keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14727 times:
One plan was to shift ETOPS (Extended Twin-engine Over-ocean Performance Specification) testing from the original 6 flight test aircraft to 787 #7-10. In order to prevent further delays to the 787 schedule, BA is now using 10 aircraft in the certification process.
That's why the missing Trent 1000 for the 9th aircraft influences certification.
Since BA is now relying on 10 aircraft for certification and given the difficulty getting 787 #6 into the test program (now slated for September), we think it’s possible first delivery of the 787 could slip beyond 1Q11 to 2Q11.
Would not be unexpected IMO, looking at the variety of known hick-ups in the program planning.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14623 times:
Yeah but if thesea re ETOPS testing aircraft, they can and will be delivered to its intended airline in this case ANA once certification is done.
In my opinion, this move is to expedite the certification process so they can deliver on time.
nyc777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5163 posts, RR: 49 Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14380 times:
Well before certain people start getting their undies in a knot because "ohh Boeing can't manage its test flight program and now they have to use production 787s for test flights"..it has always been the plan to use some of the production aircraft in the testing process towards the end of the test flight program. Not only were they supposed to do ETOPS testing but they wanted to compare ther performanceof the production airplanes vs the flight test airplanes with the flight test airplanes providing baseline performance data.
Zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7727 posts, RR: 73 Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 14096 times:
On the 777 Boeing used customer aircraft, and customer airlins/crews to perform various ETOPS/route proving flights. CX flew B-HNB with Boeing as N77773 down to SYD as part of this testing prior to delivery.
This is however the first referance I have seen to them deciding to use 10 aircraft for the 787 flight cvertification process. Previous Boeing statments indicated a 6 aircraft flight testing program "in six and a half months".
e.g.
"On the 787, we were asked to take six aircraft and get through the flight test program in six and a half months, in record time. To do that we really had to look carefully at our business," he adds. Boeing originally planned to complete 787 certification around April 2008."
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26726 posts, RR: 83 Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13963 times:
NH might actually be happy to loan some aircraft for ETOPS testing since as I recall, the Japanese Aviation Authorities are requiring a year of NH operation before they will grant the necessary certificate. Perhaps NH can apply these hours towards that requirement?
flipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1527 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13940 times:
Well Keesje, ia have to say that i disagree with all the others here and don't believe that you are actually that Airbus oriented as when I was first a member here (2006 I think) I thought you were a member of pro Boeing crowd (A380 delays) so I think you must just like to be the bearer of bad news.
Back on topic, I think what Boeing are doing is a good idea as NH wont be using their 787s for ETOPS straight away anyway so not a huge problem there I think.
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2232 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13858 times:
Quoting keesje (Thread starter): Since BA is now relying on 10 aircraft for certification and given the difficulty getting 787 #6 into the test program (now slated for September), we think it’s possible first delivery of the 787 could slip beyond 1Q11 to 2Q11.
Surprised no one picked up on this little tidbit. A subtle quasi-announcement of another delay? Lord, I hope not.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13515 times:
Quoting Zeke (Reply 6): This is however the first referance I have seen to them deciding to use 10 aircraft for the 787 flight cvertification process. Previous Boeing statments indicated a 6 aircraft flight testing program "in six and a half months".
It's important to distinguish between flight test aircraft and certification...there are only six flight test aircraft. There are tests that, for a variety of reasons, you can't or don't want to do on flight test aircraft, and those are normally done on production aircraft. 6 flight test aircraft and 10 aircraft used in certification aren't contradictory.
BlueFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3126 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13483 times:
Maybe I'm thick but there's something I just don't get in this report. In answer to a question from the author about the engine that suffered an uncontained failure, Boeing apparently replied that (...) two engines are required for ETOPS and “function and reliability” (F&R) testing and are uniquely instrumented.
Don't you need two engines just to fly the plane, testing or no testing?!? Are they talking about testing on the ground?
bonusonus From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 398 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13429 times:
Quoting ER757 (Reply 10): Since BA is now relying on 10 aircraft for certification and given the difficulty getting 787 #6 into the test program (now slated for September), we think it’s possible first delivery of the 787 could slip beyond 1Q11 to 2Q11.
Surprised no one picked up on this little tidbit. A subtle quasi-announcement of another delay? Lord, I hope not.
This is from an industry analyst, not Boeing themselves. In fact, some analysts like these have been predicting a Q2 2011 EIS for some time now.
"Source: Boeing *Electromagnetic Effects/High Intensity Radiated Field **Extended Operations/Functionality & Reliability
Boeing expects 2,430 flight hours and 3,100 ground test hours in the ZA001-ZA004 testing program. The ZA005-ZA006 tests will account for 670 flight and 600 ground test hours."
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2232 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13115 times:
Quoting bonusonus (Reply 9): This is from an industry analyst, not Boeing themselves. In fact, some analysts like these have been predicting a Q2 2011 EIS for some time now.
My bad - I mis-read "we" to be Boeing speaking and not the analyst. D'oh!
Yes. But there are tests that aren't listed there for *any* flight test airplane that are required for certification, which means Boeing must have been planning to do them on production aircraft.
The point is that "flight test aircraft" and "aircraft on which you do flight tests" aren't the same thing. A flight test aircraft is one that is built for flight testing and equipped for such. You can do flight tests on production aircraft (it happens all the time).
nyc777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5163 posts, RR: 49 Reply 13, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13030 times:
Again, Boeing is using the production 787s in flight test to compare against the baseline performance of the flght test aircraft. They also want to compare the ETOPS performance of the production aircraft vs that of the flight test 787s. The information that Zeke refers to is material that was put out in 2008...things have changed since then. The saddition of the production 787s to the test flight fleet has been widely reported.
trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12780 times:
[quote=Stitch,reply=4]NH might actually be happy to loan some aircraft for ETOPS testing since as I recall, the Japanese Aviation Authorities are requiring a year of NH operation before they will grant the necessary certificate. Perhaps NH can apply these hours towards that requirement?
[/quotrl
isn't the whole point of certification by the national regulatory authorities that the airline itself is operating the flight, if they were agreeable to anyone , anywhere operating sufficient flights for etops why would this ever have been an issue for the Japanese government, they coudl have accepted FAA, EASA etc etops certification out of the box.
ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 15, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12596 times:
Quoting trex8 (Reply 14): isn't the whole point of certification by the national regulatory authorities that the airline itself is operating the flight, if they were agreeable to anyone , anywhere operating sufficient flights for etops why would this ever have been an issue for the Japanese government, they coudl have accepted FAA, EASA etc etops certification out of the box.
I believe it's both.
Aircraft and airlines both need to prove ETOPS. Now NH and JL have proved they can handle ETOPS on other aircraft, and the 787 will be ETOPS certified at delivery, but being so no in service, the Japanese authority, either wisely or ridiculously, want more data and real hours to assure them. I'm not sure how much of that data must come from NH themselves or how much can come from birds in the air around the world.
Maybe someone more familiar with the requirements of the JAA can help here.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14356 posts, RR: 26 Reply 16, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12302 times:
Quoting nyc777 (Reply 2): .it has always been the plan to use some of the production aircraft in the testing process towards the end of the test flight program.
They'd be stupid not to. The planes aren't helping anything just sitting on the ramp.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7727 posts, RR: 73 Reply 17, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10620 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 12): The point is that "flight test aircraft" and "aircraft on which you do flight tests" aren't the same thing. A flight test aircraft is one that is built for flight testing and equipped for such. You can do flight tests on production aircraft (it happens all the time).
Seems AW&ST and my understanding were both correct.
Boeing is now stating that two additional aircraft will join the flight test group.
"There will be limited testing on two additional airplanes for a total of eight airplanes (not four for a total of 10). The additional testing is driven by the requirement that some of the testing be done on airplanes in production configuration as opposed to flight test configuration. One airplane will do some ground testing. The other will do some flight testing. "
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 18, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10620 times:
Boeing issued a clarifying statement today:
"There will be limited testing on two additional airplanes for a total of eight airplanes (not four for a total of 10). The additional testing is driven by the requirement that some of the testing be done on airplanes in production configuration as opposed to flight test configuration. One airplane will do some ground testing. The other will do some flight testing. "
EPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 3594 posts, RR: 36 Reply 19, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10513 times:
Quoting Zeke (Reply 17): Boeing is now stating that two additional aircraft will join the flight test group.
"There will be limited testing on two additional airplanes for a total of eight airplanes (not four for a total of 10). The additional testing is driven by the requirement that some of the testing be done on airplanes in production configuration as opposed to flight test configuration. One airplane will do some ground testing. The other will do some flight testing. "
So they have reacted to the latest delays to use more aircraft to speed up the certification process. This is a good move imho, but also shows how much Boeing is really pressed for time here. With the engine issues Q2 of 2011 does not even seem far fetched. Lets hope they can now pull it off in Q1 but somehow I am not that optimistic.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 20, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9944 times:
Quoting EPA001 (Reply 19): So they have reacted to the latest delays to use more aircraft to speed up the certification process.
No.
" The additional testing is driven by the requirement that some of the testing be done on airplanes in production configuration as opposed to flight test configuration."
All six aircraft in the test fleet are in flight test configuration. If there are requirements for tests on production configuration, those could *never* have been done on the flight test airplanes, therefore they must have always planned this.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 22, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9361 times:
Quoting Zeke (Reply 21):
Yes they could, that is why ZA003 was to have a passenger cabin fit.
No. Although ZA003 has a passenger cabin, it is not in production configuration. None of the flight test planes are (unless you think that having the entire center seat section missing and replaced by instrumentation is "production configuration").
CFBFrame From United States of America, joined May 2009, 531 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7918 times:
Boeing looked out at the Paine Field flightline and saw that it was getting crowded with 787s and 747-8s. Something had to be done to make room for the claimed increase in production rates (currently 2.5 per week?), after all of their past failed attempts to make this program happen, to show customers that the birds really will fly, and to get the workers feeling better about the program. So they decided to pull a few of the production a/c out, fit them with engines, and begin testing to see if the birds are ready for customer delivery. They will fly these birds around to customers, using the visits as ETOPs certification, and as a way of getting customers excited about the possibility of a 787 becoming a member of their fleet. Just maybe customer will see those a/c arrive before a new generation of workers join the airlines. Primary goal of this testing is to ensure there's not another gotcha around the corner with the the production a/c.
And, thus the saga of the 787 continues. Good luck Boeing, the clock has run out for many of your customers. This comment was not placed here to begin the Boeing bashing, but as a comment from someone who watches the Paine flightline everyday excited to see the a/c. But, I'm really tired seeing the same a/c sitting in the same stalls week after week. Let's get these birds moving!!!!!
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26726 posts, RR: 83 Reply 24, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7853 times:
Current 787 production is around 2.5 per month, though there is another Supplier Hold in place (so LN027 is the last bird on the FAL for a few weeks).
25 bkircher: Since the fleet is expanding to ten, will there be a possibility of seeing any other liveries in the air other than the 3 that are currently flying?
26 Zeke: Given the wording Boeing used in their last statement, I assume it is 8 flight test aircraft (ZA001-ZA008?), the fatigue test airframe (ZY998), and t
27 flyingAY: So are you saying that all this was planned from the beginning and was the way it was supposed to be? Why is this news in different medias and Boeing
28 Chiad: Good news or bad news is irrelevant. Keesje is only sharing information that absolutely everyone must have been searching for: "After 2,5 years of de
29 Zeke: Well that is a puzzle, as the Trent 1000 was certified in 2007 http://easa.europa.eu/certification/...000_Series_engines-01-07082007.pdf
30 Rheinbote: I don't think that this was always planned (neither was the fourth 747-8 flight test aircraft planed from the outset), but there have been rumors on
31 BoeingVista: How can this be a surprise to Boeing, surely this was factored into the test plan from the begining?
32 bikerthai: AFAIK the passenger cabin fit on ZA003 was for only one section of the aircraft to validate ECS airflow. The plane did not have a complete interior.
33 CFBFrame: Hey Keesje!!! Is this the first thread that you've started that did not have 100+ posts? The site must be on 787 overload. Or, there is some other rea
34 tdscanuck: Yes. You can't do tests requiring full production airplanes on the flight test birds. One media outlet caught it, got it wrong (8 vs. 10, production
35 ADent: I think the original plan was to have ZA006 in a production configuration. The wing structure repair and the planned retirement of the first two aircr
36 MCIGuy: ZA100 and ZA101 will participate in ETOPS and route proving, which won't require the intstallation of instrumentation. Keesje should change his title
37 tdscanuck: They still are. They're already certified. Unless you actually roll to a new model number (e.g. from CFM56-7 to -7B to -7B/3 to -7BE) you certify inl
38 Rheinbote: "We will recertify all improvements [to the -1B] in July," says GEnx programme manager Tom Brisken. "Meanwhile, testing is complete on -2B and certifi
39 MadameConcorde: NH will be doing the first 3 months of commercia service with intra-Japan flights (said Mr ANA CEO) with the new aircraft so I don't see why they wou
40 Rheinbote: Does anyone know what part of the ground fatigue testing has to be concluded prior to certification and first delivery?
41 Aloha717200: I expect the first delivery of the 787 will take place in Q1 2012 at this pace. I may be wrong but it's what I've come to expect. Don't get me wrong,
42 tdscanuck: As far as I know, the only requirement is that the fatigue frame be 100% ahead of the high time aircraft in the fleet. So, if the high time aircraft
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
.
From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7727 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1527 posts, 
From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2232 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
Lets hope they can now pull it off in Q1 but somehow I am not that optimistic.
Printer friendly format 
