Thanks, part 2 of the thread was still very much being discussed but it went all a bit off-topic unfortunately. So hopefully we can stay on topic for a little longer in this thread.
Quoting Keesje (Thread starter): I'm afraid the first flight planning is getting "ambitious" again with all the installation / testing to be done prior..
You may very well be right again. Quote from Jon's blog: "Boeing declined to say how long the final fittings would take to fabricate, but that they would be ready "soon"." And here is where I can see the most critical bottleneck, to be honest. I'm quite confident that Boeings solution works and that it will pass the tests, but they may be a tad optimistic with delivery times of their latest revision.
But frankly, first flight in December or January won't make that much difference to me, as long as they can get it to EIS in Q4 2010.
I agree that it seems doable. I guess fabrication can be predictable (for Boeing at least) and by now they might have a good idea on how long installation will take. I'm crossing my fingers as far as testing and as you say, no further hiccups.
God is The Alpha and The Omega. We come from God. We go towards God. What an Amazing Journey...
It reminds me about one year ago (or was it two years ago?) when the FF was also scheduled for the end of the year: I see myself already sneaking secretly with my laptop into the bathroom to check the latest developments about the FF during the Christmas holidays. Ok, I will use the remaining time to learn some good excuses when they knock on the door...
EPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 15924 times:
Well, that is some positive news from the B787 front at last. Now let's hope the rest of the installation of the fix on the planes goes smooth so that we can still see the B787 fly for the first time in 2009 instead of 2010. On a PR side the year 2009 looks much better then the year 2010.
I am still curious about the complete schedule of the flight tests. I guess this will only be published after they are sure of the effects of the fix. Probably after the first flight we will hopefully be informed about this.
Dougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 391 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 15856 times:
Let's hope that the computer modeling is good enough now for a 100% fix.
It would seem the model is being adjusted all the time, being that only 10 days ago they were redesigning the last parts. If that model is not good now it will only show up only on the full aircraft tests. Testing individual parts in a lab is one thing, but the full assembly tests are the proof of the pudding.
As many people have been saying if this fix is not 100% Boeing could if necessary go on and start limited flight testing of systems, basic flight envelopes, all the things that would not be limited by any necessary adjustment to the wing re-enforcement mod as it stands today.
I noted a comment on flightbloggers announcement of the first ANA 787 on the flight-line, and I quote "Boeing has said the aircraft - ZA100 - will have a limited role in the flight test program to validate some weight saving structural changes" are these weight changes also completed or is there more to come, IOW has this aircraft had the structural weight and changes to the wiring harnesses fully implemented.
Perhaps there are other reasons why the first three aircraft have no commercial value could be that it would be too expensive to modify them to the final certified standard as in the weight, system changes in respect to wiring etc.
Fingers crossed that all is well now, or it will break Boeing's currently fragile reputation.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15115 times:
Quoting Dougbr2006 (Reply 8): Perhaps there are other reasons why the first three aircraft have no commercial value
I think parts assemblies that normally shouldn't have been disassembled have been taken apart for mods, with collateral damage & off standard fixes. I wouldn't like to make a maintenance program for those birds.
Quoting Aviationbuff (Reply 9): Dec 09 seems too ambitious, however, first flight in Jan/Feb will be very fair to all concerned parties and enthusiasts.
I think more importantly the many customers that don't want to miss out in the next economic boom will ask tough questions and demand really realistic delivery schedules.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29684 posts, RR: 84
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14736 times:
I imagine Boeing has been working on installing the 13 stringers they felt would survive and now they have the design for the final 4 problem stringers (#2, #3, #4 and #5) completed and are now going to fabrication. So the remaining installation time will be shorter than if they had to install all 17 and therefore first flight by the end of the year should still be theoretically achievable.
As for the test program, the plan is to complete the installation on ZA002 through ZA006 in one-month increments with the planes entering flight test at that time. So assuming ZA001 flies in December 2009, all six should be in the air by June 2010.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21416 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 14277 times:
Quoting 757GB (Reply 13): I am assuming that if successful, the fix will then have to be installed in production birds such as JA801A, which showed up on the flightline the other day. Is anyone aware of the timeline for that?
Not sure, but the fabrication of the parts for 1 and 997 don't impact that, and vice versa. Parts for 2-20+ can be mass produced to the same spec, if you can call a limited run like that mass production, but the first two sets will be true "one of a kind" parts.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
AirbusA370 From Germany, joined Dec 2008, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 14255 times:
Were there any news about the repair of the static test bird? It was implied that it was damaged during the previous failed test, at least the wing skin partially delaminated from the stringers. The repair of the wing skin and stringers in this area would certainly put the test result of the fix in question, since the flying aircrafts are different.
Rheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 12834 times:
Quoting AirbusA370 (Reply 15): It was implied that it was damaged during the previous failed test, at least the wing skin partially delaminated from the stringers. The repair of the wing skin and stringers in this area would certainly put the test result of the fix in question, since the flying aircrafts are different.
AFAIK the delamination was not between the skin and the stringers, but within the stringers.
Tomcat From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 158 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 11643 times:
Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 20): May be, may be not. Airplane LN7 onwards have different center wing boxes and some weight savings incorporated into the wings.
That's right, just as LN 5 and 6 have left hand side side of body rib different from the right hand side. So the fix for these 2 birds is sligthly different than on LN 1-4.
It could also very well be that design of LN 7 and on fix is not yet completed. I would only take that LN1 and LN 9997 fix is released as I suspect that only one single engineering team is working on the various variants of the fix. Besides that, another Boeing/MHI/FHI team could be working on THE long term design change to be incorporated from LN ???.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
That was part of the delay, as they had to restore it to "as new" condition for retesting.
An Anetter said that, but is not true.
Yes it is true, in quotes. The parts had to be restored to the same strength as pre failure, but they were repaired, not replaced with brand new parts. That's where the confusion came in. Too many people worrying about "exact words" like some Boeing version of the Brady bunch.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
: What's changed? As far as I can tell, they're still on their latest schedule. It doesn't appear to be any more ambitious now that it was when they an
: Good God, man! Was 2000 a decade ago? Surely you jest. That CAN'T be right! (jeeeeeezus...that was quick)
: off the topic............. Boeing issues RFI for 787 connectivity solution http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...for-787-connectivity-solution.html
: I can't see how they could do any better. Boeing screwed up several times on this 787, now please tell me how the PR department could have done bette
: Umm... the decade doesn't change until 2011. Nice idea, though. 2000 was... the turn of the century was not. 2001 was the first year of the 21st cent