Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aboulafia: 787 EIS Delayed Again By 3 Months  
User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2289 posts, RR: 5
Posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 21292 times:

Flight test progress is reported to be 3 months behind plan....

Source: http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/wirtscha...-auf-den-Dreamliner/story/24099601

Earliest EIS would be Q1 2011, 33 month later than planned first.

Are there other sources and/or more substance?

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineebj1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 21280 times:

Wasn't there speculation that the flight test plan was too ambitious? Does this really come as any kind of surprise? The airplane will go into service when it's ready and when it's ready, it will do a fine job. That's what's important.


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 7007 posts, RR: 63
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 20857 times:

Mr. Aboulafia tends to be rather hard on Airbus and rather soft on Boeing so I wonder...

Meanwhile, FLIGHT were recently reporting that launch customer, ANA, were preparing for a further delay. This story would fit.

I hope it is wrong. With some luck, I could be flying on a 787 this year. Next year would be good. This year would be better!   


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31436 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 20221 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It would be helpful to know where the shortfall is projected to be - flight hours, ground hours or both?

If it is ground hours, I should think Boeing could wire one of the later production frames (perhaps for a customer not wanting delivery until 2011 - like LA) and run it around PAE, BFI or something to allow the six official test frames to concentrate on logging flight hours.


User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 19859 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
I should think Boeing could wire one of the later production frames (perhaps for a customer not wanting delivery until 2011 - like LA) and run it around PAE, BFI or something to allow the six official test frames to concentrate on logging flight hours.

Not sure whether that's a viable option. Some aircraft are very unique in their instrumentation. For example, ZA004 (I think) was wired and equipped with strain gauges for the flight loads campaign during her assembly. I doubt that another aircraft could be equipped for this task without prior disassembly.

If all aircraft had joined the test program on time and would have generated sorties like ZA001 and ZA002 do, I tend to believe that certification flight testing could have been finished in under 12 months. But...all aircraft including ZA001 and ZA002 were on ground for 3 weeks or so to have their software updated. ZA003 and ZA004 came in a few weeks late and initially didn't generate anywhere near the sortie rate as ZA001 and ZA002 did (seems that at least now they do). ZA005 and ZA006 first flights are overdue by 2 months already.

That said, I still think there's no reason for Boeing to rush a 2010 delivery other than pleasing Wall Street.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1473 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 19858 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
It would be helpful to know where the shortfall is projected to be - flight hours, ground hours or both?

Don't know mate, but it could also be that Boeing has run into some kind of problem that'll take a while to solve. Nothing unusual about that, it's one of the reasons for testing. However, the very ambitious Boeing schedule does not leave much, if any, room for correction of problems. I, along with many others, have always questioned the wisdom of the Boeing schedule and, as an extention of that, suggested a more usual 12 month testing & certification regime would be more realistic.

However, being the eternal pessimist that I am when it comes to highly complex programs such as this, will offer the suggestion that there'll be a further 6 months delay in total, resulting in EIS an eyewatering 36 months behind original plan. I certainly hope Boeing will prove me wrong, but my hopes are not high.



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31436 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 19735 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 4):
Not sure whether that's a viable option. Some aircraft are very unique in their instrumentation. For example, ZA004 (I think) was wired and equipped with strain gauges for the flight loads campaign during her assembly. I doubt that another aircraft could be equipped for this task without prior disassembly.

Boeing appears to be able to do so with another customer 747-8Fs, so I would think it would not be impossible to do so with a customer 787. Assuming the delay is that they don't have enough flight hours. A few folks have stated that the bulk of hours are generated on the ground, not in the air. So if Boeing could instrument a frame for ground tests to free up hours on the six planes instrumented for flight testing to perform flight testing, that might help them at least reduce the delay.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 5):
Don't know mate, but it could also be that Boeing has run into some kind of problem that'll take a while to solve.

Boeing has been unable to hide any problem with the 787 or the 747-8. Witness the Flaps 30 issue with the 747-8F's undercarriage. So if there is an issue with the 787 flight test program, we should know about it within hours of Boeing.  


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 19322 times:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6480DM20100509?type=marketsNews

Quote:
Boeing is due to deliver the first 787 to All Nippon Airways (9202.T) by the end of this year.

"Testing is going well. If there are no unexpected discoveries, we'll be on track," said James Albaugh, President and Chief Executive of Boeing Commercial Airplanes on the sidelines of an event.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18846 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 2):
Mr. Aboulafia tends to be rather hard on Airbus and rather soft on Boeing so I wonder...

He's rather critical of Airbus on the A380 program (and some critique on the RLI) more than anything.....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18831 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
Boeing has been unable to hide any problem with the 787 or the 747-8

How do you know? That's not to imply anything, and 'hiding' isn't a word I'd use in this context to begin with. But to assume that every problem/challenge/issue gets published is quite a stretch.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 7):
"Testing is going well. If there are no unexpected discoveries, we'll be on track,"

Statements like that, no matter whether issued by Airbus, Boeing or any other player, are nothing but hollow phrases. "Testing is going well" is a subjective assessment, moreover it is relative to an arbitrary standard. "We'll be on track if there are no unexpected disvoveries" is a no-brainer that doesn't even imply that they are on track right now. Anyway, it doesn't imply anything towards progress. You could be on track with a dead engine and broken axles. I'm not trying to weasel into sematics here, but statements like the above are crafted with great care to sound fundamentally positive while having next to no substance that could be held against the company in a lawsuit. The safest thing to do for any senior manager is to begin every statement with "I believe...", "I am convinced....", "I am pleased with..." or the like.


User currently offlinenomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1903 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 18522 times:

Wasn't there word that Boeing was going to bring #7 into the test program?


Andy Goetsch
User currently offlinerj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1886 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 18421 times:

How and where does Boeing do Gate testing (pulling a jet bridge up to the plane, etc......)

User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 18093 times:

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 1):
Wasn't there speculation that the flight test plan was too ambitious?

There was a lot of discussion to that effect under the prior schedule (where flight testing was ~6 months). During the last rescheduled they built in more buffer and upped it to 9+ months, so I'm not sure that speculation applies to the current schedule.

Quoting rj777 (Reply 11):
How and where does Boeing do Gate testing (pulling a jet bridge up to the plane, etc......)

I'm not sure they do...what do you learn by such a test? The part of the jetbridge that goes up against the plane is exactly the same as the piece at the top of the airstairs that Boeing uses at Boeing Field.

Tom.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25704 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 17873 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8):
He's rather critical of Airbus on the A380 program (and some critique on the RLI) more than anything.....

You don't remember what he said about the A350XWB at the Paris Air Show? LOL.

Every time the aircraft met a bar that he had set, he raised the bar higher. The last was when he dismissed the plane because ILFC had not ordered it - and then ILFC did.

It was funny.  

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10253 posts, RR: 97
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 17054 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 8):
He's rather critical of Airbus on the A380 program (and some critique on the RLI) more than anything.....

There was the saga of the ever-changing goalposts by which the A350 would be deemed acceptable...
And inevitably it never would be....

Amusing.

Rgds


User currently offlineabba From Denmark, joined Jun 2005, 1387 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15989 times:

Keeping in mind the nature of the source: should we say 12, then?

User currently offlineDelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1513 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15776 times:

So he is viewed as a biased source when he discusses Airbus but reputable when Boeing? That somehow doesn't follow...

User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25704 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 15578 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Delimit (Reply 16):
So he is viewed as a biased source when he discusses Airbus but reputable when Boeing? That somehow doesn't follow...

He (somewhat) admits the bias now. He is the one who referred to the "drug-like rush" of the 787, and admits to his great disappointment over the delays.

He also admits that some of the comparisons he made between the 787 and A350XWB, may have been - hasty.

LOL.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14529 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Thread starter):
Flight test progress is reported to be 3 months behind plan....

This would be the first delay during flight testing.
I would be more surprised, than not, if it was the only delay.

Quoting PM (Reply 2):
I hope it is wrong. With some luck, I could be flying on a 787 this year. Next year would be good. This year would be better!

I doubt you'll have the pleasure before the end of 2011, but we'll see.


User currently offlineebbuk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13601 times:

787 delayed? Again? I am not saying a word. I will have nothing to say about it this.

User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13274 times:

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 4):
That said, I still think there's no reason for Boeing to rush a 2010 delivery other than pleasing Wall Street.

I cannot understand people who love to throw this statement around, do you not understand that "Wall Street" owns the company? "Wall Street" is most definitely the single most important entity to please, if your owners ("Wall Street") are unhappy the company won't last very long.



/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13228 times:

Well, color me confused. This, from another aviation news source (fair use exerpt):

May 9, 2010

"Boeing is on track to deliver its first 787 Dreamliner to All Nippon Airways by the end of this year, the company's head of commercial planes said.

"Testing is going well. If there are no unexpected discoveries, we'll be on track," said James Albaugh chief executive of Boeing Commercial Airplanes."



I come in peace
User currently offlineDan23 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12541 times:

Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 10):

I believe LN9 (N6066Z) was at one stage going to be used for some sort of testing, I assume this is still the case.


User currently offlinenaritaflyer From Japan, joined Apr 2006, 549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12458 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 21):
Testing is going well. If there are no unexpected discoveries, we'll be on track," said James Albaugh chief executive of Boeing Commercial Airplanes."

Isn't this what they always say until they can't hide anymore and only then come out clean and confess what everyone already knows?

Aboulafia might have a source who told him about the possible delay or he is guessing based what he has seen so far. As far as Boeing is concerned everything is on track until they have to make an announcement. They might make that announcement any day. As far as I'm concerned, I believe Aboulafia.


User currently offlinewjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5362 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11807 times:

This guy is just playing the odds that he'll look like a genius if/when there is some kind of delay.

25 Post contains images frigatebird : The very first flight test period for the 787 was planned to start September 2007 with first delivery to the customer in May 2008. About 8 months, wh
26 flyingAY : Yep, if this goes how it has been going before, it's about 3-5 days still before they announce a 3-9 month delay.
27 decoder : I have to say the above statement is a work of art. For the optimistic, it's saying "Everything is fine". To me it says: We are not on track currentl
28 pylon101 : The test program of Boeing appears to be too agressive. So some delays would be quite understandable. The issue is that we never know what is the caus
29 Post contains images AirlineCritic : Yes, except maybe making the customers happy and generating some cashflow FWIW I think this rumor is pretty bogus. If Aboulafia is the only source I
30 rheinwaldner : The article reveals some details about that: "Related to the projected 3000 hours of flight testing the current status seems to be 3 months behind".
31 Burkhard : As long as the additional delays are months I don't care, normal in this buisiness.
32 Post contains links 747classic : With presently 7 test aircraft (4 787 and 3 747-8F) in the air, some data storage, telemetry or other software related problems for managing all reco
33 ikramerica : Except that flown hours are not the same as test hours. Multiple tests can be run for all or part of the flight, but flown hours also count wheels up
34 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : Well, it is your A.net birthday today, so I'd think today's the day to say whatever you want. -Dave
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 Firstflight Delayed At Least One Year? posted Wed Jul 22 2009 04:22:28 by Rheinwaldner
787 Fastener Problems Caused By Boeing Engineers posted Thu Nov 20 2008 12:01:46 by FrmrCAPCADET
Sterling Could Be Flying Again By Next Week! posted Mon Nov 3 2008 04:33:56 by SKAirbus
787-Dreamliner #4 Delayed Indefinetly posted Mon Jun 30 2008 16:39:21 by NYC777
Goldman Sachs Believes 787 EIS In July 2009 posted Fri Mar 7 2008 06:59:49 by Stitch
T3 At Dubai Delayed Again? posted Sun Feb 24 2008 09:35:28 by Chrisjdurber
Impressed Once Again By AA Eagle F/A's posted Wed Oct 3 2007 13:29:52 by TWAL10114ever
WSJ: Boeing Expects On-time 787 EIS posted Mon Sep 17 2007 15:31:01 by CygnusChicago
US-EU Open Skies Delayed Again posted Wed Aug 16 2006 06:56:27 by MasseyBrown
BFL - MX Flights Delayed Again, Now Spring 2007 posted Wed Jul 19 2006 19:01:49 by FATFlyer