "socialize" the idea that we are having problems, with the department's director, who then "socializes" it elsewhere. Then the official announcement isn't such a hammer.

[Edited 2009-07-30 18:32:22]

Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
User currently offlineContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1475 posts, RR: 44
Reply 23, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49831 times:

Quoting Wingman (Reply 22):
My guess is that McNerney and several others will be gone by year-end and we may see a hard play to get Mullaly back from Ford. That alone would go a long way to restoring some confidence in the employee base and the customers as well.

And it would be disastrous for Ford and its shareholders. I bought Ford stock when they named Mullaly CEO. While I believe he could do for Boeing what he has been doing for Ford, I would rather he continue to do it for Ford!

Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
User currently offlineUSAFDO From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 49826 times:

Am I reading this right....Boeing Engineers on the 787 program are reporting extremely sensitive company information of the productions problems of their employers aircraft?

Is that what I am reading in the Seattle Times?

25 Castillo : Actually it is correct, but don't take my word for it just look at FAR 25.301: "(a) Strength requirements are specified in terms of limit loads (the
26 Pygmalion : Overweight Landings, heavy turbulence and gusts and RTOs all require structural inspections... none of them are anywhere near limit load. Limit load
27 RedFlyer : Stitch, if I recall correctly, didn't Mr. Bell state just last week that they are running $800 million/quarter? At that rate, over the last 2 years (
28 Castillo : Anyone directly involved with the A350 knows that is patently false and knows what the current delay is. In my career I have been fortunate to spend
29 EcuadorianMD11 : Aha!! I knew it........... That would make you the prime suspect! But on a more serious note, few people can say they worked for both companies I thi
30 Dalavia : Boeing is riding on the back of decades of goodwill at this stage. If problems of this magnitude were being experienced by Tupolev, or even Embraer, w
31 Stitch : I think it's more than just "goodwill". They've been building commercial airliners for near on a century and even though they've co**ed this one up r
32 Banjo76 : OFF topic I know, but I did not start the thing... Would you please elaborate, I'm no insider and AFAIAC, no delay to the 350 has been reported. Do y
33 Dalavia : I agree. This is precisely what I meant by "riding on the back of decades of goodwill".
34 Rheinwaldner : I am not sure. You could argue that this part of the 787 is build according to the panel apporach because the center fuselage section consists not of
35 XT6Wagon : More importantly from some of the "rumors" it sounds like the stringer was TOO stiff near the joint causing it to remain straight instead of bending
36 Wowpeter : Well said... however, if they did bring Mullaly back... it will be a great irony... they pass Mullaly for the top job at Boeing and gave it to McNern
37 Pylon101 : "Nevertheless, Boeing will prevail in this issue. Why? Because the must. The entire US requires that Boeing succeed. So they will. And the 787 will be
38 Rheinwaldner : Boeing quote: "800 millions are for building up inventory" Thus, yes, it has retained value (though mostly at the suppliers, that's the other point I
39 Rheinbote : The inventory is value consisting of part stocks which will be turned into revenue later (unless the inventory or part of it is rendered obsolete by
40 Post contains links Wolbo : From Seattle Times: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2009520585_boeing23.html
41 EPA001 : Yes, this is remarkable. They have clearly told a lie and did not want to face the world with the truth at the Paris Air Show. Contrary to what Airbu
42 Asiaflyer : I don't think he just grabbed that number out of the blue, and compensation payments to airline might be a heavy part of it. AI's rumored claim of $7
43 Rheinbote : The key word here is "public". How do you know what information Boeing has given to customers, stakeholders/shareholders? Makes you wonder when IATA
44 Dynamicsguy : Something which needs to be corrected from that article is that it states That's not what Bell says in the call. I wish they'd put the transcript up
45 EPA001 : I do not know this since I am not a shareholder of Boeing. But if it was communicated to the shareholders we would have read about it here on A-net a
46 Tomcat : The load carried by the wing stringers is hardly a function of the way the fuselage is designed. Please don't mix everything.
47 Flyglobal : Some brutal ideas comes to my mind on how to solve the issue, but probably by creating some angry customers. Lets say Boeing may only be able to get t
48 Revelation : From the Seattle Times article: So, what we are discussing here is how Seattle Times messed up their reporting. Last week, their reporting "suggested"
49 TISTPAA727 : The consensus on this forum is the 787 will not take to the sky until next year. Didn't Al Baker say after his meeting with Boeing first flight would
50 Post contains links Rheinbote : Here you go http://seekingalpha.com/transcripts/for/ba[Edited 2009-07-31 06:00:40]
51 Rheinwaldner : My statement was a response to a question about the impact of the fuselage design on this. My position is (it should have become clear from my answer
52 AirNZ : Well, unless I'm reading something entirely incorrectly, the two quotes you supply there are saying exactly the same thing. So what is there that "ne
53 Dynamicsguy : It's the difference between saying that the $8 billion is for parts and airplanes only, or that it also includes non-recurring costs including toolin
54 Racko : Boeing didn't say anything in regard to the load % at which the failure occured. They actually went to great lengths not to say anything about it in
55 Post contains links RedChili : That was based upon the information he got from Carson in a meeting in the end of June, not a week ago. See the following link: http://www.reuters.co
56 Braybuddy : Why was the test frame only tested till it started to fail, somewhere between 120 and 130%? Surely the whole point of testing a static frame to destru
57 Dynamicsguy : That test comes later. This test was apparently only to check the wing up to limit load, and that is what Boeing has said was done. The other 120-130
58 Stitch : Plus if your static model is failing before your computer model said it should - and in areas your computer model didn't expect it to - you don't want
59 RedFlyer : I don't believe that $800 million is down the hole; however, Mr. Bell didn't provide details around what that $800 million entailed. He did specify i
60 Aviators99 : I feel sort of rude about doing it, but I am getting a refund for the $500 I paid to have the VIP seats for the first flight. The reason I feel it's r
61 Astuteman : Airbus declared $6Bn cost overrun associated with the delays, to the existing $12Bn development cost. That figure included delay penalties AND produc
62 Mattcawby : Save your money, there will be a public viewing area at midfield only a few hundred feet from the runway that will accommodate several thousand curio
63 Stitch : I suppose so. Can we all just agree that no matter how long they're offered for sale and no matter how many they sell, the A380 and 787 will never ea
64 Part147 : The way things seem to be going, I wouldn't be surprised if the first few 787s end up being 'scrapped' entirely due to the excessive amount of rework
65 Post contains links Yeogeo : I know you engineering types aren't supposed to be big on humor* but perhaps its time for a little mental health break from the Onion re the 787: htt
66 Baroque : Well if it has no Sprite no wonder it will not fly! Nice catch. I think they are wrong about the wings though, it is more the glue to stick em togeth
67 Astuteman : Absolutely not! My money's on agreeing exactly the opposite, in both cases. But then I'm a glass half-full person.. Rgds
68 Castillo : I think most people are surprised at how often it happens. It is definitely more common with temporary contract workers but there are also many perma
69 Carls : Cost of doing business these days. The A380 is probably in the same neighboorhood. Funny this comment, the only small difference is that the A380 is n
70 GlobeEx : Hm, well, it is said that the costs of overrun for the Dreamliner programm are around 11 billion. So we are talking +20 billion for the whole program
71 Stitch : Even if neither plane makes a profit, they're still going to bring in billions / tens of billions of revenue. I've been a Boeing stockholder for over
72 StressedOut : I can only speak for the structures group, but I have worked with many stress/design engineers that have worked at both companies. Many of these engi
73 ULMFlyer : Hey StressedOut, is it a correct assumption that the top stringer delaminated at the joint under compressive loads? Thanks.
74 RedChili : I'm with you. In my view, both Airbus and Boeing made a good business decision when they launched the program. And both of them proved fully capable
75 EPA001 : This is so true. However, many seem to forget that this is what got us interested in aviation. To see, to hear, to smell and to experience flying on
76 Norlander : I'm seeing this as a failure of management more then anything else, and in that light I'm wondering how successful Boeing has been, since they moved t
77 Manfredj : I'd like to hear more about a claim someone made in the locked thread about the wing stress being "inside the airplane." "The only reason the damage "
78 Planemaker : There are things called GAAP, the SEC, investors, etc, etc...
79 BrouAviation : That is what I'm wondering too. At the beginning of June, I spoke a high bobo in the Boeing Company telling mefull of enthousiasm the 787 would fly T
80 Stitch : Those just cover Boeing's reporting of what they claim to be the truth. They certainly don't cover the actual truth of the matter, as we have seen ti
81 GlobeEx : You are totally taking my quote out of context just to make a point, which I never claimed. I never tried to compare those two types in the way you t
82 Dynamicsguy : It says so in the artice linked at the start of that thread: I've got to rush out the door, otherwise I would find and cite more references to demons
83 BrouAviation : Which is exactly the point I'm making. They aren't to blame for the sales figures crashing in the years afterwards, bringing Boeing 'downhill'.. Boei
84 GlobeEx : I never said anything of that kind. I just said that they failed in dealing with the 787 disaster which it is by now. I'm well aware that the didn't
85 Dynamicsguy : Well, we knew a full week before the first flight was meant to happen, so "hours" is a bit of an exaggeration. They knew as soon as the problem was f
86 Planemaker : We are not talking about other companies. So you what is untruthful about Boeing's SEC filings?
87 GlobeEx : Well, I think you got what I wanted to say as I also made the quotationmarks in my post as well. You know, I don't even argue that. In fact that wasn
88 Dynamicsguy : Sorry, my bad. That's what happens when I skim the thread.
89 EPA001 : As a CEO of a public owned company, he has a legal obligation to inform the stockholders (which basically means informing the world) if such developm
90 BrouAviation : And I say that is not a relevant comparison, because they are such different planes in all aspects! Ah, sorry! I made a big mistake. I was actually r
91 EPA001 : I think the comparison is very much relevant. Forget about the size of the plane, but just compare the actual situation. That situation could be the
92 BrouAviation : It's not size that matters, but what about market potential? I think there is the difference. That is why this Is a useless comparison in my opinion.
93 Affirmative : No matter how you swing this all the problems Boeing is facing are management related. I have been a bystander to the aviation business for quite some
94 EPA001 : Sorry Brou, you missed GlobeEx's and my point completely. It is not nonsense at all. GlobeEx used the A380 example to calculate the possible damage o
95 BrouAviation : Exactly, and also regarding costs C172's, 787's and A380's are NOT comparable. The structure of the three companies involved, their financial situati
96 EPA001 : Sorry, but if you still do not see the point, then you don't want to see it. There is no way you can disagree with this. The damages on the delayed p
97 EPA001 : If you are building 1.000.000 doghouses, it could easily be even expensive as building a modest skyscraper. Again it is about the volume or size of t
98 Post contains links N14AZ : Found that video taken from a helicopter flying over dreamliner one and showing the exposed areas of the wings: http://www.kirotv.com/video/20129150/i
99 EPA001 : That is a nice video showing the problem area. It also shows a beautiful new airplane.
100 N14AZ : Does anybody know how the background of that video? I mean, isn't quit unusual to fly with an helicopter about Boeing's production facilities and to m
101 Stitch : PAE is a public facility and even if it wasn't, in general private property does not extend to the airspace above so there is really nothing Boeing c
102 BrouAviation : The CEO hasn't, the company has that responsibility. Another responsibility is telling their shareholders the truth, the whole truth and nothing but
103 EPA001 : Let's hope so. Since the CEO is representing the company, he/she also legally has this responsibility. Contrary to European business in the US a CEO
104 BrouAviation : That confuses me, regarding what I told earlier: Of course some knew, but I guess we'll never know who knew what and when exactly. Next to that, is a
105 Post contains links and images Dougbr2006 : With ref to the heli video : Still taken shows area in question. There doesn't seem to be a lot of area to work in there especially if they are going
106 Dynamicsguy : You must have a good source inside Boeing to be able to state that as a certainty. If they knew then that the airplane wouldn't fly, then what did th
107 EcuadorianMD11 : Just a quick question...........just read in an article that Boeing have "completed" over ten 787´s already, and about ten more are somewhere in the
108 Post contains links Dynamicsguy : I think 10 complete is a stretch, but they have at least some of the major parts for that many at Everett. There's the static test airframe presumabl
109 Post contains links Baroque : If you are on the high seas in a ship, you might want to keep a careful lookout for a vessel marked Boeing as it seems to be completely at sea too. O
110 TaromA380 : Few months ago there was an Airbus report (sort of book - very controversated due to level of detail) about the 787. Question : did that report forese
111 Baroque : Depends a bit on how you read page 6 of that report. The funniest bit is that RR might need to develop a new casing to accommodate different blading
112 Travelhound : I don't think Boeing has to report about every engineering mile stone to the stock exchange. Their requirement is to report on the financial viabilit
113 EcuadorianMD11 : Okay thanks, I saw those numbers in an article that used the figures coming from "Yvonne", the Boeing spokes woman. Now when you say "paint shop", yo
114 Baroque : The comparison between Rio and B might be quite valid. Just as Rio failed to tell its shareholders about the Al venture and then its standoffish atti
115 Swallow : At least we can count these 'chickens' before they.....er, fly
116 DocLightning : What amazes me about Mulally (my spelling is correct, BTW...checked on Wikipedia) is that his education is aero/astro engineering. Yet he's one of th
117 RedFlyer : That shouldn't be too surprising since that means as an engineer, he applies LOGIC to business decisions - something that's been woefully lacking at
118 Max999 : I wrote this in the other thread about Mulally, but that thread wasn't as dynamic as this one so I'm going to post it here. I don't quite understand w
119 Stitch : It's also possible those decisions were imposed upon him by Stonecipher and/or McNerney and he just executed their instructions. He may very well hav
120 Max999 : Are you implying that he knew the 787 program was in for big trouble several years ago?[Edited 2009-08-03 15:22:40]
121 Stitch : No, but as an "Engineer's Engineer" and someone who remembered the late-1990's production ramp snafu, he may have felt that outsourcing so much of th
122 Pygmalion : Stitch, nearly all of the program level decisions for the 787 were made when Alan M. was head of BCA. He had to approve the decisions that Bair made o
123 Stitch : And those decisions then had to be approved by at least the CEO, and perhaps some by the Board of Directors. I'm more and more of the opinion that Sa
124 Khobar : Why do you think Boeing could "easily" survive cancellation of the 787 program when survive at all is currently being debated?
125 Max999 : He did not damn the program, but I'm saying that as the Boeing Commercial CEO, the buck stops with him. And since he has some responsibility for prob
126 2175301 : A couple of thoughts now that I've read the above post (I've been gone a few days): I don't believe the 787 is currently $11 billion over. $5-6 Billio
127 Stitch : Because those people are either ignorant or they hate Boeing and want it to fail. No, the buck stops with the CEO and Board of Directors. I do not fo
128 Max999 : I think we're moving into the realm of corporate governance here, which I'm not an expert in. But I guess we both agree to disagree about who should
129 Astuteman : I have to say that I struggle a little bit with the "A second production line will save the 787" scenario, like Boeing can click their fingers and ma
130 Baroque : Perhaps "easily was a bit of exaggeration, but the other activities of B are financing the current unproductive schemozzle without stress. Suppose (w
131 DocLightning : I mean, there it is. And, unless I'm incorrect, he has access to more information than any of us do.
132 Pygmalion : he has no more information than any of us do , and lots less than some of us do.
133 Post contains links RedChili : And ATW reports that Boeing has "moved to water down a Sunday report in The Seattle Times that painted a bleak picture of both the scale and time requ
134 Travelhound : I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that a second line is a viable option. The problem I see with the 787 is if the costs to develop the plane
135 2175301 : I am aware of the difficulties; however, you would not have to double the entire amount of tooling. Certain key tooling items would have to be double
136 Post contains links JPRM1 : I would like to share two information which seems provide some precision to the delay. 1/ From Reuters concerning a supplier for the B787: Senior Plc
137 EbbUK : IIRC some time back when 2nd prod line was a hot topic, Boeing's Japanese partners were unwilling to invest any more monies in order to facilitate th
138 Astuteman : I wouldn't go too deeply into that.... My point is that "throwing money at a second line" isnt the overrarching drumbeat constraint.... I'll virtuall
139 Post contains links Baroque : He will do that (go deeply) if he samples the sediment at Morecambe Bay - "Danger. Beware. Fast rising tides. Quicksands. Hidden channels.'' - come t
140 AirNZ : I'm finding it more and more sad that such comments are increasing here on a.net. Whilst I can understand a level of frustration from so, it would se
141 Stitch : It's called "reaping what you sow". When the A380 first encountered problems, a number of rabid Boeing Boosters vilified Airbus Management and stated
142 EPA001 : It is regrettable to see this happen, still I am not sure about the interest since the A380 was severely more bashed here then the B787 (up to this m
143 Art : I'm not at all sure what Airbus will learn from Boeing's mistakes. Boeing has spectacularly mismanaged the 787 program. Airbus do not appear to need
144 Astuteman : You would have thought that we here on A-net would have learned by now, Stitch, wouldn't you. Rgds
145 AirNz : Actually no, I'm quite aware of that 'outlook' but that's not what I meant at all......and I believe it was pretty self-explanatory that wasn't what
146 Post contains links and images Part147 : Aw don't worry Stitch, I enjoy the many posters here because they have opened my eyes to 'the other side' of each argument - I don't always agree wit
147 Post contains images Stitch : Honestly, I'm not interested in whose s**t smells worse. I don't appreciate having to smell it, period.   There are people on this forum who want Bo
148 Post contains links Someone83 : And the customers are getting angry.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF_P77VEPKA
149 RedChili : Now, that's a customer I would not want to see angry.
150 BrouAviation : I like the Sukhoi 100 part.
151 WINGS : Mate, That is one funny video. Just love the following two quotes. '' They'd sell that fat useless whale-plane to anyone with a back-account'' ''Now
152 EPA001 : That's fair enough I am not a fan of that either.
153 Baroque : Spot of luck for a.net and Boeing then that this schemozzle is occurring at a time of record low interest rates. Must account for the relatively mild
154 Baroque : It is hysterical. Is there no end to the uses for that film and fake subtitles? I think the first frame is almost the funniest. At first I assumed it
155 EcuadorianMD11 : Did you order them killed?? What happened to "those people"..........can you "suggest deletion" in the sense of deleting their username and password
156 AirNz : I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you in principle, but equally it has to be said on what criteria are you judging those. Just because you 'feel'
157 Pylon101 : This youtube stuff is so funny!!! Especially for those who actually watched the movie and/or understand German. We really should bring more humor to o
158 Post contains links Scipio : New 787 schedule is "weeks away" - Boeing engineer http://www.reuters.com/article/marke...sNews/idINN0631958620090806?rpc=44 Hmmm. "Weeks away" sounds
159 Vega9000 : "just weeks away" means end September at the least, IMHO. Probably October...I think they are still struggling to understand all the implications of t
160 Stitch : Hopefully this means they have at least identified the issue, properly calculated why it happened, and have developed a workable fix. Of course, how l
161 Rheinbote : The 3Q earnings conference is when, September 23rd?
162 DocLightning : I'm a thoroughbred Boeing cheerleader and I'm concerned that if the 787 doesn't work that there won't be any more BCA. How do you know that?
163 Post contains links JPRM1 : There is a new article in Flightglobal http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...s-preparations-begin-ahead-of.html Even if Boeing estimates they have a
164 Carls : Stich, and some of us just translate in to English and some of the spirit of our comment gets lots. I just hope we can get in to the 787 and A350 soo
165 SixtySeven : From a fairly well connected Boeing employee.... "we're f%$%^ed." It will not fly until next year. I said this last year. This really does suck becaus
166 GlobeEx : Yeah, the problem is, such a technology as the 787 isn't really basic. So having a bsic idea usualy dosn't bring you very far. Very likely probably m
167 Post contains links USAFDO : After reading the article below from Reuters (see link included), I was wonder when the Organization of White Airline Pilots and Organization of Spani
168 Vega9000 : Huh? Did you read the article right? The Organization of Black Airline Pilots didn't spoke. The boeing engineer spoke about it at their meeting. Or w
169 Ikramerica : They are in the process of installing that repair and have already delivered the fix for the static frame AND flight bird #1.. One would hope they un
170 Stitch : If we really are looking at another year before EIS (so Q1 2011 instead of Q1 2010), then if airlines still want the plane and the order book remains
171 Nomadd22 : Maybe I missed it, but is the fatigue frame going to need the modification? You think by the nature of it's purpose it would need to have the same exa
172 Stitch : Yes. They discovered the problem on ZA997 so they must first install the fix on that frame and re-run the test to ensure it meets the 150% minimum lo
173 GlobeEx : Well, you kind of contradict yourself in your post. If such a fix, as you claim is already in the making that option of failing should be close to 0%
174 Nomadd22 : ZA997 isn't the fatigue frame. I'm talking about ZA998. As far as I know, that one never gets stressed over 100%. It just gets stressed normal amount
175 Dynamicsguy : It would be a month later than that, wouldn't it? The Q2 call was the 22nd of July.
176 Stitch : Iif Boeing decides to open two FALs and deliver 15+ 787s a month, they'd exhaust their current backlog within five years of EIS (adjusting for the ti
177 Khobar : Sound words! It seems most don't realize the retroactive penalties if 787 is canceled. The what? The WHAT???? Wow... You are taking his words literal
178 AirlineCritic : I do not understand how you can say that they are already installing the repair. They have publicly stated that they will have the *schedule* for the
179 Revelation : Yes, but what about the time needed to assign blame?
180 SixtySeven : Sometimes simple, non political answers such as the one I heard of "we are F^&%$d" are not only jarrring, they provide a bit of clarity to a situation
181 Astuteman : You know this for a fact? Or are you blowing smoke? Be nice if you're right, but that doesn't sit well with "several weeks before the programme's rel
182 RedChili : Flightblogger's latest entry said that "Supplier sources say that the reinforcing parts required for ZA001 and ZY997 have been shipped to Everett."
183 Astuteman : Missed that. My bad. And credit to Ike where it's due. Rgds
184 GlobeEx : Yes I am, and that is why I don't agree with you statment in this case neither. I know for what you are aiming. Both are very big and important proje
185 Ikramerica : No, I don't contradict myself. The fix is already being delivered. But that doesn't mean it will work. I don't think the engineering will be off, but
186 XT6Wagon : My take on it is that Boeing doesn't NEED the 2nd line to deliver 15 frames a month once its up and into full production. However, having a second li
187 Khobar : Well, the US had already gone to the moon, and no one has ever looped a commercial jetliner. You are referring to the barrel roll that took place in
188 Post contains images Swallow :    His actual words were, "I think..." Given the past history of this program, it is better to be cautious in how we interpret statements coming ou
189 Cerecl : Based on Boeing's current modus operandi, it would have told the world some time ago if there were any significant chance of first flight in 2 months
190 Baroque : OR This beautiful concept deserves better.
191 Astuteman : As I indeed acknowledged. Rgds
192 Art : I imagine that Boeing would have started by identifying the tightest spaces and checking that it is possible for an engineer to reach them, for the r
193 GlobeEx : Sorry, if I misunderstood this statement as more like "we have differnt ideas how to fix it" never ever did I say that. Don't try to put words in my
194 Vega9000 : Aren't the wings made by the Japanese? Let them do it...
195 Slz396 : So far that magic 'fix' is nothing but a few bolts and a jigsaw to cut the U-profile out. Oh, and a Bible to pray for success... Unless the fix is pr
196 Nomadd22 : Testing duration will depend a lot on if they trust the strain gauges to tell them everything's Ok or if they stop every 5% to reinspect suspect areas
197 PITingres : Why? Doing it the other way hasn't worked out too well, has it? Why would you expect them to repeat the mistake indefinitely? Even rats learn...
198 Cerecl : Clearly, they will not repeat the mistake indefinitely, because it means 787 will never get off the ground. However, I think it is fair to say that i
199 Burkhard : A second production line only makes sense if it is full for 10 years at least, and better is ful for 20 years. So we speak if 200+ planes over 20 year
200 PITingres : I think you're confusing public announcements with engineering work. (Or you're confused about what I was replying to.) I'm suggesting that maybe Boe
201 Cerecl : No, I knew exactly what you mean. If Boeing infinitely (or for a long time) gave optimistic report/announcement while the engineering side is not ros
202 Dynamicsguy : But how will management understand the problems without the painstakingly crafted Powerpoint presentations?
203 Nomadd22 : Just give em last weeks with the background and dates changed. I've been using the same one for three years.
204 Tarheelwings : If you actually believe Boeing places the future of its business on a "Bible to pray for success" then I would suggest that based on that logic, they
205 PITingres : Why would we want management to understand the problems? Oooh, I've never tried changing the background. Good idea!
206 Khobar : Priceless!
207 SEPilot : Whether or not a second line will be a wise move will depend on a lot of things not certain yet, such as the state of the world economy, the health o
208 Art : We don't, do we? Dangerous proposition. If management thought they understood the problems, they would start trying to manage them. Management should
209 Kaitak : Maybe he'll start calling it the "7-Edsel-7"?! (*The Edsel was a Ford car of the late 1950s - around the time Boeing entered the jet age!) that nearl
210 GlobeEx : I totaly agree and disagree with you at the same time. Simple fact is, that neither you nor me nor anyone else knows. While it can finally expected b
211 Post contains images Stitch : The problem with the Edsel is customers didn't want it, which is not the case with the 787. And while a commercial failure that cost Ford north of $4
212 Rheinbote : I hear that something is going to be announced on the 25th of September. You are right, the 3Q earnings call would come a month later.
213 Banjo76 : The more I read posts here, the more I have the feeling that B engineers are some kind of martyrs that are never listened to, some kind of Cassandras
214 Travelhound : Yes, I agree with your sentiment and from where we sit it is very difficult to ascertain where the program really went wrong. I think as a starter, b
215 Astuteman : But what aspects of the "ground-breaking engineering" have fundamentally "gone wrong"? That's not what I see.. Rgds
216 Rheinbote : Always two sides of the coin, and even more: Irresponsible suppliers who cannot live up to their insanely low bid, irresponsible investors who don't
217 EPA001 : I do not see it either. They are more or less trying to build the B787 in a way Airbus has been producing for decades. Meaning that in multiple place
218 Norlander : I'm still going to say that to me the reasons behind this mess is that: 1) This is Boeing's first major new product since moving the HQ to Chicago. 2)
219 Travelhound : I haven't used the term "ground-breaking engineering" and have only stated things have generally "gone wrong". I probably should have made myself mor
220 Post contains images Bestwestern : Just like in Dilbert - the engineers always blame sales and marketing. I would agree - it was the engineers that designed and manufactured the aircra
221 Kire : If I remember correctly it was following the (for European companies) very negative development of the $ / € exchange rate, making the Airbusses en
222 AirNz : With respect, exactly what parts of the 787 engineering are "ground-breaking", or are a great 'engineering achievement'? I'm asking out of curiosity
223 Astuteman : Thanks for the clarification, Travelhound, of which I agree with just about every word. The bits that us "teccies" tend to get excited about seem to
224 Travelhound : I am referring to the 787 as an "engineering program" which includes other aspects (over and above engineering) such as logistics, financial, managem
225 Baroque : Hmmm. I seem to remember us having a about this when the Power8 was being discussed and I thought you were of the opinion that this mistake would not
226 GlobeEx : Well, something went wrong in the engineering process obviously. However, I think that is not the problem, customers and of course we anetters are ha
227 Khobar : I didn't know Airbus had already produced a CFRP-fuselaged commercial airliner. Where have they been hiding it? It's also ground-breaking for Airbus
228 Slz396 : It's boeing that wanted its 5 minutes of fame on 7/8/7 and went as far as fooling the world by rolling out nothing but a plastic mock up! That is tot
229 Astuteman : I'll repeat my view that Airbus have never had to slice production by nearly half, with the attendant loss of long-term experienced people in the way
230 Slz396 : The 787 which Boeing said would be an ideal A300 replacement plane, yet would be more than 20T heavier than the Airbus it was aimed to replace? The 7
231 Stitch : And even if they didn't, I suspect that some of the folks who seem to take umbrage at the thought Boeing could have done something Airbus already has
232 Rheinbote : The manufacturing of single-piece, constant and non-constant section CFRP barrels close to 6m in diameter with a contour tolerance of 0.030 inch cons
233 Pygmalion : In addition to Rheinbote's barrels above, I would submit the following: Not only bleedless and fly by wire but also a fully distributed electrical sy
234 Danny : And how is that ground breaking considering all composite wingbox of the A380 that already is in service?
235 Astuteman : Nailed in one my friend. The clever bit is the manufacturing, more than the materials "technology" per se, as is assumed on here too often. And as yo
236 Stitch : Well I am guessing the 787 would have that 12-year D-check interval at EIS, whereas the A330 eventually arrived at it after a decade of active service
237 Pygmalion : The A380 main wing sections are aluminum. Only the center box is CFRP You only have a couple avenues to form aluminum into wing panels. To get the ch
238 Astuteman : As far as I'm aware, the A380 achieves the latter through creep forming. But thanks for the explanation. True. But I'd argue it was ground-breaking a
239 EPA001 : And even today it still is. Which is something many members out here seem to forget. Perfect statement. No doubt the B787 will be overall the most ad
240 AirNZ : Cheers, and was really just curious what you meant. Certainly I would agree that the way/procedure for the aircraft being built is somewhat 'ground b
241 Astuteman : I have to admit to being guilty of overlooking the development of the 77W/L, which I'm sure those that worked on them would argue broke ground in the
242 Maxter : Well, an equally fatuous statement could be "It's also ground-breaking for Boeing to first pretend it was a real aircraft, then tell us it was about
243 Zeke : Numerous statements have been made above regarding Boeings competencies in relation to composite manufacturing. I was of the understanding that 787 ha
244 Baroque : All true, but with a bit of "skill", it would be possible to "design" say a 5% reduction in staffing levels so that it seriously affected institution
245 Post contains links Castillo : I think an armchair observer of the 787 could easily come to such a conclusion because this is the way that the program heads have always tried to se
246 Stitch : GE under Jack Welch (who McNerney studied under) treated personnel as just another "cost center" that could easily be replaced as needed with a cheape
247 Aircellist : So well said. Very good post. In music, what we were doing was called "art", and the value was put on the know-how of performers, able to make someth
248 Aircellist : I can't edit my post... The know-how of engineers... I think we could as well say it has to do with a form of art.
249 AirNz : Would you explain that comment a bit better please? That's interesting, because you're then saying that Boeing is fully responsible for the 787 fiasc
250 Stitch : Boeing can't be fully responsible for every problem on the 787 program because they didn't directly partake of everything that occurred in relation to
251 CPHGuard : In my opinion, any person that has been following the 787 program, and has an IQ over 60, would without any doubt say that it's a combination of both
252 XT6Wagon : unfortunately, there is often only one or two choices of where to source major components now. Plenty of these had issues, yet where is Boeing going
253 Baroque : Exactly the sort of generic cause I had in mind when writing: But I don't know in that sort of detail what has happened in the aircraft industry, jus
254 Travelhound : ... and maybe once Airbus and Boeing have analyzed the mistakes made with the A380 and 787 programs and the consequent delays, the lost revenues and
255 Post contains links RedChili : For what it's worth, ATW reports today that: 1. The fix parts for ZA001 and ZY997 are on their way to Everett (but evidently have not arrived there y
256 Astuteman : Sorta funny in a way that Airbus have been divesting parts of the business in the meantime. That said, if its the same guys in the same desks at the
257 Stitch : Looking deeper into that issue, it seems that it was not so much a case of Alcoa totally dropping the ball, but Boeing management refusing to believe
258 Khobar : Please DO re-read what you posted, especially the part where you claimed there was nothing about the 787 Airbus hadn't been doing for decades. "With
259 Baroque : Tragedy and total farce are seldom far apart! But would you ever manage to predict this in advance? Nah, just too implausible. Does make you wonder w
260 AirNZ : I am well aware of what I wrote (are you?). Tell you what, I'll explain it carefully as you're obviously having some 'deliberate' difficulty. With re
261 Pygmalion : No engineering in the 787 that Airbus hasn't been doing for years.... those are your words. Just limiting it to composites... What commerical airplan
262 EPA001 : The discussion between Khobar and AirNZ seems to be taken a bit out of context. But this quote is interesting. The B787 will be (until the A350-XWB a
263 Astuteman : If I recall, the CFRP horizontal stabilisers in the A380's tail structure are not that much smaller than the 787's wings (from memory I think they're
264 Pygmalion : I didnt think the A380 horizontal was anything near 200 feet in span. Similar in size to A320 wing sure but not a 787/A350 sized airplane. Nor does it
265 SEPilot : It certainly does seem that Airbus is taking a much more conservative approach all around on the A350 than Boeing did on the 787. Hopefully that will
266 Astuteman : They're over 200m2 in area (about 30m/100ft across). That makes sense. As does that And although there's been divestment, it will still be pretty muc
267 Stitch : Maybe "big risks" were what needed to happen in order for "big payoffs" to occur? Yes, the pundits will point out Boeing's own statements where CFRP c
268 Tdscanuck : Yes, it can, given that there's no large commercial airliner (at least in the West, I can't speak for the Russians) that hasn't had a bleed system. T
269 Revelation : A400M has composite wings, which doesn't meet the 'commercial airliner' part of your question, but still, they do hold four large turboprops which mu
270 AirNz : Thank you indeed for saying, and noting, that and you are quite correct. Yes, those are my words and, if you note, I was alluring specifically to the
271 Amicus : Tom, Re your post 268, the A300 tail is CFRP not fiberglass as is the A310 and all A3X aircraft. Regards,
272 Post contains links Astuteman : A fascinating insight here.. http://www.compositesworld.com/artic...for-airbus-a380-vertical-tail.aspx Rgds
273 Tarheelwings : Are you sure that's what you want to say? That Boeing has not built a composite fuselage out of barrels......I'm sure that will come as a huge surpri
274 Rheinbote : Another great post.
275 Dynamicsguy : Can we agree to disagree on this one? It seems to revolve around each person's definition of "ground breaking". Every new airplane program from both m
276 Stitch : Seconded. We're an aviation discussion forum, not a kindergarten playground.
277 EPA001 : Although I do not completely understand the technical details as described in the article, it still is very interesting to read. It gives the reader
278 SixtySeven : When this thing is done and dusted, the way Boeing decided to build this airplane will become a target. Two unidentified engineers sound a lot like tw
279 Baroque : Second EPA001. If you ever find a similar article written in English please be sure to give us all the link. With EPA001 having probs, we know whatev
280 Astuteman : Sadly, though, that is also exactly what happens (routinely) with regard to "technologies" that Airbus applied for the first time "on that scale" on
281 Post contains images EPA001 : I thought I had copied the link in full. Apparently this was not the case.   Sorry about that. I can try to translate the article to Dutch, although
282 Post contains links Baroque : No, not a problem with the link. Just a problem with me being cryptic EPA001. So no trouble at all with the link, but as you too seemed find there wa
283 Post contains links Astuteman : You want another? http://www.compositesworld.com/artic...tion-for-a-big-composite-part.aspx or another? http://www.compositesworld.com/artic...gain-l
284 Slz396 : Personally I'd like to see what is so much more 'groundbraking' about the idea to slice up a composite fuselage circumferencially (with the slices cal
285 Astuteman : We could do with one of the "CFRP aeroplane" experts to translate for us, don't you think? Mind you, they'd probably not understand what our problem
286 Abba : Also it must be said that when Airbus decided that they needed to do more than just beef up the 330 and start on a clean sheet, the best strategic mo
287 Art : Nicely put. Regarding a long delay, would this give suppliers of non-contentious items - I mean components and assemblies that are not involved in th
288 Dynamicsguy : The obvious engineering challenge is that when made as barrels, then they must come out pretty close to bang on in their circumference and diameter.
289 Dynamicsguy : I understood every word. Really. Seriously, what parts of it were less clear? From my reading of it, I think the aspect which would be hardest to und
290 Dynamicsguy : The problem with building parts like this is that you tie up capital in parts and assemblies. This goes against the Lean+ mantra at Boeing. There is
291 Tarheelwings : It's difficult sometimes to see through the "fog" of patriotism, nationalism, regionalism, and any other "ism" that may apply. As an American, I may
292 Astuteman : "What doesn't kill me makes me stronger... " Rgds
293 Baroque : That would be nice. We seem to be in an "all you ever feared you needed to know about making things out of CFRP" mode. Those last two you linked seem
294 Tarheelwings : There's a great quote from Teddy Roosevelt that many on this forum should keep in mind before pounding away at either Airbus or Boeing: "The credit b
295 Tdscanuck : Not having longitudinal splices is a huge deal...they're probably the single most fatigue-prone installation on the entire aircraft. In addition, wel
296 Post contains links and images Zeke : They have been dealing with lightning protection for a long time, on the commercial side, on the military side, Eurofighter has 70% of the external w
297 Tdscanuck : Actually, I'm just fine with calling the 787 performance to this point a failure. But the post I was originally responding to suggested that the hype
298 EPA001 : That is my understanding as well. Percentages and absolute weights are really two different things in this discussion. Great post Zeke!
299 RIX : - a non-ER one? Hardly the case, 330 has nothing to do with it. And, anyway, Boeing did nothing to replace it, other than 787-3, which was hardly a p
300 Pygmalion : Have to disagree with both you and Zeke. It has nothing to do with poundage of CFRP or percentage of some all up weight. it has everything to do with
301 Slz396 : I fully understand the barrel approach is a more COMPLICATED method to achieve, but is a more complicated way also a BETTER way, as in MORE EFFICIENT
302 Post contains links Khobar : "Airbus signs a joint venture contract to establish a manufacturing centre for aircraft composite parts in Harbin, China 30 January 2009 Airbus and a
303 Stitch : The Government of Dubai also bought a bit over 3% of Airbus' common stock and was/is interested in buying some of the factories that Airbus was/is sp
304 Tdscanuck : Yes. I'd argue the exact opposite. It's easy to show that the barrel has an inherent technical advantage because there's no way to make a panel struc
305 Post contains links GBan : Structural Flaw Halts Production Of 787 Sections (by IAD787 Aug 13 2009 in Civil Aviation) Would a similar issue be less or more of an issue with the
306 Tdscanuck : Not sure...I suspect it would depend a great deal on how the panel was done. The barrels, as far as I know, are fiber placement, while panels could b
307 Post contains links ManuCH : This thread is now too long, and there are multiple threads going on about the same topic. Please continue discussion here: Any Update On 787 Repair?
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...
787 First Flight Delayed To 1Q2009 posted Wed Oct 8 2008 17:09:31 by Observer
787 First Flight Delayed Another 3 Months? posted Mon Feb 4 2008 10:54:46 by Heavierthanair
787 First Flight Delayed Until October posted Fri Aug 10 2007 06:43:18 by Mymiles2go
787 First Flight Delayed 2 Weeks posted Sun Jun 17 2007 23:16:44 by KLMCedric
Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 3 posted Wed Jul 1 2009 13:42:32 by Srbmod
Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 2 posted Wed Jun 24 2009 09:17:32 by WILCO737
Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight Part 1 posted Tue Jun 23 2009 06:05:41 by Pilot21
Should B Launch The 737NNG At 787 First Flight? posted Fri Sep 16 2005 21:02:00 by Ikramerica
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