Boeing 777X Testing/Production Thread - 2020

qf789 · Tue Dec 31, 2019 2:22 pm

Welcome to the Boeing 777X Testing/Production Thread - 2020. Please add your comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411905&p=20969397&hilit=777X#p20969397

Schmave · Thu Jan 02, 2020 8:48 pm

Does anyone have any news or updates on engine testing or the first flight? All of the news articles on Google news about the 777x seem to be about 2 weeks old. Presumably they should be getting close to engine readiness if they aren't experiencing any further engine issues.

VV · Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:15 pm

Schmave wrote:
Does anyone have any news or updates on engine testing or the first flight? All of the news articles on Google news about the 777x seem to be about 2 weeks old. Presumably they should be getting close to engine readiness if they aren't experiencing any further engine issues.

I think we will hear a little bit more next week.

Opus99 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 6:23 am

WH001 moved into the paint hangar yesterday. Any idea why that would happen?

VV · Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:27 am

Opus99 wrote:
WH001 moved into the paint hangar yesterday. Any idea why that would happen?

Perhaps to get some paint job?

Noshow · Sat Jan 04, 2020 8:45 am

Does Boeing change it's logo or similar? This will be the first "good" stage event after some time.

MileHFL400 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:02 am

I’m seeing some really ambiguous statements along the lines that the plane will have its fist flight “this year.” Does this mean that we should see it later on this year as opposed to early Jan?

Opus99 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:04 am

VV wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
WH001 moved into the paint hangar yesterday. Any idea why that would happen?

Perhaps to get some paint job?

Maybe, but why? I don’t know maybe it’s getting the red Livery that never came on. That would be nice

Opus99 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 9:06 am

MileHFL400 wrote:
I’m seeing some really ambiguous statements along the lines that the plane will have its fist flight “this year.” Does this mean that we should see it later on this year as opposed to early Jan?

I think people just don’t want to narrow it down into any particular timeframe in the event that something goes wrong which it very well can but hopefully all should be going well, though it’s been quiet

Spetsnaz55 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:33 pm

January 17th is the new rumor date for flight test

VV · Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:48 pm

Opus99 wrote:
VV wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
WH001 moved into the paint hangar yesterday. Any idea why that would happen?

Perhaps to get some paint job?

Maybe, but why? I don’t know maybe it’s getting the red Livery that never came on. That would be nice

Well, a paint hangar is for painting an aircraft whatever that paint job would be.

catdaddy63 · Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:57 pm

Doesn't Boeing weigh aircraft in the paint bay? Would be a simple reason, double-check weight and balance before first flight?

StTim · Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:05 pm

Are they still trying to have an accelerated flight test campaign?

I have not seen anything official on revised expected certification date and first delivery. I wonder how many frames they will have built by then.

mjoelnir · Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:37 pm

catdaddy63 wrote:
Doesn't Boeing weigh aircraft in the paint bay? Would be a simple reason, double-check weight and balance before first flight?

That should than have resulted in it coming out again after a few hours.

Stitch · Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:25 pm

Opus99 wrote:
WH001 moved into the paint hangar yesterday. Any idea why that would happen?

Maybe they're giving it a once-over? Fixing any blemishes or just giving it a good clean.

keesje · Sat Jan 04, 2020 10:07 pm

I think the ultimate load test drew attention & probably a deeper look takes place on the certification strategy of the involved structure. Has anyone heard of (preliminairy) conclusions on this event?

Stitch · Sat Jan 04, 2020 10:34 pm

keesje wrote:
I think the ultimate load test drew attention & probably a deeper look takes place on the certification strategy of the involved structure.

It drew attention due to the failure result, but as for certification strategy, I don't expect a "deeper look". The fuselage failed at ~149% of Limit Load so it was within one percent of a load well beyond any airframe would ever see in regular service and from some of the reports about the Ultimate Load test, it sounds like Boeing was pushing the fuselage structure even harder than they had to which might have contributed to the failure (in other words, the frame might have reached 150% if not for the additional stresses being imposed on it above and beyond what was required).

MileHFL400 · Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:45 am

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
January 17th is the new rumor date for flight test

That would mean we would be seeing taxi tests by now.

AeroplaneFreak · Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:58 am

MileHFL400 wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
January 17th is the new rumor date for flight test

That would mean we would be seeing taxi tests by now.

Don't forget taxi tests began in 2019.

B764er · Sun Jan 05, 2020 6:23 am

It would be impressive to see WH001 come out with the LH livery painted on it. Then to take off in about 10 days will be a 1-2 punch for us all.

Strato2 · Sun Jan 05, 2020 6:42 am

Stitch wrote:
from some of the reports about the Ultimate Load test, it sounds like Boeing was pushing the fuselage structure even harder than they had to which might have contributed to the failure (in other words, the frame might have reached 150% if not for the additional stresses being imposed on it above and beyond what was required).

[/quote]

IF that is true then there are no more words left to explain Boeings stupidity. They wanted to show off and failed because of that. Then again we have MAX.

Checklist787 · Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:55 am

Strato2 wrote:

IF that is true then there are no more words left to explain Boeings stupidity. They wanted to show off and failed because of that. Then again we have MAX.

I don't see any stupidity in trying to do it right. Do you have evidence of what you say? I wish Boeing to come back faster and stronger from now and for ever

*** 2020 ***

keesje · Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:27 am

According to Boeings testing campaign plan, ultimate load might cause certain structure to fail at a certain value. So if they are measuring, monitoring that structure during ultimate load testing and somewhere else the fuselage explodes & a door flies around, that might cause authorities and Boeing to have a root cause analyses of that event.

The, by now, notorious denial, divert, push regulator culture dealing with setbacks, might not sit well with customers. The old fashioned stick to the rules bureaucracy might gain terrain versus the powerfull PR / political machine.

marcelh · Sun Jan 05, 2020 11:52 am

B764er wrote:
It would be impressive to see WH001 come out with the LH livery painted on it. Then to take off in about 10 days will be a 1-2 punch for us all.

There was also a 747-8i test bed in LH livery as well, but lacked the titles and logo for IIRC legal reasons. An almost all white 779 with a dark blue tail isn't too sexy.... I love the new LH livery, but it's too understated for a first flight.

bikerthai · Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:15 pm

keesje wrote:
The old fashioned stick to the rules bureaucracy might gain terrain versus the powerfull PR / political machine.

Unfortunately I do not see them going back.

And the question is not bureaucracy vs PR machine but rather, conservative engineering principles vs. fast paced technology development.

Ever since Boeing lost the sales lead to Airbus, it has tried to transformed itself into a tech Company in the vein of Apple/Samsung/Space-X.

The push to think out-of-the box have brought successes and some failures. The break neck pace of new designs and manufacturing processes leave room for errors.

However they will have to learn how to live in this new environment. If not, they would have to give up the dream of being the largest Aerospace firm in the world.

bt

MileHFL400 · Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:42 pm

marcelh wrote:
B764er wrote:
It would be impressive to see WH001 come out with the LH livery painted on it. Then to take off in about 10 days will be a 1-2 punch for us all.

There was also a 747-8i test bed in LH livery as well, but lacked the titles and logo for IIRC legal reasons. An almost all white 779 with a dark blue tail isn't too sexy.... I love the new LH livery, but it's too understated for a first flight.

Don’t see it happening either.

Stitch · Sun Jan 05, 2020 6:01 pm

keesje wrote:
According to Boeings testing campaign plan, ultimate load might cause certain structure to fail at a certain value. So if they are measuring, monitoring that structure during ultimate load testing and somewhere else the fuselage explodes & a door flies around, that might cause authorities and Boeing to have a root cause analyses of that event.

Of course there will be an investigation into the root cause, but because the failure was so close to Ultimate Load, there won't be a need to re-do the test.

It's directly akin to the A380-800's Ultimate Load test failure - at 148%, it was close enough to the goal that once the root cause was identified, a re-do was not required and the frame was signed off as passing the test so it could be certified. I expect the same to happen with the 777X.

Spetsnaz55 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 1:03 am

It's out of the paint hanger

Stitch · Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:23 am

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
(WH001 is) out of the paint hanger

I assume it is still in Boeing House Colors?

MileHFL400 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:15 am

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
It's out of the paint hanger

Any pics?

iamlucky13 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:34 am

keesje wrote:
According to Boeings testing campaign plan, ultimate load might cause certain structure to fail at a certain value. So if they are measuring, monitoring that structure during ultimate load testing and somewhere else the fuselage explodes & a door flies around, that might cause authorities and Boeing to have a root cause analyses of that event.

Not might. Did. I'm not privy to any details, but I've been around this industry long enough to know that far, far less significant events than this are resolved in part by determining the root cause in order to have confidence any corrective actions are addressing the right problem.

The press doesn't get these details, but I guarantee it is well underway.

Spetsnaz55 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:49 am

Stitch wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
(WH001 is) out of the paint hanger

I assume it is still in Boeing House Colors?

Yes, it wasnt in there for paint

VV · Mon Jan 06, 2020 7:27 am

Spetsnaz55 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
(WH001 is) out of the paint hanger

I assume it is still in Boeing House Colors?

Yes, it wasnt in there for paint

What was it for then?

A paint job doesn't necessarily mean livery change. Could it be just (re)paint of some patches?

Is there no space left in the area to do things such they have been obliged to use a paint hangar?

This is a very significant information.

AeroplaneFreak · Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:07 am

VV wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
Stitch wrote:

I assume it is still in Boeing House Colors?

Yes, it wasnt in there for paint

What was it for then?

A paint job doesn't necessarily mean livery change. Could it be just (re)paint of some patches?

Is there no space left in the area to do things such they have been obliged to use a paint hangar?

This is a very significant information.

As mentioned above it could be in there for weighing.

Opus99 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:32 am

VV wrote:
Spetsnaz55 wrote:
Stitch wrote:

I assume it is still in Boeing House Colors?

Yes, it wasnt in there for paint

What was it for then?

A paint job doesn't necessarily mean livery change. Could it be just (re)paint of some patches?

Is there no space left in the area to do things such they have been obliged to use a paint hangar?

This is a very significant information.

They apparently also use the paint hangar to weigh the aircraft before first flight

frigatebird · Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:56 am

Stitch, thank you very much for your patience and voice of reason. There is far too much second-guessing bordering hysteria posted by some users and by one in particular on this forum. :banghead:

Too many good and knowledgeable people have already left, glad you're still here :thumbsup:

Stitch wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Of course there will be an investigation into the root cause, but because the failure was so close to Ultimate Load, there won't be a need to re-do the test.

keesje wrote:
I think it is much to early to conclude that. We need objective analyses. The silence since the failure (the fuselage rupture leaked months later) isn't a positive. If there were positive preliminairy conclusions we would have seen them asap.

There are a minimum of three regulatory agencies reviewing it, plus Boeing. Is it your assertion that there is a four-way conspiracy between Boeing, the FAA, EASA and the GCAA to suppress information?

How long did it take for the official report of the A380 Ultimate Load failure to be published? For how long was the narrative just "the wings broke too early"?

keesje wrote:
737 MAX MCAS opened a can of worms. Grandfathered worms.

MCAS was a new system so it was could not have been, and therefore was not, covered under grandfathering.

keesje wrote:
I hope 777x is certified using different methodologies, strategy.

It will be certified under the methodologies outlined in the regulations. To do so any other way could result in those nasty "unknown unknowns" cropping up later.

MileHFL400 wrote:
Seeing as it’s based off an existing platform there will be grandfathering.

Indeed there will be, but anything new - like the wings - will be certified under current methodologies, which is why Boeing had to perform an Ultimate Load test.

ssteve · Mon Jan 06, 2020 2:55 pm

What's being argued here? What *should* happen? Fine, you've made your points about how different/evolutionary the 777X is.

Now wait for the people who actually get to determine that to make their decisions known. Shouldn't really be that long now.

I don't see the point of trying to prove that someone is wrong on the internet when no one here gets a seat at the table. It's just sowing FUD.

atcsundevil · Mon Jan 06, 2020 4:21 pm

Please keep the thread on topic. Posts that introduce flame bait, go off topic, or become personal will be removed.

✈️ atcsundevil

Sooner787 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 5:04 pm

Still wondering if Boeing will publicly announce a first flight target date

or keep with their "employees only" notices like the Max 10 rollout ?

Opus99 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 6:09 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
Still wondering if Boeing will publicly announce a first flight target date

or keep with their "employees only" notices like the Max 10 rollout ?

I think employees but let’s see

iamlucky13 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:23 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
Still wondering if Boeing will publicly announce a first flight target date

or keep with their "employees only" notices like the Max 10 rollout ?

Hopefully public. First flight is perhaps the biggest milestone in any new aircraft program, and it's relatively disconnected from the MAX troubles. It also is not immediately following a major disaster like the originally scheduled rollout was.

Any announcement will probably only happen very shortly before the flight, however. If I remember right, the 747-8 first flight was only confirmed once the high speed taxi test took place the day before.

Sooner787 · Mon Jan 06, 2020 8:59 pm

iamlucky13 wrote:
Sooner787 wrote:
Still wondering if Boeing will publicly announce a first flight target date

or keep with their "employees only" notices like the Max 10 rollout ?

Hopefully public. First flight is perhaps the biggest milestone in any new aircraft program, and it's relatively disconnected from the MAX troubles. It also is not immediately following a major disaster like the originally scheduled rollout was.

Any announcement will probably only happen very shortly before the flight, however. If I remember right, the 747-8 first flight was only confirmed once the high speed taxi test took place the day before.

Lord knows Boeing could use some good publicity to start off the new decade.

I successful first flight of the 777X could be a big part of that

jfk777 · Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:38 am

hen is the 777X first flight schedule for ?

Stitch · Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:28 am

jfk777 wrote:
hen is the 777X first flight schedule for ?

Nothing public as of yet.

I would not expect a public date until just before Boeing is ready to send her up.

PepeTheFrog · Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:05 am

One has to wonder if the message at https://twitter.com/davidshepardson/sta ... 5130701826 will have impact for the certification timeline:

Opus99 · Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:12 am

PepeTheFrog wrote:
One has to wonder if the message at https://twitter.com/davidshepardson/sta ... 5130701826 will have impact for the certification timeline:

I would like to hope they've changed this supplier, really and honestly because this is bad if the email is true at least. Apparently this email was sent years ago

blrsea · Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:26 am

Opus99 wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
One has to wonder if the message at https://twitter.com/davidshepardson/sta ... 5130701826 will have impact for the certification timeline:

I would like to hope they've changed this supplier, really and honestly because this is bad if the email is true at least. Apparently this email was sent years ago

This particular exchange is about simulator for 737 (and also for 777X), not any parts supplier for the actual aircraft. Of course, the simulator needs to behave as closely as possible to the actual aircraft.

MileHFL400 · Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:22 pm

Ok how about some news on the actual plane..... any updates?

WayexTDI · Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:58 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
Strato2 wrote:

IF that is true then there are no more words left to explain Boeings stupidity. They wanted to show off and failed because of that. Then again we have MAX.

I don't see any stupidity in trying to do it right. Do you have evidence of what you say? I wish Boeing to come back faster and stronger from now and for ever

*** 2020 ***

When you decide to go above and beyond the actual requirement (and original test plans) just to try and show of, and when that test spectacularly fails, then it is stupidity.

bikerthai · Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:44 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
When you decide to go above and beyond the actual requirement (and original test plans) just to try and show of, and when that test spectacularly fails, then it is stupidity.

So much cynicism. With the light of all the problems going on with Boeing, it may be apropos. However, when performing something as costly as this static test, adding the additional test parameters is not done likely and should not be considered as showing off. The engineers probably know what they are doing when they added the additional parameters, most likely to answer some other question that they want to know about (beyond the minimum test requirement). Unfortunately for them Murphy's law struck again.

bt

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net