keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 8608
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:48 am

Details are leaking out on the uncontained failure early august on a Derby test rig. Apart from the usual PR "damage control" few positive signs come out. RR and Boeing saying they have no certainty the program deadlines can not be met, is legally correct. But that's it.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-following-trent-1000-testbed.html

The "Package B" engines modification seem drastic too IMO. Revisions include a revised LP turbine design, new blades, relocation of the IP compressor bleed offtake ports and fan outlet guide vanes with improved aerodynamics. A bit more than fine tuning I guess.



The 787 isn't lucky in it's test phase. Thinking back 5 years I think many people agreed introducing so many new technology (engines, composite frame/wings, bleedless systems) all in 1 airframe posed a significant risk and the program was likely to take much longer then scheduled by Boeing.

However this one (together with the tail issues and overambitious test flight schedule) seems almost certain to push EIS with ANA further into 2011. Program progress sofar showed that "If everything works, we can do it" proved a useless prediction tactic.

An engine failure is a bad thing, an uncontained engine failure is rare, dangerous and taken very seriously.

uncontained engine failure after a platform test on a AA 767 a few yrs back

The Trent1000 received joint certification from the FAA and EASA on 7 August 2007. ANA will demand the reasons for this failure to be completely clear & solved, before accepting their first Trent powered 787. I think early 2011 is starting to look optimistic already. I don't know how far the GENX is at this stage..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4820
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:53 am

Keesje

Your thread beat mine by a minute or so. Mine should be deleted but here's what I posted.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-following-trent-1000-testbed.html

OK, I need to get my retaliation in first.

Sounds as if RR may become the scapegoat for Boeing's inability to deliver the 787 in 2010.

Ultimately, neither another slip of a few weeks (late 2010 into early 2011) in the first 787 delivery nor the failure of a test T1000 is likely to mean a hill of beans in the long run but I'm disappointed if Seattle are trying to pass the buck to Derby.
 
Ronaldo747
Posts: 272
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:58 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:00 pm

Ok, maybe I don't know enough about this, but I don't sympathize with the whole sick excitement of this event. An engine has suffered a failure on a test rig - a thing that sometimes happened. It will be investigated and the failure will be fixed - and that's it. I can not see any impact on the 787 program. Furthermore, it's a Package A engine which suffered a failure - and this engine will not enter commercial service on any 787 ...

It's gotta be the so-called summer slump, I guess ....
 
point2point
Posts: 2080
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:54 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:08 pm

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Revisions include a revised LP turbine design, new blades, relocation of the IP compressor bleed offtake ports and fan outlet guide vanes with improved aerodynamics. A bit more than fine tuning I guess.

Is that all?

It sounds as if they need to practically design a whole new engine.
 
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 8608
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:22 pm

Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 2):
I can not see any impact on the 787 program. Furthermore, it's a Package A engine which suffered a failure - and this engine will not enter commercial service on any 787 ...

It shares the intermediate pressure turbine with Package A engines.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
luv2cattlecall
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:25 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:26 pm

I'm somewhat unfamiliar with the system timeline for the dreamliner, so just to clarify - if everything on Boeing's side had went according to plan, would RR still have taken until late 2010/early 2011 for the engine to be ready for ANA? Or did these findings come about as a result of a test that could only be conducted on the 787 and not on a flying testbed?
.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6668
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:27 pm

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
The 787 isn't lucky in it's test phase. Thinking back 5 years I think many people agreed introducing so many new technology (engines, composite frame/wings, bleedless systems) all in 1 airframe posed a significant risk and the program was likely to take much longer then scheduled by Boeing.

How many items in your list are being built by Boeing, as noted below, the engine received certification in 2007, unless the delays are due to integration on the assembled frame, I call red herring on this one. The engine failed on a test bed with no 787 attached.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
The Trent1000 received joint certification from the FAA and EASA on 7 August 2007.

Well within the estimated EIS of the a/c, so Boeing or RR completed the engine within specified time parameters.

Quoting PM (Reply 1):
Sounds as if RR may become the scapegoat for Boeing's inability to deliver the 787 in 2010.

A RR engine failed on a test bed in the UK, how many Boeing personnel are working on that engine to have created this problem, additionally which engine are they talking about, it's an improved package engine.

Now a better conspiracy theory would be that RR is doing this to further delay the 787 entry into service, and since they are the sole engine supplier on the competiton ( A350 ) any additional delays will benefit that product and its OEM  
 
PITingres
Posts: 993
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:31 pm

Quoting point2point (Reply 3):
It sounds as if they need to practically design a whole new engine.

It does not.

All the changes listed with the possible exception of the LP turbine stuff are detail improvements in relatively small and localized areas of the engine. The fan, all of the compressors, and 2 of the 3 turbines are largely untouched the way I read it.

Quoting PM (Reply 1):
I'm disappointed if Seattle are trying to pass the buck to Derby.

I would be too, but so far all I see is Keeje trying to pass the buck to Derby.   Seriously, I haven't seen any attempt by Boeing to blame additional delays (i.e. beyond what's already been hinted at prior to the engine event) on RR.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:38 pm

Why don't they just switch to GenX and maintain the delivery schedule? That engine is on track as far as I know and is probably the better engine anyway. It was always intended for the 787 and for a while I thought it was the only choice. This is actually a Rolls Royce problem. Doesn't really appear to be Boeing's fault and my guess is that the Trent 1000 will be at least a 6-8 month fix based on the extensive changes required. Most of the 787 delays are not actually caused by Boeing but their sub-contractors. It is Boeing's fault though for outsourcing so much.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11744
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:42 pm

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Details are leaking out on the uncontained failure early august

I missed that event. I will have to do some research.

I found this link on the flight tracking blog (hattip tdscanuck):
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

"Inappropriate Operating regime" to me sounds like an increased thrust test point. So this might have nothing to do with the 788 and everything to do with the 789 (pure speculation on my part). Or it could be a turbine cooling failure.   

Keep in mind the GE-90 *never* proved it could do a blade out failure. Instead, GE analyzed and *proved* it wasn't required. Now... this is a bad thing for RR, but both GE and Pratt have had in service failures that were bad.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
The "Package B" engines modification seem drastic too IMO.

Very much analogous to the 757. RR will buy back in service 'A engines' and replace them with 'B engines.'

Quoting point2point (Reply 3):
It sounds as if they need to practically design a whole new engine.

The redesign is extensive and expensive. RR must produce a more competitive engine to compete against the GEnX-1B.

I'm sad not seeing the 787 in service.  

Something is up with the GEnX too. They should have been flying by now. With a two year program delay... GE certainly had the time to get it ready. Anyone have any recent updates on the GEnX? In particular, why it is not up doing the stall speed tests as planned?

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11744
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:21 pm

Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 9):
Why don't they just switch to GenX

Why isn't the GEnX flying?

I do not think this issue will slow T1000 EIS. There are issues with the engine, it will not meet fuel burn by quite the miss. But the GEnX has had issues too. It is undergoing a redesign almost as extensive at the 'B' version of the Trent 1000. GE was just a little quicker on the revisions (hmmm... makes one wonder if they knew they would have issues from day #1).

If it was just an engine issue, the GEnX would gain further market share.

Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 9):
Most of the 787 delays are not actually caused by Boeing but their sub-contractors. It is Boeing's fault though for outsourcing so much.

The 787 will be a case study in poor project management. Poor ICD definition (come on, no wingbox length requirement!), poor joint analysis (Boeing's fault), and a few other issues. Slamming the vendors is easy. But since the issues were with so many vendors... the 'root cause' points back at Boeing. Just as the A388 will forever be a case study in poor IT management.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:54 pm

Quoting point2point (Reply 3):
It sounds as if they need to practically design a whole new engine.

GE had to redesign the front third of the GEnx to meet SFC, so it seems doable.

Quoting keesje (Reply 4):
(Package B) shares the intermediate pressure turbine with Package A engines.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Or it could be a turbine cooling failure.

As I understand it, Package B has improved IPT cooling so if that was the cause, it might already be addressed, as Rolls has been stating.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 11):
Why isn't the GEnX flying?

ZA005 is in flight test with GEnx engines.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19624
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:05 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):

ZA005 is in flight test with GEnx engines.

And doing very well, from what I hear.

I do wonder if ANA won't switch engine manufacturers. The 787 makes it very easy to do so.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:44 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
I do wonder if ANA won't switch engine manufacturers. The 787 makes it very easy to do so.

Engine contracts are about as sophisticated as airplane contracts. From a technical standpoint it's much easier to change engines on the 787 than other airplanes, but I would wonder about the contract. My bet is that ANA will stick with the RR engines, barring a many months-long redesign of the engine (highly unlikely, I would hope).


Interesting, though, to remember that Rolls Royce killed the Lockheed commercial aircraft division--and almost killed Rolls Royce itself. Not that these problems are THAT bad, though.
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
N809FR
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:10 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:48 pm

It's a shame that something out of Boeing's control will possibly push back delivery, yet again. I wonder if ANA needs to planes bad enough that they would switch to GEnx engines for the first few deliveries in order to maintain, or as close as possible, their most recently planned EIS.
 
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 8608
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:52 pm

Quoting N809FR (Reply 15):
It's a shame that something out of Boeing's control will possibly push back delivery, yet again.

I think there are several parallel issues. Boeing warned for further delays BEFORE this engine failure.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
(together with the tail issues and overambitious test flight schedule)
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19624
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:54 pm

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 14):

Engine contracts are about as sophisticated as airplane contracts. From a technical standpoint it's much easier to change engines on the 787 than other airplanes, but I would wonder about the contract

Remember, no airline is going to sign a contract that allows indefinite delays without any sort of recourse. Other airlines have switched engine manufacturers (especially on the A330). So it's not completely unheard-of.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
pnwtraveler
Posts: 1064
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:12 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:05 pm

Quoting keesje (Reply 16):
Quoting N809FR (Reply 15):
It's a shame that something out of Boeing's control will possibly push back delivery, yet again.

I think there are several parallel issues. Boeing warned for further delays BEFORE this engine failure.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
(together with the tail issues and overambitious test flight schedule)

Not sure if it is a literal translation thing or a deliberate spin, but let me rephrase the above a little more accurately. Boeing said flight test margins had been used up and the program was tight, they did not warn that further delays were coming.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:22 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
Remember, no airline is going to sign a contract that allows indefinite delays without any sort of recourse.

Absolutely agree, but cancellation of the contract is a pretty drastic measure. I'd say, if it comes down to it, there might be some monetary compensation, or perhaps some service deal.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
Other airlines have switched engine manufacturers (especially on the A330).

I'm not familiar with this. Do you have an example? Even though it is still "easy" to change engines on the actual bird, there are other factors to consider--especially this far along (several customer aircraft built, customer basically ready to take delivery). I'm shooting from the hip, but I can't think of any A330 customers who have switched engines this far along in the process.
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:38 pm

Boeing burning suppliers again, the 787 is late because of the fastners, no it was spirit, no it was Alliena workmanship, no it was Rolls Royce.

The important thing is its never Boeings fault.

ZA006 is GE powered, currently 2 months behind schedule, has never flown.
BV
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 7:55 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 21):
Boeing burning suppliers again, the 787 is late because of the fastners, no it was spirit, no it was Alliena workmanship, no it was Rolls Royce.

Unless I missed something no one at Boeing is blaming RR for any delay in regard to this. I beleive the only ones doing that (so far at least) are a few folks here on a.net
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6668
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:21 pm

Quoting ER757 (Reply 20):
Unless I missed something no one at Boeing is blaming RR for any delay in regard to this. I beleive the only ones doing that (so far at least) are a few folks here on a.net

Here you go interjecting truth and facts into a lively discussion.  
Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 19):
Boeing burning suppliers again, the 787 is late because of the fastners, no it was spirit, no it was Alliena workmanship, no it was Rolls Royce.

The important thing is its never Boeings fault.

Except these this actually did happen, RR did blow an engine right and the fastners were wrong  

The 787 is a Boeing a/c and so far Boeing has been paying all the compensation and writing off losses on their books, no sub-contractor has yet been fired, one has been taken over by Boeing and I'm sure those share holders made a pretty penny. The notion that Boeing has not taken the blame for the delays and suffered the consequences is false.


Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 19):
ZA006 is GE powered, currently 2 months behind schedule, has never flown.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
ZA005 is in flight test with GEnx engines.

One down one to go.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:24 pm

I'm not generally one to shoot the messenger, but I'm really getting tired of this OP's tactics. Exactly how much is Airbus paying Keesje to be their mouthpiece on A.net? It's getting absurd. It's not uncommon for paid spokesmen to try to influence forums and blogs, but it's frowned upon. But I really have trouble believing he's an independent voice at this point. It seems as if he constructs these posts in a professional capacity with input from others in order to spin it in a deliberate way.

Long "posts" (reading suspiciously like PR flack) about the failure of this or that Boeing program or aircraft and how the Airbus alternative is going to win, escalating negative Boeing rumors and half truths into "almost certain" facts, and never starting a negative thread about Airbus (and rarely contributing to them). Where was/is he when FI reports A350 EIS at 2014, for example? Was he first to break the news like he is with any Boeing bad news? Did he even comment yet about it? Nope and nope. You'd think if he was simply an Airbus "fan" he'd have something to say about it. But as a paid agent, he'd want to simply distance himself from any bad news unless he's forced to confront it.

Or better yet, respond with a new thread about the 787 and "almost certain" delays to deflect the A350 news. PR trick.

And yet, any positive bit of Airbus news, no matter how minor, he heralds it as a huge thing deserving a long post with pretty pictures to attract the eye and make the reader think the post has more weight and credibility (PR trick again). Airbus salesman tries to push A350s and A380s on Thai even though they don't see a need for them at this time all of a sudden becomes Thai about ready to sign a contract.

It never ends. Between that and combining other people's work with his own ideas without attribution until he's called out on it (repeatedly), and it's just tiring.

As for the story.

The engine is CERTIFIED. As long as the engine failure is understood, it's not going to delay the program for a freaking year as Keesje tries to imply through his "opinion" about the blog post of another with NO FACTS to back up the assertions in the blog let alone Keesje's take on the blog. Certified, in service engines have uncontained failures in the wild, and the entire fleet isn't grounded until it's fully understood unless it's a common event. Jon's stirring up some hits because it's his job, even though I think his reporting here is a little speculative (it's a blog, so it's fine), but it's hardly Keesje's job to do the same.

Or is it...

Anyway, I agree with our RR fan PM on his belief that if the aircraft is delayed again, it will be due to other problems, and the engine failure gives Boeing a little of their own PR leeway to offer it as "one of the reasons" even if it doesn't turn out to be a critical path problem. I don't have much faith in Boeing's forthrightness and this point, though I don't have a reason to doubt RR.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3784
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:38 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Quoting point2point (Reply 3):
It sounds as if they need to practically design a whole new engine.

GE had to redesign the front third of the GEnx to meet SFC, so it seems doable.


I find it strange that GE and RR are still having issues that is causing delays to the program. All the delays on the B787 program gave them a lot of extra time to get the job done. But as i.e. Lightsaber stated both engine manufacturers missed the promised targets by quite a margin. So they used the time up to get to the point which they promised. But maybe even here the marketing department may have pushed beyond what the technology department could actually deliver?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Quoting keesje (Reply 4):
(Package B) shares the intermediate pressure turbine with Package A engines.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Or it could be a turbine cooling failure.

As I understand it, Package B has improved IPT cooling so if that was the cause, it might already be addressed, as Rolls has been stating.


If that is the case, then it would be quite reassuring for RR and the B787 program for RR customers. Let us hope this incident, and the rest of the flight test and production issues will not push back the delivery well into 2011. It would be very sad and regrettable if this would turn out to be the case.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:41 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 21):
Except these this actually did happen, RR did blow an engine right and the fasteners were wrong

The fasteners were bolts because Boeing did not place the order according to the lead time of the supplier that was communicated to Boeing.

Meh, the RR donk did blow though. My point is that Boeing seems to have have been failing with EIS 2010 through flight test delays but now conveniently has someone else to pin it on.
BV
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6668
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:50 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 24):
The fasteners were bolts because Boeing did not place the order according to the lead time of the supplier that was communicated to Boeing.

Meh, the RR donk did blow though. My point is that Boeing seems to have have been failing with EIS 2010 through flight test delays but now conveniently has someone else to pin it on.

Well you need to spend more time on A.Net, everyone and their uncle has been holding Boeing responsible for the delays, who / what actually caused it is irrelevant, it's still Boeings baby.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
The 787 will be a case study in poor project management. Poor ICD definition (come on, no wingbox length requirement!), poor joint analysis (Boeing's fault), and a few other issues. Slamming the vendors is easy. But since the issues were with so many vendors... the 'root cause' points back at Boeing.

A pretty good summation.

Boeing's move from a designer / builder of a/c to a "facilitator / integrator" (my opinion) has not been an easy one, so far they seem determined to continue with this trend, if their next new project runs afoul with the same issue their investors might initiate a re-think, at least their unions will say "I told you so"  
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:09 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
The engine is CERTIFIED.

The engine/airframe combination ain't. However, Package A will become irrelevant as soon as the 787-8 with Package B is certified, should happen in Q1 2011.
 
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 8608
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:27 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
as a paid agent
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
Or is it...

     

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
a new thread about the 787 and "almost certain" delays to deflect the A350 news. PR trick.

   however the thread was before I saw the A350 "news"   I tried to post on that thread, but stopped because it's hard to react on a somebody said that somebody said "news"

I guess my chief in Toulouse didn't appreciate threads like these:
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...general_aviation/read.main/4613838
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...general_aviation/read.main/4752046

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
it's not going to delay the program for a freaking year as Keesje tries to imply

   
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
Between that and combining other people's work with his own ideas without attribution until he's called out on it (repeatedly)

You have said so before. To be honest: I have no idea what you are talking about.

btw you are violating rules 1b, 1c and 1f so you might reconsider your post.

.

[Edited 2010-08-23 14:38:20]
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11744
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:30 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
ZA005 is in flight test with GEnx engines.

*&*&%^ You are right. I did a poor scan of the 787 flight testing threads. I see the first flight was 6/10/2010. Oops.
  

I am impressed how quickly GE redesigned a large chunk of the GEnX-1B.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
As long as the engine failure is understood, it's not going to delay the program for a freaking year as Keesje tries to imply through his "opinion"

   It all depends on why the engine failed. The wording implies an attempted thrust increase or an altered turbine cooling pattern. ('Enhanced A' that is 1/2 an "A" engine and half a "B" engine.) It might be the cooling pattern doesn't work right without the changed low spool (and changed pressure profile through the engine).

Quoting N809FR (Reply 14):
It's a shame that something out of Boeing's control will possibly push back delivery

Too much has been 'out of Boeing's control' in the 787! Do not get me wrong, I'm excited about the technology. But the program will be a case study in poor project management, in particular in ICD definition and joint analysis.   As I noted earlier, the A388 will be a case study in poor IT management.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 19):
ZA006 is GE powered, currently 2 months behind schedule, has never flown.

That is an issue. Final certification cannot happen, for either type, until ZA006 finishes its portion of the test program.

I want to fly on a 787!   

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
pnwtraveler
Posts: 1064
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:12 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:31 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
I'm not generally one to shoot the messenger, but I'm really getting tired of this OP's tactics. Exactly how much is Airbus paying Keesje to be their mouthpiece on A.net? It's getting absurd. It's not uncommon for paid spokesmen to try to influence forums and blogs, but it's frowned upon. But I really have trouble believing he's an independent voice at this point. It seems as if he constructs these posts in a professional capacity with input from others in order to spin it in a deliberate way.

  

As a marketer who has recommended to clients to pay bloggers/poster/surfers to help spread the word about a product, charity or service, it is more and more common to have people comment on the web as part of a marketing campaign. I have no idea if this is happening with the 787 or not, but I would be surprized if at some level it wasn't part of someone's plans. At the same time it might just be someone's bias being used to the extreme. However, I need to add that I have never recommended someone go after another product, service or charity that way. I leave that to the political parties because they are doing it with volunteers big time. Including smear campaigns that may or may not be sanctioned.

The 787 program for the next couple of years will provide a lot of fodder for study at universities. I suspect more than a few Masters thesis are being based on the mix-ups that have happened. However, at the same time, the virulent posting of some could also be another thesis. With a background in psychology it is both interested but practically very annoying at the same time.   

I wonder how many hours the test engine has been running and at what level of fatique the uncontained failure happened. I think the engine is probably serviced extremely well mind you. It will be interesting to see what actual FACTS are released on this in the coming days and whether it will actually have an effect on EIS dates or not.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:34 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
The 787 will be a case study in poor project management. Poor ICD definition (come on, no wingbox length requirement!), poor joint analysis (Boeing's fault), and a few other issues. Slamming the vendors is easy. But since the issues were with so many vendors... the 'root cause' points back at Boeing. Just as the A388 will forever be a case study in poor IT management.

Lightsaber

As asked in another thread, if everybody (Boeing, RR, GE) had taken another year or so with initial definition and design would the 787 be in service today?

I believe that it would.
BV
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:01 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
The 787 will be a case study in poor project management. Poor ICD definition (come on, no wingbox length requirement!), poor joint analysis (Boeing's fault), and a few other issues. Slamming the vendors is easy.

Agreed the whole thing has been poorly managed. I just don't know how they are going to fix things now. I also hope its not this bad for future efforts.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6668
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:35 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 30):
As asked in another thread, if everybody (Boeing, RR, GE) had taken another year or so with initial definition and design would the 787 be in service today?

I would say no, the bulk of the delays have been due to poor management, another year in schools does not help some folk.

A better alternative would have been the current production methods where the production of portions of the a/c were spun off after the process was matured. Boeing has chosen to out-source from the begining including design, it appears that they did not beleive that initially until the process was proven, they should have additional inspections and follow up of all their sub-contractors, one wonders if they had the "nerve" to request such additonal access from private companies not under their control.
 
murchmo
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 2:59 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:08 pm

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
RR and Boeing saying they have no certainty the program deadlines can not be met, is legally correct. But that's it.

okaaaaay...

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
seems almost certain to push EIS with ANA further into 2011

the article did say this:
"We are now investigating in detail and have made good progress in understanding the issue. We do not anticipate any impact on the programme"

just saying.
to strive to seek to find and not to yield
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Mon Aug 23, 2010 11:43 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 24):
My point is that Boeing seems to have have been failing with EIS 2010 through flight test delays but now conveniently has someone else to pin it on.

But they haven't done so, have they? That makes your point moot.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:58 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
I'm not generally one to shoot the messenger, but I'm really getting tired of this OP's tactics. Exactly how much is Airbus paying Keesje to be their mouthpiece on A.net?

Maybe he should become Gerson Lehrman Group Expert Contributor.   
 
jetfuel
Posts: 1027
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:27 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:04 am

Another useless post tainited with misinformation
Where's the passion gone out of the airline industry? The smell of jetfuel and the romance of taking a flight....
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19624
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:10 am

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 29):

As a marketer who has recommended to clients to pay bloggers/poster/surfers to help spread the word about a product, charity or service, it is more and more common to have people comment on the web as part of a marketing campaign.

Do you guys HONESTLY believe that Airbus cares what we think? Or Boeing? How many people on this site actually have much to do with ordering decisions on airlines?

Show of hands?

That's what I thought.

Keesje as an Airbus plant. ZOMG. *facepalm*

Now, I do seem to recall that Leahy said that if the 350 was late he should be shot. The only problem is that there's only one Leahy and probably a very long line of airlines who want to do the shooting. Perhaps Airbus will open up a human cloning division?  
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4891
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:10 am

I wouldn't be surprised if DL switches to the GEnx engine if they plan on keeping some of their 787 orders. After all, it was NW (not DL) who chose RR, and DL could probably switch without any penalty. After all, DL seems to have a stronger relationship with GE than RR, as GE financed DL through bankruptcy and the fact that DL is in love with the GE90 engines on their 77Ls. With the issues going on with the Trent 1000, this could very well be a good reason for DL to switch to the GEnx.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:25 am

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
The "Package B" engines modification seem drastic too IMO. Revisions include a revised LP turbine design, new blades, relocation of the IP compressor bleed offtake ports and fan outlet guide vanes with improved aerodynamics. A bit more than fine tuning I guess.

It's not more significant than the -7B/3 or -7BE modifications to the CFM-56 engine, which went off without a whimper (and without complaint on this forum).

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
However this one (together with the tail issues and overambitious test flight schedule) seems almost certain to push EIS with ANA further into 2011.

Except for the minor detail that there is *zero* evidence that this RR event has any impact on the flight test schedule. It didn't happen on a flight test airplane, it didn't happen on the EIS build-standard engine, and RR says they've already got a fix. Other than you wishing it delays the 787, there isn't one shred of evidence (yet) that it has any impact on any 787 deliverable.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
An engine failure is a bad thing, an uncontained engine failure is rare, dangerous and taken very seriously.

Of course. But if it turns out that the cause of this was RR taking the engine into an area of operation where the in-service engine won't go (for which there is already evidence), or a random defect that doesn't apply to the production engines, then there would be *zero* impact to 787 EIS.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
ANA will demand the reasons for this failure to be completely clear & solved, before accepting their first Trent powered 787.

Of course they will. The FAA & NTSB will demand the same, long before ANA will, and they'll get it. But, since the engine that failed isn't the engine that ANA gets, there's no reason to think this is an EIS delay based on the available evidence.

Quoting luv2cattlecall (Reply 5):
I'm somewhat unfamiliar with the system timeline for the dreamliner, so just to clarify - if everything on Boeing's side had went according to plan, would RR still have taken until late 2010/early 2011 for the engine to be ready for ANA?

No.

Quoting luv2cattlecall (Reply 5):
Or did these findings come about as a result of a test that could only be conducted on the 787 and not on a flying testbed?

No.

Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 8):
Why don't they just switch to GenX and maintain the delivery schedule?

Because they can't. Switching to GEnX would delay delivery.

Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 8):
It was always intended for the 787 and for a while I thought it was the only choice.

The Trent 1000 was also always intended for the 787, and was actually the first choice available, I think.

Quoting SolarFlyer22 (Reply 8):
Doesn't really appear to be Boeing's fault and my guess is that the Trent 1000 will be at least a 6-8 month fix based on the extensive changes required.

What changes? RR has already said that the fix is already in place on the current production-standard engines.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
RR must produce a more competitive engine to compete against the GEnX-1B.

They're already competitive (look at the order breakdown).

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Why isn't the GEnX flying?

It is.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 23):
I find it strange that GE and RR are still having issues that is causing delays to the program.

Neither GE nor RR are having issues delaying the program, at least based on available evidence.

Quoting keesje (Reply 27):
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 22):
Between that and combining other people's work with his own ideas without attribution until he's called out on it (repeatedly)

You have said so before. To be honest: I have no idea what you are talking about.

Go back and check your posters using RR's Trent 1000 logo-flower without attribution.

Tom.

[Edited 2010-08-23 19:03:41]
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5372
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:37 am

Wow, another interesting Keesje thread about Boeing shortcomings.........................well, now off to his thread about the soon-to-be-worthless 737-900ER.  

-Dave
-Dave
 
tommytoyz
Posts: 1195
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:08 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:40 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 38):
After all, it was NW (not DL) who chose RR, and DL could probably switch without any penalty.

There is the teensy little problem called contact law. NW or its successors are bound by any NW contract. DL can not magically void NW contracts. They all remain as valid as ever and DL, as the successor entity to NW, is bound by them.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 4549
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:28 am

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 40):
Wow, another interesting Keesje thread about Boeing shortcomings.........................

But who is to say that anyone countering his opinion isn't a paid Boeing supporter? That's not suggesting you are - but it's a reasonable thing to say.

I also don't like the way Keesje hotlinks to images instead of using the proper code to embed the image as all other photographers do. His method prevents me from clicking on the image and seeing more photos from that photographer.

Not very nice.
 
airfrnt
Posts: 1993
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:32 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
Do you guys HONESTLY believe that Airbus cares what we think? Or Boeing? How many people on this site actually have much to do with ordering decisions on airlines?

Actually, you would be surprised. I've been involved with the marketing organizations of several fortune 10 companies, and they all do aggressive brand management including the targeting of "influencers" in common forums. I bet more then one poster on A.net has received preferential treatment, tours, questions, help, or a word behind the scenes. I know that I posted a thread at one point severely criticizing a carrier, and immediately got a IM from a poster who happened to work at the carrier, and the situation resolved the next day.

It's becoming more and more common, but still considered unethical, to pay people on forums and in common areas. More typically in the CPG space then other industries.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 37):
Keesje as an Airbus plant. ZOMG. *facepalm*

Nope, just hopelessly partisan, like most of A.net. IF there is a European flag, Boeing's products will be delayed forever, blow up, and invade Canada. If it's a American flag, the reverse is true.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5065
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:43 am

One thing that no one, especially Keesje, mentioned here is that the four 787 test airplanes have flown over 1400 flight hours not including ground test hours where the engines were running and guess what...no engine failure......something to keep in mind folks.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11094
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:00 am

Quoting airfrnt (Reply 43):
I bet more then one poster on A.net has received preferential treatment, tours, questions, help, or a word behind the scenes. I know that I posted a thread at one point severely criticizing a carrier, and immediately got a IM from a poster who happened to work at the carrier, and the situation resolved the next day.

Plus the Planemaker thing on Oman Air's Twitter.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
328JET
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:16 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:06 am

Come on guys,


Keesje is only the messenger.


If you want to blame somebody that the assumption about EIS 2011 is wrong, please do so.


Blame www.flightglobal.com...
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5372
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:27 am

Quoting cpd (Reply 42):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 40):
Wow, another interesting Keesje thread about Boeing shortcomings.........................

But who is to say that anyone countering his opinion isn't a paid Boeing supporter? That's not suggesting you are - but it's a reasonable thing to say.

Oh, I can respect that. However, I think you and I and the majority of A.net can tell who's actually working with an agenda. And it's a relative few who are very active at it. The rest of us end up as collateral damage in the dogfight while they move on to their next hit-and-run piece. Just my opinion.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 46):
Come on guys,


Keesje is only the messenger.

LOL! Ok, tell me then how we spin an uncontained failure on RR testbed engine into:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
The 787 isn't lucky in it's test phase. Thinking back 5 years I think many people agreed introducing so many new technology (engines, composite frame/wings, bleedless systems) all in 1 airframe posed a significant risk and the program was likely to take much longer then scheduled by Boeing.

However this one (together with the tail issues and overambitious test flight schedule) seems almost certain to push EIS with ANA further into 2011. Program progress sofar showed that "If everything works, we can do it" proved a useless prediction tactic.

You are welcome to interpret his comments any way you like, but to proclaim him as innocently as "the messenger" must have really made his day.  

-Dave
-Dave
 
328JET
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:16 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:31 am

@ PlanesNTrains


Sorry to say that, but he is correct by a 100 percent.


The B787 is ambitious, probably too ambitious, it had some minor issues and it won´t enter service in 2010.

That is what everybody expects already.


So what is the deal?
 
BMI727
Posts: 11094
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: EIS 787 Could Be 2011 After Trent 1000 Test

Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:34 am

Quoting 328JET (Reply 48):
The B787 is ambitious, probably too ambitious

So ambitious they got hundreds of orders for it. This industry is about pushing the limits and it appears to be about to pay off handsomely for Boeing, delays or no delays.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: INFINITI329 and 27 guests