Welcome to the Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2022. Please continue to add your comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1455925

In response to Spacepope:

It was already posted since Tuesday.
Roman Abramovich Training Flights in The Bahamas - https://youtu.be/D2uPlmSENE4

When was the last 787 delivered?

flight152 wrote:

When was the last 787 delivered?

ANA took a frame on 12 October, but it had been sitting in VCV since 20 April so I presume it was contractually delivered in April.

The last tranche of 787 deliveries was between March and June so likely June was the last direct delivery fresh from the factory.

Refresh my memory please. Are all 787’s being produced in Charleston now?

AAlaxfan wrote:

Refresh my memory please. Are all 787’s being produced in Charleston now?

Yes, the Everett plant has built its final 787.

TheZ wrote:

AAlaxfan wrote:

Refresh my memory please. Are all 787’s being produced in Charleston now?

Yes, the Everett plant has built its final 787.

Thanks.

Does Boeing actually still produce 787's or are they waiting to get the already produced ones delivered first?

inkjet7 wrote:

Does Boeing actually still produce 787's or are they waiting to get the already produced ones delivered first?

The last official statement I can find is from their Q3 report in late October saying production is at two planes per month.

Thanks! I hope They can get their act together sooner rather than later.

Overview of CHS ramp just after Christmas including the Air China 789 which has been on the ramp for several years





https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 43331?s=20

Along with an unpainted Oman Air 789 LN1123



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 20417?s=20

American Airlines 788 partially painted on the CHS ramp (7 Jan)





https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 33507?s=20

United 787-10 N17015 spotted on the ramp at CHS (7 Jan)



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 93092?s=20

Turkish Airlines 789 TC-LLR at the fuel dock at CHS (7 Jan)



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 55270?s=20

And an unpainted Turkish Airlines 789 TC-LLT LN1141 returns to CHS after a test flight



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 87681?s=20

qf789 wrote:

Turkish Airlines 789 TC-LLR at the fuel dock at CHS (7 Jan)



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 55270?s=20

And an unpainted Turkish Airlines 789 TC-LLT LN1141 returns to CHS after a test flight



https://twitter.com/BoeingSCSpotter/sta ... 87681?s=20

There is some confusion about the identities of the Turkish 789s, depends if TC-LLQ is LN 1113. Most likely TC-LLR is LN1117, TC-LLS is LN1121 and most likely that's the N10016 on your second picture as LN1142/TC-LLT willl take another 6 months to be built when they continue with two per month. Another scenario is that they skip TC-LLQ, then all the registrations go up one letter and LN1121 is TC-LLT instead.

There is no confusion. Turkey doesn't use Q. Airliner inventory websites and bloggers need to learn to stop guessing at registrations, msns, LNs and posting them as fact which every other inventory website and blogger copies and reposts as fact, leading to these situations. I've been saying this for nearly 20 years but no-one takes any notice as everyone wants to be the first to post the info, regardless of its accuracy.

RobK wrote:

There is no confusion. Turkey doesn't use Q. Airliner inventory websites and bloggers need to learn to stop guessing at registrations, msns, LNs and posting them as fact which every other inventory website and blogger copies and reposts as fact, leading to these situations. I've been saying this for nearly 20 years but no-one takes any notice as everyone wants to be the first to post the info, regardless of its accuracy.

Fair enough, it actually confirms what I have been saying above that the pictured TC-LLT can't be 1141 like what qf789 wrote but is then 1121 instead. Also boefamily.flights is wrong then with calling TC-LLT LN 1141 and N10115 of United LN 1131 while it must be LN 1122. I call this confusion no matter whose fault it is.

Any news on the long-forgotten Avianca B789 N797AV that's been parked at Abu Dhabi since delivery on 31 May 2019 ? I wonder who is paying for that.

What is the story with the Air China 787-9 at CHS that has been undelivered for years?

kaitak744 wrote:

What is the story with the Air China 787-9 at CHS that has been undelivered for years?

Guessing they don't need it since international travel in and out of China cratered due to COVID so existing wide bodies have been used on domestic runs. Air China is starting to take planes again, so maybe they will finally come get it.

Does any one know what Westjet's delivery schedule is like?

I haven't seen a new tail in a while, wondering if there will be a few this year to finish off that order of 10.

Thanks

RobK wrote:

Any news on the long-forgotten Avianca B789 N797AV that's been parked at Abu Dhabi since delivery on 31 May 2019 ? I wonder who is paying for that.

https://www.facebook.com/AviacionComerc ... 518673337/
Sits in AUH without engines.

Stitch wrote:

kaitak744 wrote:

What is the story with the Air China 787-9 at CHS that has been undelivered for years?

Guessing they don't need it since international travel in and out of China cratered due to COVID so existing wide bodies have been used on domestic runs. Air China is starting to take planes again, so maybe they will finally come get it.

No, this plane has been sitting around long before Covid. It was built in 2018 and as far as I am aware has never even flown yet. I don’t think anyone knows why exactly Air China has not taken the plane, although many suspect the reasons to mostly be political.

ben7x wrote:

RobK wrote:

Any news on the long-forgotten Avianca B789 N797AV that's been parked at Abu Dhabi since delivery on 31 May 2019 ? I wonder who is paying for that.

https://www.facebook.com/AviacionComerc ... 518673337/
Sits in AUH without engines.

Thanks. The comments are from not long after it arrived and the general jist of it seems to be that RR are paying for the storage whilst they find some engines to put on it. 2.5 years seems like a long time to me to find a pair of engines.. Apparently it flew there with some engines from a 787-8, which possibly explains why the flight plan had in the remarks "NON-RVSM FERRY FLIGHT".

Stitch wrote:

kaitak744 wrote:

What is the story with the Air China 787-9 at CHS that has been undelivered for years?

Guessing they don't need it since international travel in and out of China cratered due to COVID so existing wide bodies have been used on domestic runs. Air China is starting to take planes again, so maybe they will finally come get it.

Make of it what you will, but the frame no longer shows on various internal Boeing inventory listings, ie. the entry for LN 688 is completely deleted.

Curious, why would you apply the 'American' title/graphics when you haven't finished painting it ? Is this a new economy look for AA ?

MEA-707 wrote:

Another scenario is that they skip TC-LLQ, then all the registrations go up one letter and LN1121 is TC-LLT instead.

Yes they'll skip TC-LLQ as Q isn't included in the turkish alphabet

..

flight152 wrote:

When was the last 787 delivered?

..
The All Nippon Airways' 77th .787 aircraft, the 39th of the type 787-9, MSN 66524 / LN 1095, reg. JA937A, test reg. N883BA, N2005V, with the 375 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y347 and powered by two .GEnx-1B70/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: 9,3:1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 53,3:1, each rated at 321,61 kN / 32.795 kgf / 72.300 lbf, delivered to All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) on 09/10. Nov 2021, flying on the route VCV/KVCV - HND/RJTT (FLT NH9397) was the latest delivered Boeing 787 aircraft. At the same time this was the last Boeing Everett Factory-built .787 Dreamliner that has rolled off the assembly line of the factory that seats at the northeast corner of Paine Field PAE/KPAE airport (WA).
..
..The aircraft first flew on 16. Mar 2021. This was the 1006th delivered Boeing 787 aircraft and 568th of the type 787-9. The first Boeing 787 was delivered on 25. Sep 2011 to All Nippon Airways and it was Boeing 787-8, MSN 34488 / LN 8, reg. JA801A, test reg. N1008S, with the 240 seats, cabin configuration C42 Y198 and powered by two .Trent 1000-A2, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, each rated at 307,79 kN / 31.386 kgf / 69.194 lbf.
..
..In a 10 years of the serial production .787 was produced in the three different variants: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10. Of the 1006 in total delivered Boeing 787 aircraft, 645 (64,1 %) were powered by .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (8,0-9,3):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (52,4-58,1):1, rated between 255,30 kN / 26.033 kgf / 57.394 lbf and 349,2 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf and 361 (35,9 %) aircraft by .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated between 265,25 kN / 27.048 kgf / 59.631 lbf and 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf.
..
………….…….
………….…….Boeing 787 - deliveries by the Model, Production Site and the Engine Factory
..
..All Nippon Airways took delivery of its first .787-9 Dreamliner on 29. July 2014. ANA has 77 787s in its fleet now; 36 787-8, 39 787-9 and 2 787-10, having ordered a total of 80 aircraft. The newly-delivered All Nippon Airways' Dreamliners, which will operate on the domestic routes, are configured with a total of 375 seats, of which 28 are Premium Economy Class (up from the previous 18). ANA has fitted its Safran-designed Premium Class seats to the new Boeing 787-9, which have been already well received, just as the Toyota Boshoku-designed Economy Class seats, on their eight .777-281ER aircraft with 392 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y364 and powered by two .PW4090 (PW4074D), 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: (5,8-6,4):1; eng. architecture: 1F+6LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (34,2-42,8):1, each rated at 408,30 kN / 41.635 kgf / 91.790 lbf (344,47 kN / 35.126 kgf / 77.440 lbf) and eleven .787-8 aircraft with the 312 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y284 and powered by either two .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines or by two .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines, after their introduction before the COVID pandemic in May 2019. The seat offers a width of 22 inches and features a 15,6-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports, a large, swivelling tray table and a storage compartment next to the seat. Meanwhile the 787-9’s Economy Class cabin with 347 Toyota Boshoku-designed seats also features the same seats fitted to the carrier’s Boeing 777-200 aircraft, and offers a 13,3-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports. The new 787-9 is the first Dreamliner in the fleet to be equipped with personal IFE screen at all Economy and Premium Class seats.
..
..All Nippon Airways' commitment from February 2020 for up to 20 extra Boeing 787s is not significant for the sheer number of the aircraft, nor the sub-types (11 787-10s and up to 9 787-9s). The surprise in the February 2020-announcement is what will be under the wings: the Japanese airline has opted for .GEnx-1Bs instead of more .Trent 1000s. This makes All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) deal just as interesting as that of Air New Zealand (NZ/ANZ) when they announced in May 2019 that it had ordered 8 787-10s with GEnx-1B-power instead of Trent 1000s they use on their 14 787-9s. The clear message from both airlines is that they have lost (some) confidence in the Rolls-Royce engines. And for a reason; both have suffered a lot from reliabilty issues. Just as a reminder; this is the same factory that was producing legendary and eternal RB211-535E4, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 1.882,1 mm / 74,1 in; BPR: 4,4:1; eng. architecture: 1F–6IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–3LPT), OPR: (25,8-28,0):1, rated between 176,30 kN / 17.978 kgf / 39.634 lbf and 192,40 kN / 19.619 kgf / 43.253 lbf, aimed for .757, twin-jet, narrowbody airliner...
..
All Nippon Airways was one of the first airlines in 2016 that recorded intermediate turbine (IPT) issues on the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000s. Soon after the first incidents and inspections it became evident not only IPT and high-pressure turbine (HPT) blades were showing excessive wear but intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) blades as well. What followed were three years of multiple inspections and repairs while Rolls-Royce tried to fix the issue on Package B and Package C engines, only to find out that the latest Trent 1000 TEN-version wasn’t immune of problems either. The peak of ANA's 787 groundings happened between July and October 2018, causing major disruptions to the flight schedule. ANA completed the upgrade of turbine components in February 2019, and at the same time it launched fleet-wide upgrades and inspections of compressors. This program was completed during 2020.
..
..The GEnx-1Bs haven’t been without reliability issues either. General Electric produced a durability upgrade package in 2018 that included HPT's first-stage nozzles and blades, combustor linings and fuel nozzles, with the aim of improving on-wing performance by some 30 %. The GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B (Boeing.747-8) also benefitted from two Performance Improvement Packages, although at first they didn’t entirely bring the expected results. With GEnx orders from Turkish Airlines (TK), Korean Air (KE), Vistara (UK), Hawaiian (HA), China Aircraft Leasing Group Holdings Limited (CALC) and Biman (BG) since early 2018, the American engine maker has increased its market share well over 65 % it claimed at Farnborough 2018. It is with great anticipation we wait for a decision from Emirates which engine will power its 30 787-9s on order since the 2019 Dubai Airshow. Rolls-Royce most significant recent order was Lufthansa (LH)’s for 20 787-9s in March 2019…
..
…..…
…..…Image source: https://airlinergs.com/united-enters-first-boeing-787-10-dreamliner-into-service/
…..…United Airlines was the first carrier in the world to operate all three Dreamliner models: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10
..
Unlike 787-9 and 787-10 that share the same MTOW (560.000 lb / 254.011 kg), the shortest member of the 787 Dreamliner family - 787-8, has a MTOW of 502.500 lb / 227.930 kg. During the introduction in the commercial service in October 2011 with ANA, the MTOW of the Boeing 787-8 was 484.000 lb / 219.538 lb. For the Boeing 787-9, that entered commercial service with NZ in August 2014, the MTOW was 557.000 lb / 252.650 kg. In April 2018, when the largest member of the family, Boeing 787-10, entered the commercial service, in April 2018 with SQ, its MTOW was 560.000 lb / 254.011 kg, just as it is now.
..
..In the recent years The Boeing Company has announced for a several times an increase of MTOW of its 787-10 aircraft, lately and 787-9, but this hasn't happened yet. From the recent issue of the type-certificate data sheet (TCDS) of the .787 aircraft: ..TCDS No.: EASA.IM.A.115 Issue: 26 dated on 03. Mar 2021 and ..T00021SE Revision 35 dated on 02. July 2021, the same way as Boeing 787 aircraft’s factory document - 787.ACfAP D6-58333 REV N from October 2021, it is not visible that the MTOW of 573.202 lb / 260.000 kg (or any other) is foreseen for either 787-9 or 787-10 aircraft in this moment …
..
..It would be interested to see if the mentioned 787-10’s MTOW increase of 6.000 kg / 13.228 lb, reportedly offered to NZ (787-10ER) in 2019, would have to partially include and increased OEW because of the possible needed redesigning, structural strengthening or reinforcment of any or more of the aircraft’s parts: fuselage, wingbox, wings, wings’ joins, horizontal stabilizers, landing gear... In some circumstances it is possible for the aircraft to land overweighted so the max load on the landing gear could be too high for its current design …
..
..The .787-10 Dreamliner aircraft is currently certified by two either .GEnx-1B74/75/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (7,9-9,1):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 58,1:1, each rated at 341,18 kN / 34.791 kgf / 76.700 lbf, .GEnx-1B76(A)/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines rated at 349,20 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf (UA, EY, BR, KL, VN and SV) or .Trent 1000-J3/K3, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated at 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf (NH, SQ and BA).
..
..If the .787-9 HGW and/or 787-10 HGW aircraft of the increased MTOW (260.000 kg / 573.202 lb) would need the engines of the higher thrust, General Electric has certified one engine model of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .GEnx-1B78/P2, 2-shaft turbofan, rated at 357,6 kN / 36.465 kgf / 80.392 lbf. On the other side Rolls-Royce has certified two engine models of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .Trent 1000-M3/-N3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 354,65 kN / 36.164 kgf / 79.728 lbf and .Trent 1000-R3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 360,43 kN / 36.754 kgf / 81.028 lbf.
..As far as the Boeing 787-10’s engines are concern all I can say is: "If those current engines are already a 'racing' engines good enough for a couple races, those above mentioned, of even higher thrust, are definitely a 'pole-position' engines good enough for a couple of laps. Good luck with both of them …"
..
In 2015 during the one of the aeronautical fairs, Emirates’ president and COO, Sir Tim Clark, was asked on the Emirates’ requirement for a twin-aisle medium / long range complement to their .A380 and .777 fleets, respectively on the competition in between Boeing 787-10 and .A350-900 in the 300-seat segment. Namely, at that time conventional wisdom has been created that Emirates firmly leans towards the Boeing 787-10, especially after they canceled their order for the 70 A350-900s in 2014. However, Sir Clark responded that he doesn’t know where that comes from because the Boeing 787-10 is not coming up with the thrust requirements Emirates find necessary for their needs, whereas the Airbus A350-900 has more than enough supply of thrust. The most people could wonder how come the Boeing 787-10 could be short of thrust since no other customer has raised this issue. In the meantime EK/ EK gave up on 787-10 and now has 50 Airbus A350-900 and 30 Boeing 787-9 ordered. EK is also considering switching between 30 to 40 of its Boeing.777X orders for those of the smaller Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This is more than a third of the airlines' initial 777X order. In November 2019 besides a deal to purchase 30 787 Dreamliners, initial order of 156 777X aircraft was reduced to 126.
..
..That what the Emirates have been looking for out of the .787-9/-10’s engines, . Trent 1000, 3-shaft turbofans or .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft turbofans, is 373,65 kN / 38.102 kgf / 84.000 lbf of take-off thrust necessary to assure take-off with full loads all year round. It is interesting to note that Emirates’ Gulf neighbor, Etihad Airways (EY), which has an almost identical climate and elevation to the Emirates’ base in Dubai and deploys their B78X aircraft on the routes similar to those Emirates had in mind, haven’t had such demands. However, the people in Emirates are well aware of the fact that probably no other airline could have such a requirement and that The Boeing Company and the 787-9/-10’s engines’ factories are not going to develop a custom made aircraft and the new engine just for them.
..
..The Emirates are everything but an ordinary airline by any of the benchmarks. Their main hub, Dubai International Airport (DXB), experiences the ground temperatures of over 45°C / 113°F on many days of the year, and this affects in a great extent and in the same way both, the aircraft and the engines. The decreased air density directly impacts on the foreseen and necessary difference of the pressures on the top and the bottom of the wings, the difference that creates a lift-off force on the wings. So, to get to the same lift force, the aircraft has to go faster. Higher take-off speed requires more powerful engines or longer runways. Those Dubai International’s runways are long (12L/30R - 4.000 m / 13.123 ft; 12R/30L - 4.450 m / 14.600 ft), but there are other limits. You just can’t go too fast down the runway because of the tire-speed-limit. And if you want to reduce take-off speed, the MTOW has to be reduced…
..
..And when it comes to the engines, it is even worse. The lower air density not only lowers engine’s thrust but the engine also suffers internally from the increased air temperature. The air of the higher temperature enters the intake and passes through the whole front section of the engine - fan and LPC. As it passes the HPC, it can cause the engine computer (FADEC) to lower engine rotation speed since the HPC also increases the air’s temperature as the part of the compression, and that temperature can easily exceed the last HPC stages’ allowed maximum. On the other side, lower rotation speed, and which saves the last stages from being thermally overloaded, means disturbed/reduced air-flow, possible compressor’s stalling and/or surging, lower OPR and TIT.
..
..Generally, this flat rating max. temperature is normally set to happen at outside temperature of +15°C / 59°F over ISA temperature (the worldwide agreed standard) and Dubai has +30°C / 86 °F , i.e. 45°C / 113°F, on a large part of the year, what represents three to four times higher values. In the case the compressor alone ‘has no problem’ with the higher temperatures, the engine’s turbine will not accept those higher temperatures without the engine computer’s throttling back. This results in reduced thrust from the engine and what we have seen is that we need more thrust just to compensate for the thinner air. That reduced thrust comes from the engine’s computer injecting less fuel in the combustor just to save the compressors’ and especially HPT’s blades from melting. Don’t forget to add on all that the desert’s dust and the sand filling the turbines’ blades cooling system. The final result is that the engine loses the power and that the aircraft has to take-off with the lower MTOW. The only way to compensate for the thinner air and thrust loss is to haul less payload or to have more powerful engines on an aircraft with a larger wings. The problems with a very high thrust requirement for take-offs from Dubai International are especially known from the larger aircraft. That’s the reason EK didn't go for 78Js, especially those of inreased MTOW that would even more emphasize the lack of the sufficient thrust EK are looking for from 78J’s engines. In addition to the engines, the attitude of the Emirates is that the 787-10’s range is too short for their needs and because of this the company opted to order the 787-9 …
..
..It is not a secret the 787-10 already has some issues with the field performances at MTOW at high OAT (outside/ambient air temperatures) and/or HEA (high elevation airports), and increasing the MTOW (787-10ER) would not be of any help at all if that increasing won't be partially including increased OEW (f.e. bigger and heavier .GE9X derived, 2-shaft, high-bypass turbofans or .UltraFan, ‘2,5'-shaft, high-bypass, geared, turbofans and/or larger wing originally planned for 787-9…). The wingbox may be able to carry MTOW of 280.000 kg / 617.294 lb, but it doesn't make it competitive against the larger wings, and on the other hand the question arises whether the MLG can withstand such an increase of the aircraft's weight. MTOW is simply limited by the lift and the engines' thrust. More thrust is needed to reach take-off speed (assuming you have the same runway lenghts) or a bigger wing to be able to take-off with less speed because of the lowered thrust due to ambient conditions…
..
The 787 Dreamliner program has been hit with multiple issues over the years, including early battery problems in 2013, which led to all 50 787s in service worldwide being grounded for over three months. Last year, more problems were discovered, including quality issues with seams on the fuselage, forcing Boeing to rework around 100 undelivered 787s. Although the deliveries of the 787 took place earlier in 2021, they were halted again in May and are yet to resume. The Boeing Company has delivered just 14 787 Dreamliners in 2021, 2 787-8s and 12 787-9s …
..
…
…Boeing 787 - deliveries 2021
..
..The Boeing Company is currently dealing with several quality issues on its 787s and is working closely with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on the fixes. Its current production rate of the 787 Dreamliner is now at two planes per month. At its peak, The Boeing Company was producing 14 787s per month but has repeatedly slashed its production rate of the aircraft, which stood at 5 aircraft per month in the summer 2021. In October 2021, Boeing revealed that certain titanium parts on some 787s built in the past three years were not up to strength, citing problems with a third-party supplier. Affected parts of the plane include fittings that assist in securing the floor beam, while other fittings, spacers, brackets, and clips are still under investigation…
..
..At some point, the question of the quality of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft manufactured at the Boeing South Carolina (previously Boeing Charleston) plant was raised. Now all the remaining planes will be produced at that factory. It is not questionable whether there are enough engineers in The Boeing Company who can work on several projects simultaneously, but it is perfectly clear that the priority at the moment is to further establish the production and delivery of the 787 Dreamliner aircraft that their future customers are eagerly awaiting. Including Emirates …
..
..Mario

mfranjic wrote:

..

flight152 wrote:

When was the last 787 delivered?

..
The All Nippon Airways' 77th .787 aircraft, the 39th of the type 787-9, MSN 66524 / LN 1095, reg. JA937A, test reg. N883BA, N2005V, with the 375 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y347 and powered by two .GEnx-1B70/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: 9,3:1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 53,3:1, each rated at 321,61 kN / 32.795 kgf / 72.300 lbf, delivered to All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) on 09/10. Nov 2021, flying on the route VCV/KVCV - HND/RJTT (FLT NH9397) was the latest delivered Boeing 787 aircraft. At the same time this was the last Boeing Everett Factory-built .787 Dreamliner that has rolled off the assembly line of the factory that seats at the northeast corner of Paine Field PAE/KPAE airport (WA).
..
..The aircraft first flew on 16. Mar 2021. This was the 1006th delivered Boeing 787 aircraft and 568th of the type 787-9. The first Boeing 787 was delivered on 25. Sep 2011 to All Nippon Airways and it was Boeing 787-8, MSN 34488 / LN 8, reg. JA801A, test reg. N1008S, with the 240 seats, cabin configuration C42 Y198 and powered by two .Trent 1000-A2, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, each rated at 307,79 kN / 31.386 kgf / 69.194 lbf.
..
..In a 10 years of the serial production .787 was produced in the three different variants: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10. Of the 1006 in total delivered Boeing 787 aircraft, 645 (64,1 %) were powered by .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (8,0-9,3):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (52,4-58,1):1, rated between 255,30 kN / 26.033 kgf / 57.394 lbf and 349,2 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf and 361 (35,9 %) aircraft by .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated between 265,25 kN / 27.048 kgf / 59.631 lbf and 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf.
..
………….…….
………….…….Boeing 787 - deliveries by the Model, Production Site and the Engine Factory
..
..All Nippon Airways took delivery of its first .787-9 Dreamliner on 29. July 2014. ANA has 77 787s in its fleet now; 36 787-8, 39 787-9 and 2 787-10, having ordered a total of 80 aircraft. The newly-delivered All Nippon Airways' Dreamliners, which will operate on the domestic routes, are configured with a total of 375 seats, of which 28 are Premium Economy Class (up from the previous 18). ANA has fitted its Safran-designed Premium Class seats to the new Boeing 787-9, which have been already well received, just as the Toyota Boshoku-designed Economy Class seats, on their eight .777-281ER aircraft with 392 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y364 and powered by two .PW4090 (PW4074D), 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: (5,8-6,4):1; eng. architecture: 1F+6LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (34,2-42,8):1, each rated at 408,30 kN / 41.635 kgf / 91.790 lbf (344,47 kN / 35.126 kgf / 77.440 lbf) and eleven .787-8 aircraft with the 312 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y284 and powered by either two .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines or by two .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines, after their introduction before the COVID pandemic in May 2019. The seat offers a width of 22 inches and features a 15,6-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports, a large, swivelling tray table and a storage compartment next to the seat. Meanwhile the 787-9’s Economy Class cabin with 347 Toyota Boshoku-designed seats also features the same seats fitted to the carrier’s Boeing 777-200 aircraft, and offers a 13,3-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports. The new 787-9 is the first Dreamliner in the fleet to be equipped with personal IFE screen at all Economy and Premium Class seats.
..
..All Nippon Airways' commitment from February 2020 for up to 20 extra Boeing 787s is not significant for the sheer number of the aircraft, nor the sub-types (11 787-10s and up to 9 787-9s). The surprise in the February 2020-announcement is what will be under the wings: the Japanese airline has opted for .GEnx-1Bs instead of more .Trent 1000s. This makes All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) deal just as interesting as that of Air New Zealand (NZ/ANZ) when they announced in May 2019 that it had ordered 8 787-10s with GEnx-1B-power instead of Trent 1000s they use on their 14 787-9s. The clear message from both airlines is that they have lost (some) confidence in the Rolls-Royce engines. And for a reason; both have suffered a lot from reliabilty issues. Just as a reminder; this is the same factory that was producing legendary and eternal RB211-535E4, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 1.882,1 mm / 74,1 in; BPR: 4,4:1; eng. architecture: 1F–6IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–3LPT), OPR: (25,8-28,0):1, rated between 176,30 kN / 17.978 kgf / 39.634 lbf and 192,40 kN / 19.619 kgf / 43.253 lbf, aimed for .757, twin-jet, narrowbody airliner...
..
All Nippon Airways was one of the first airlines in 2016 that recorded intermediate turbine (IPT) issues on the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000s. Soon after the first incidents and inspections it became evident not only IPT and high-pressure turbine (HPT) blades were showing excessive wear but intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) blades as well. What followed were three years of multiple inspections and repairs while Rolls-Royce tried to fix the issue on Package B and Package C engines, only to find out that the latest Trent 1000 TEN-version wasn’t immune of problems either. The peak of ANA's 787 groundings happened between July and October 2018, causing major disruptions to the flight schedule. ANA completed the upgrade of turbine components in February 2019, and at the same time it launched fleet-wide upgrades and inspections of compressors. This program was completed during 2020.
..
..The GEnx-1Bs haven’t been without reliability issues either. General Electric produced a durability upgrade package in 2018 that included HPT's first-stage nozzles and blades, combustor linings and fuel nozzles, with the aim of improving on-wing performance by some 30 %. The GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B (Boeing.747-8) also benefitted from two Performance Improvement Packages, although at first they didn’t entirely bring the expected results. With GEnx orders from Turkish Airlines (TK), Korean Air (KE), Vistara (UK), Hawaiian (HA), China Aircraft Leasing Group Holdings Limited (CALC) and Biman (BG) since early 2018, the American engine maker has increased its market share well over 65 % it claimed at Farnborough 2018. It is with great anticipation we wait for a decision from Emirates which engine will power its 30 787-9s on order since the 2019 Dubai Airshow. Rolls-Royce most significant recent order was Lufthansa (LH)’s for 20 787-9s in March 2019…
..
…..…
…..…Image source: https://airlinergs.com/united-enters-first-boeing-787-10-dreamliner-into-service/
…..…United Airlines was the first carrier in the world to operate all three Dreamliner models: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10
..
Unlike 787-9 and 787-10 that share the same MTOW (560.000 lb / 254.011 kg), the shortest member of the 787 Dreamliner family - 787-8, has a MTOW of 502.500 lb / 227.930 kg. During the introduction in the commercial service in October 2011 with ANA, the MTOW of the Boeing 787-8 was 484.000 lb / 219.538 lb. For the Boeing 787-9, that entered commercial service with NZ in August 2014, the MTOW was 557.000 lb / 252.650 kg. In April 2018, when the largest member of the family, Boeing 787-10, entered the commercial service, in April 2018 with SQ, its MTOW was 560.000 lb / 254.011 kg, just as it is now.
..
..In the recent years The Boeing Company has announced for a several times an increase of MTOW of its 787-10 aircraft, lately and 787-9, but this hasn't happened yet. From the recent issue of the type-certificate data sheet (TCDS) of the .787 aircraft: ..TCDS No.: EASA.IM.A.115 Issue: 26 dated on 03. Mar 2021 and ..T00021SE Revision 35 dated on 02. July 2021, the same way as Boeing 787 aircraft’s factory document - 787.ACfAP D6-58333 REV N from October 2021, it is not visible that the MTOW of 573.202 lb / 260.000 kg (or any other) is foreseen for either 787-9 or 787-10 aircraft in this moment …
..
..It would be interested to see if the mentioned 787-10’s MTOW increase of 6.000 kg / 13.228 lb, reportedly offered to NZ (787-10ER) in 2019, would have to partially include and increased OEW because of the possible needed redesigning, structural strengthening or reinforcment of any or more of the aircraft’s parts: fuselage, wingbox, wings, wings’ joins, horizontal stabilizers, landing gear... In some circumstances it is possible for the aircraft to land overweighted so the max load on the landing gear could be too high for its current design …
..
..The .787-10 Dreamliner aircraft is currently certified by two either .GEnx-1B74/75/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (7,9-9,1):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 58,1:1, each rated at 341,18 kN / 34.791 kgf / 76.700 lbf, .GEnx-1B76(A)/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines rated at 349,20 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf (UA, EY, BR, KL, VN and SV) or .Trent 1000-J3/K3, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated at 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf (NH, SQ and BA).
..
..If the .787-9 HGW and/or 787-10 HGW aircraft of the increased MTOW (260.000 kg / 573.202 lb) would need the engines of the higher thrust, General Electric has certified one engine model of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .GEnx-1B78/P2, 2-shaft turbofan, rated at 357,6 kN / 36.465 kgf / 80.392 lbf. On the other side Rolls-Royce has certified two engine models of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .Trent 1000-M3/-N3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 354,65 kN / 36.164 kgf / 79.728 lbf and .Trent 1000-R3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 360,43 kN / 36.754 kgf / 81.028 lbf.
..As far as the Boeing 787-10’s engines are concern all I can say is: "If those current engines are already a 'racing' engines good enough for a couple races, those above mentioned, of even higher thrust, are definitely a 'pole-position' engines good enough for a couple of laps. Good luck with both of them …"
..
In 2015 during the one of the aeronautical fairs, Emirates’ president and COO, Sir Tim Clark, was asked on the Emirates’ requirement for a twin-aisle medium / long range complement to their .A380 and .777 fleets, respectively on the competition in between Boeing 787-10 and .A350-900 in the 300-seat segment. Namely, at that time conventional wisdom has been created that Emirates firmly leans towards the Boeing 787-10, especially after they canceled their order for the 70 A350-900s in 2014. However, Sir Clark responded that he doesn’t know where that comes from because the Boeing 787-10 is not coming up with the thrust requirements Emirates find necessary for their needs, whereas the Airbus A350-900 has more than enough supply of thrust. The most people could wonder how come the Boeing 787-10 could be short of thrust since no other customer has raised this issue. In the meantime EK/ EK gave up on 787-10 and now has 50 Airbus A350-900 and 30 Boeing 787-9 ordered. EK is also considering switching between 30 to 40 of its Boeing.777X orders for those of the smaller Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This is more than a third of the airlines' initial 777X order. In November 2019 besides a deal to purchase 30 787 Dreamliners, initial order of 156 777X aircraft was reduced to 126.
..
..That what the Emirates have been looking for out of the .787-9/-10’s engines, . Trent 1000, 3-shaft turbofans or .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft turbofans, is 373,65 kN / 38.102 kgf / 84.000 lbf of take-off thrust necessary to assure take-off with full loads all year round. It is interesting to note that Emirates’ Gulf neighbor, Etihad Airways (EY), which has an almost identical climate and elevation to the Emirates’ base in Dubai and deploys their B78X aircraft on the routes similar to those Emirates had in mind, haven’t had such demands. However, the people in Emirates are well aware of the fact that probably no other airline could have such a requirement and that The Boeing Company and the 787-9/-10’s engines’ factories are not going to develop a custom made aircraft and the new engine just for them.
..
..The Emirates are everything but an ordinary airline by any of the benchmarks. Their main hub, Dubai International Airport (DXB), experiences the ground temperatures of over 45°C / 113°F on many days of the year, and this affects in a great extent and in the same way both, the aircraft and the engines. The decreased air density directly impacts on the foreseen and necessary difference of the pressures on the top and the bottom of the wings, the difference that creates a lift-off force on the wings. So, to get to the same lift force, the aircraft has to go faster. Higher take-off speed requires more powerful engines or longer runways. Those Dubai International’s runways are long (12L/30R - 4.000 m / 13.123 ft; 12R/30L - 4.450 m / 14.600 ft), but there are other limits. You just can’t go too fast down the runway because of the tire-speed-limit. And if you want to reduce take-off speed, the MTOW has to be reduced…
..
..And when it comes to the engines, it is even worse. The lower air density not only lowers engine’s thrust but the engine also suffers internally from the increased air temperature. The air of the higher temperature enters the intake and passes through the whole front section of the engine - fan and LPC. As it passes the HPC, it can cause the engine computer (FADEC) to lower engine rotation speed since the HPC also increases the air’s temperature as the part of the compression, and that temperature can easily exceed the last HPC stages’ allowed maximum. On the other side, lower rotation speed, and which saves the last stages from being thermally overloaded, means disturbed/reduced air-flow, possible compressor’s stalling and/or surging, lower OPR and TIT.
..
..Generally, this flat rating max. temperature is normally set to happen at outside temperature of +15°C / 59°F over ISA temperature (the worldwide agreed standard) and Dubai has +30°C / 86 °F , i.e. 45°C / 113°F, on a large part of the year, what represents three to four times higher values. In the case the compressor alone ‘has no problem’ with the higher temperatures, the engine’s turbine will not accept those higher temperatures without the engine computer’s throttling back. This results in reduced thrust from the engine and what we have seen is that we need more thrust just to compensate for the thinner air. That reduced thrust comes from the engine’s computer injecting less fuel in the combustor just to save the compressors’ and especially HPT’s blades from melting. Don’t forget to add on all that the desert’s dust and the sand filling the turbines’ blades cooling system. The final result is that the engine loses the power and that the aircraft has to take-off with the lower MTOW. The only way to compensate for the thinner air and thrust loss is to haul less payload or to have more powerful engines on an aircraft with a larger wings. The problems with a very high thrust requirement for take-offs from Dubai International are especially known from the larger aircraft. That’s the reason EK didn't go for 78Js, especially those of inreased MTOW that would even more emphasize the lack of the sufficient thrust EK are looking for from 78J’s engines. In addition to the engines, the attitude of the Emirates is that the 787-10’s range is too short for their needs and because of this the company opted to order the 787-9 …
..
..It is not a secret the 787-10 already has some issues with the field performances at MTOW at high OAT (outside/ambient air temperatures) and/or HEA (high elevation airports), and increasing the MTOW (787-10ER) would not be of any help at all if that increasing won't be partially including increased OEW (f.e. bigger and heavier .GE9X derived, 2-shaft, high-bypass turbofans or .UltraFan, ‘2,5'-shaft, high-bypass, geared, turbofans and/or larger wing originally planned for 787-9…). The wingbox may be able to carry MTOW of 280.000 kg / 617.294 lb, but it doesn't make it competitive against the larger wings, and on the other hand the question arises whether the MLG can withstand such an increase of the aircraft's weight. MTOW is simply limited by the lift and the engines' thrust. More thrust is needed to reach take-off speed (assuming you have the same runway lenghts) or a bigger wing to be able to take-off with less speed because of the lowered thrust due to ambient conditions…
..
The 787 Dreamliner program has been hit with multiple issues over the years, including early battery problems in 2013, which led to all 50 787s in service worldwide being grounded for over three months. Last year, more problems were discovered, including quality issues with seams on the fuselage, forcing Boeing to rework around 100 undelivered 787s. Although the deliveries of the 787 took place earlier in 2021, they were halted again in May and are yet to resume. The Boeing Company has delivered just 14 787 Dreamliners in 2021, 2 787-8s and 12 787-9s …
..
…
…Boeing 787 - deliveries 2021
..
..The Boeing Company is currently dealing with several quality issues on its 787s and is working closely with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on the fixes. Its current production rate of the 787 Dreamliner is now at two planes per month. At its peak, The Boeing Company was producing 14 787s per month but has repeatedly slashed its production rate of the aircraft, which stood at 5 aircraft per month in the summer 2021. In October 2021, Boeing revealed that certain titanium parts on some 787s built in the past three years were not up to strength, citing problems with a third-party supplier. Affected parts of the plane include fittings that assist in securing the floor beam, while other fittings, spacers, brackets, and clips are still under investigation…
..
..At some point, the question of the quality of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft manufactured at the Boeing South Carolina (previously Boeing Charleston) plant was raised. Now all the remaining planes will be produced at that factory. It is not questionable whether there are enough engineers in The Boeing Company who can work on several projects simultaneously, but it is perfectly clear that the priority at the moment is to further establish the production and delivery of the 787 Dreamliner aircraft that their future customers are eagerly awaiting. Including Emirates …
..
..Mario

Fantastic review mario.

Boeing has said no change in OEW and no change in engine thrust and they expect the 787-10 to match the range of the 777-200ER or 330-900.

Boeing has only just confirmed the -10 mtow increase. So let’s see when they update the technical details. They did say they’re still in the process of designing it. Covid probably affected that but let’s see

mfranjic wrote:

..

flight152 wrote:

When was the last 787 delivered?

..
The All Nippon Airways' 77th .787 aircraft, the 39th of the type 787-9, MSN 66524 / LN 1095, reg. JA937A, test reg. N883BA, N2005V, with the 375 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y347 and powered by two .GEnx-1B70/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: 9,3:1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 53,3:1, each rated at 321,61 kN / 32.795 kgf / 72.300 lbf, delivered to All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) on 09/10. Nov 2021, flying on the route VCV/KVCV - HND/RJTT (FLT NH9397) was the latest delivered Boeing 787 aircraft. At the same time this was the last Boeing Everett Factory-built .787 Dreamliner that has rolled off the assembly line of the factory that seats at the northeast corner of Paine Field PAE/KPAE airport (WA).
..
..The aircraft first flew on 16. Mar 2021. This was the 1006th delivered Boeing 787 aircraft and 568th of the type 787-9. The first Boeing 787 was delivered on 25. Sep 2011 to All Nippon Airways and it was Boeing 787-8, MSN 34488 / LN 8, reg. JA801A, test reg. N1008S, with the 240 seats, cabin configuration C42 Y198 and powered by two .Trent 1000-A2, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, each rated at 307,79 kN / 31.386 kgf / 69.194 lbf.
..
..In a 10 years of the serial production .787 was produced in the three different variants: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10. Of the 1006 in total delivered Boeing 787 aircraft, 645 (64,1 %) were powered by .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (8,0-9,3):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (52,4-58,1):1, rated between 255,30 kN / 26.033 kgf / 57.394 lbf and 349,2 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf and 361 (35,9 %) aircraft by .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated between 265,25 kN / 27.048 kgf / 59.631 lbf and 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf.
..
………….…….
………….…….Boeing 787 - deliveries by the Model, Production Site and the Engine Factory
..
..All Nippon Airways took delivery of its first .787-9 Dreamliner on 29. July 2014. ANA has 77 787s in its fleet now; 36 787-8, 39 787-9 and 2 787-10, having ordered a total of 80 aircraft. The newly-delivered All Nippon Airways' Dreamliners, which will operate on the domestic routes, are configured with a total of 375 seats, of which 28 are Premium Economy Class (up from the previous 18). ANA has fitted its Safran-designed Premium Class seats to the new Boeing 787-9, which have been already well received, just as the Toyota Boshoku-designed Economy Class seats, on their eight .777-281ER aircraft with 392 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y364 and powered by two .PW4090 (PW4074D), 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: (5,8-6,4):1; eng. architecture: 1F+6LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (34,2-42,8):1, each rated at 408,30 kN / 41.635 kgf / 91.790 lbf (344,47 kN / 35.126 kgf / 77.440 lbf) and eleven .787-8 aircraft with the 312 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y284 and powered by either two .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines or by two .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines, after their introduction before the COVID pandemic in May 2019. The seat offers a width of 22 inches and features a 15,6-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports, a large, swivelling tray table and a storage compartment next to the seat. Meanwhile the 787-9’s Economy Class cabin with 347 Toyota Boshoku-designed seats also features the same seats fitted to the carrier’s Boeing 777-200 aircraft, and offers a 13,3-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports. The new 787-9 is the first Dreamliner in the fleet to be equipped with personal IFE screen at all Economy and Premium Class seats.
..
..All Nippon Airways' commitment from February 2020 for up to 20 extra Boeing 787s is not significant for the sheer number of the aircraft, nor the sub-types (11 787-10s and up to 9 787-9s). The surprise in the February 2020-announcement is what will be under the wings: the Japanese airline has opted for .GEnx-1Bs instead of more .Trent 1000s. This makes All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) deal just as interesting as that of Air New Zealand (NZ/ANZ) when they announced in May 2019 that it had ordered 8 787-10s with GEnx-1B-power instead of Trent 1000s they use on their 14 787-9s. The clear message from both airlines is that they have lost (some) confidence in the Rolls-Royce engines. And for a reason; both have suffered a lot from reliabilty issues. Just as a reminder; this is the same factory that was producing legendary and eternal RB211-535E4, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 1.882,1 mm / 74,1 in; BPR: 4,4:1; eng. architecture: 1F–6IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–3LPT), OPR: (25,8-28,0):1, rated between 176,30 kN / 17.978 kgf / 39.634 lbf and 192,40 kN / 19.619 kgf / 43.253 lbf, aimed for .757, twin-jet, narrowbody airliner...
..
All Nippon Airways was one of the first airlines in 2016 that recorded intermediate turbine (IPT) issues on the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000s. Soon after the first incidents and inspections it became evident not only IPT and high-pressure turbine (HPT) blades were showing excessive wear but intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) blades as well. What followed were three years of multiple inspections and repairs while Rolls-Royce tried to fix the issue on Package B and Package C engines, only to find out that the latest Trent 1000 TEN-version wasn’t immune of problems either. The peak of ANA's 787 groundings happened between July and October 2018, causing major disruptions to the flight schedule. ANA completed the upgrade of turbine components in February 2019, and at the same time it launched fleet-wide upgrades and inspections of compressors. This program was completed during 2020.
..
..The GEnx-1Bs haven’t been without reliability issues either. General Electric produced a durability upgrade package in 2018 that included HPT's first-stage nozzles and blades, combustor linings and fuel nozzles, with the aim of improving on-wing performance by some 30 %. The GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B (Boeing.747-8) also benefitted from two Performance Improvement Packages, although at first they didn’t entirely bring the expected results. With GEnx orders from Turkish Airlines (TK), Korean Air (KE), Vistara (UK), Hawaiian (HA), China Aircraft Leasing Group Holdings Limited (CALC) and Biman (BG) since early 2018, the American engine maker has increased its market share well over 65 % it claimed at Farnborough 2018. It is with great anticipation we wait for a decision from Emirates which engine will power its 30 787-9s on order since the 2019 Dubai Airshow. Rolls-Royce most significant recent order was Lufthansa (LH)’s for 20 787-9s in March 2019…
..
…..…
…..…Image source: https://airlinergs.com/united-enters-first-boeing-787-10-dreamliner-into-service/
…..…United Airlines was the first carrier in the world to operate all three Dreamliner models: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10
..
Unlike 787-9 and 787-10 that share the same MTOW (560.000 lb / 254.011 kg), the shortest member of the 787 Dreamliner family - 787-8, has a MTOW of 502.500 lb / 227.930 kg. During the introduction in the commercial service in October 2011 with ANA, the MTOW of the Boeing 787-8 was 484.000 lb / 219.538 lb. For the Boeing 787-9, that entered commercial service with NZ in August 2014, the MTOW was 557.000 lb / 252.650 kg. In April 2018, when the largest member of the family, Boeing 787-10, entered the commercial service, in April 2018 with SQ, its MTOW was 560.000 lb / 254.011 kg, just as it is now.
..
..In the recent years The Boeing Company has announced for a several times an increase of MTOW of its 787-10 aircraft, lately and 787-9, but this hasn't happened yet. From the recent issue of the type-certificate data sheet (TCDS) of the .787 aircraft: ..TCDS No.: EASA.IM.A.115 Issue: 26 dated on 03. Mar 2021 and ..T00021SE Revision 35 dated on 02. July 2021, the same way as Boeing 787 aircraft’s factory document - 787.ACfAP D6-58333 REV N from October 2021, it is not visible that the MTOW of 573.202 lb / 260.000 kg (or any other) is foreseen for either 787-9 or 787-10 aircraft in this moment …
..
..It would be interested to see if the mentioned 787-10’s MTOW increase of 6.000 kg / 13.228 lb, reportedly offered to NZ (787-10ER) in 2019, would have to partially include and increased OEW because of the possible needed redesigning, structural strengthening or reinforcment of any or more of the aircraft’s parts: fuselage, wingbox, wings, wings’ joins, horizontal stabilizers, landing gear... In some circumstances it is possible for the aircraft to land overweighted so the max load on the landing gear could be too high for its current design …
..
..The .787-10 Dreamliner aircraft is currently certified by two either .GEnx-1B74/75/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (7,9-9,1):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 58,1:1, each rated at 341,18 kN / 34.791 kgf / 76.700 lbf, .GEnx-1B76(A)/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines rated at 349,20 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf (UA, EY, BR, KL, VN and SV) or .Trent 1000-J3/K3, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated at 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf (NH, SQ and BA).
..
..If the .787-9 HGW and/or 787-10 HGW aircraft of the increased MTOW (260.000 kg / 573.202 lb) would need the engines of the higher thrust, General Electric has certified one engine model of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .GEnx-1B78/P2, 2-shaft turbofan, rated at 357,6 kN / 36.465 kgf / 80.392 lbf. On the other side Rolls-Royce has certified two engine models of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .Trent 1000-M3/-N3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 354,65 kN / 36.164 kgf / 79.728 lbf and .Trent 1000-R3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 360,43 kN / 36.754 kgf / 81.028 lbf.
..As far as the Boeing 787-10’s engines are concern all I can say is: "If those current engines are already a 'racing' engines good enough for a couple races, those above mentioned, of even higher thrust, are definitely a 'pole-position' engines good enough for a couple of laps. Good luck with both of them …"
..
In 2015 during the one of the aeronautical fairs, Emirates’ president and COO, Sir Tim Clark, was asked on the Emirates’ requirement for a twin-aisle medium / long range complement to their .A380 and .777 fleets, respectively on the competition in between Boeing 787-10 and .A350-900 in the 300-seat segment. Namely, at that time conventional wisdom has been created that Emirates firmly leans towards the Boeing 787-10, especially after they canceled their order for the 70 A350-900s in 2014. However, Sir Clark responded that he doesn’t know where that comes from because the Boeing 787-10 is not coming up with the thrust requirements Emirates find necessary for their needs, whereas the Airbus A350-900 has more than enough supply of thrust. The most people could wonder how come the Boeing 787-10 could be short of thrust since no other customer has raised this issue. In the meantime EK/ EK gave up on 787-10 and now has 50 Airbus A350-900 and 30 Boeing 787-9 ordered. EK is also considering switching between 30 to 40 of its Boeing.777X orders for those of the smaller Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This is more than a third of the airlines' initial 777X order. In November 2019 besides a deal to purchase 30 787 Dreamliners, initial order of 156 777X aircraft was reduced to 126.
..
..That what the Emirates have been looking for out of the .787-9/-10’s engines, . Trent 1000, 3-shaft turbofans or .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft turbofans, is 373,65 kN / 38.102 kgf / 84.000 lbf of take-off thrust necessary to assure take-off with full loads all year round. It is interesting to note that Emirates’ Gulf neighbor, Etihad Airways (EY), which has an almost identical climate and elevation to the Emirates’ base in Dubai and deploys their B78X aircraft on the routes similar to those Emirates had in mind, haven’t had such demands. However, the people in Emirates are well aware of the fact that probably no other airline could have such a requirement and that The Boeing Company and the 787-9/-10’s engines’ factories are not going to develop a custom made aircraft and the new engine just for them.
..
..The Emirates are everything but an ordinary airline by any of the benchmarks. Their main hub, Dubai International Airport (DXB), experiences the ground temperatures of over 45°C / 113°F on many days of the year, and this affects in a great extent and in the same way both, the aircraft and the engines. The decreased air density directly impacts on the foreseen and necessary difference of the pressures on the top and the bottom of the wings, the difference that creates a lift-off force on the wings. So, to get to the same lift force, the aircraft has to go faster. Higher take-off speed requires more powerful engines or longer runways. Those Dubai International’s runways are long (12L/30R - 4.000 m / 13.123 ft; 12R/30L - 4.450 m / 14.600 ft), but there are other limits. You just can’t go too fast down the runway because of the tire-speed-limit. And if you want to reduce take-off speed, the MTOW has to be reduced…
..
..And when it comes to the engines, it is even worse. The lower air density not only lowers engine’s thrust but the engine also suffers internally from the increased air temperature. The air of the higher temperature enters the intake and passes through the whole front section of the engine - fan and LPC. As it passes the HPC, it can cause the engine computer (FADEC) to lower engine rotation speed since the HPC also increases the air’s temperature as the part of the compression, and that temperature can easily exceed the last HPC stages’ allowed maximum. On the other side, lower rotation speed, and which saves the last stages from being thermally overloaded, means disturbed/reduced air-flow, possible compressor’s stalling and/or surging, lower OPR and TIT.
..
..Generally, this flat rating max. temperature is normally set to happen at outside temperature of +15°C / 59°F over ISA temperature (the worldwide agreed standard) and Dubai has +30°C / 86 °F , i.e. 45°C / 113°F, on a large part of the year, what represents three to four times higher values. In the case the compressor alone ‘has no problem’ with the higher temperatures, the engine’s turbine will not accept those higher temperatures without the engine computer’s throttling back. This results in reduced thrust from the engine and what we have seen is that we need more thrust just to compensate for the thinner air. That reduced thrust comes from the engine’s computer injecting less fuel in the combustor just to save the compressors’ and especially HPT’s blades from melting. Don’t forget to add on all that the desert’s dust and the sand filling the turbines’ blades cooling system. The final result is that the engine loses the power and that the aircraft has to take-off with the lower MTOW. The only way to compensate for the thinner air and thrust loss is to haul less payload or to have more powerful engines on an aircraft with a larger wings. The problems with a very high thrust requirement for take-offs from Dubai International are especially known from the larger aircraft. That’s the reason EK didn't go for 78Js, especially those of inreased MTOW that would even more emphasize the lack of the sufficient thrust EK are looking for from 78J’s engines. In addition to the engines, the attitude of the Emirates is that the 787-10’s range is too short for their needs and because of this the company opted to order the 787-9 …
..
..It is not a secret the 787-10 already has some issues with the field performances at MTOW at high OAT (outside/ambient air temperatures) and/or HEA (high elevation airports), and increasing the MTOW (787-10ER) would not be of any help at all if that increasing won't be partially including increased OEW (f.e. bigger and heavier .GE9X derived, 2-shaft, high-bypass turbofans or .UltraFan, ‘2,5'-shaft, high-bypass, geared, turbofans and/or larger wing originally planned for 787-9…). The wingbox may be able to carry MTOW of 280.000 kg / 617.294 lb, but it doesn't make it competitive against the larger wings, and on the other hand the question arises whether the MLG can withstand such an increase of the aircraft's weight. MTOW is simply limited by the lift and the engines' thrust. More thrust is needed to reach take-off speed (assuming you have the same runway lenghts) or a bigger wing to be able to take-off with less speed because of the lowered thrust due to ambient conditions…
..
The 787 Dreamliner program has been hit with multiple issues over the years, including early battery problems in 2013, which led to all 50 787s in service worldwide being grounded for over three months. Last year, more problems were discovered, including quality issues with seams on the fuselage, forcing Boeing to rework around 100 undelivered 787s. Although the deliveries of the 787 took place earlier in 2021, they were halted again in May and are yet to resume. The Boeing Company has delivered just 14 787 Dreamliners in 2021, 2 787-8s and 12 787-9s …
..
…
…Boeing 787 - deliveries 2021
..
..The Boeing Company is currently dealing with several quality issues on its 787s and is working closely with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on the fixes. Its current production rate of the 787 Dreamliner is now at two planes per month. At its peak, The Boeing Company was producing 14 787s per month but has repeatedly slashed its production rate of the aircraft, which stood at 5 aircraft per month in the summer 2021. In October 2021, Boeing revealed that certain titanium parts on some 787s built in the past three years were not up to strength, citing problems with a third-party supplier. Affected parts of the plane include fittings that assist in securing the floor beam, while other fittings, spacers, brackets, and clips are still under investigation…
..
..At some point, the question of the quality of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft manufactured at the Boeing South Carolina (previously Boeing Charleston) plant was raised. Now all the remaining planes will be produced at that factory. It is not questionable whether there are enough engineers in The Boeing Company who can work on several projects simultaneously, but it is perfectly clear that the priority at the moment is to further establish the production and delivery of the 787 Dreamliner aircraft that their future customers are eagerly awaiting. Including Emirates …
..
..Mario

Do you have any links to your sources?

RobK wrote:

mfranjic wrote:

..

flight152 wrote:

When was the last 787 delivered?

..
The All Nippon Airways' 77th .787 aircraft, the 39th of the type 787-9, MSN 66524 / LN 1095, reg. JA937A, test reg. N883BA, N2005V, with the 375 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y347 and powered by two .GEnx-1B70/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: 9,3:1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 53,3:1, each rated at 321,61 kN / 32.795 kgf / 72.300 lbf, delivered to All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) on 09/10. Nov 2021, flying on the route VCV/KVCV - HND/RJTT (FLT NH9397) was the latest delivered Boeing 787 aircraft. At the same time this was the last Boeing Everett Factory-built .787 Dreamliner that has rolled off the assembly line of the factory that seats at the northeast corner of Paine Field PAE/KPAE airport (WA).
..
..The aircraft first flew on 16. Mar 2021. This was the 1006th delivered Boeing 787 aircraft and 568th of the type 787-9. The first Boeing 787 was delivered on 25. Sep 2011 to All Nippon Airways and it was Boeing 787-8, MSN 34488 / LN 8, reg. JA801A, test reg. N1008S, with the 240 seats, cabin configuration C42 Y198 and powered by two .Trent 1000-A2, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, each rated at 307,79 kN / 31.386 kgf / 69.194 lbf.
..
..In a 10 years of the serial production .787 was produced in the three different variants: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10. Of the 1006 in total delivered Boeing 787 aircraft, 645 (64,1 %) were powered by .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (8,0-9,3):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (52,4-58,1):1, rated between 255,30 kN / 26.033 kgf / 57.394 lbf and 349,2 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf and 361 (35,9 %) aircraft by .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated between 265,25 kN / 27.048 kgf / 59.631 lbf and 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf.
..
………….…….
………….…….Boeing 787 - deliveries by the Model, Production Site and the Engine Factory
..
..All Nippon Airways took delivery of its first .787-9 Dreamliner on 29. July 2014. ANA has 77 787s in its fleet now; 36 787-8, 39 787-9 and 2 787-10, having ordered a total of 80 aircraft. The newly-delivered All Nippon Airways' Dreamliners, which will operate on the domestic routes, are configured with a total of 375 seats, of which 28 are Premium Economy Class (up from the previous 18). ANA has fitted its Safran-designed Premium Class seats to the new Boeing 787-9, which have been already well received, just as the Toyota Boshoku-designed Economy Class seats, on their eight .777-281ER aircraft with 392 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y364 and powered by two .PW4090 (PW4074D), 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: (5,8-6,4):1; eng. architecture: 1F+6LPC–11HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: (34,2-42,8):1, each rated at 408,30 kN / 41.635 kgf / 91.790 lbf (344,47 kN / 35.126 kgf / 77.440 lbf) and eleven .787-8 aircraft with the 312 seats, cabin configuration W28 Y284 and powered by either two .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines or by two .Trent 1000, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines, after their introduction before the COVID pandemic in May 2019. The seat offers a width of 22 inches and features a 15,6-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports, a large, swivelling tray table and a storage compartment next to the seat. Meanwhile the 787-9’s Economy Class cabin with 347 Toyota Boshoku-designed seats also features the same seats fitted to the carrier’s Boeing 777-200 aircraft, and offers a 13,3-in IFE screen, PC and USB power ports. The new 787-9 is the first Dreamliner in the fleet to be equipped with personal IFE screen at all Economy and Premium Class seats.
..
..All Nippon Airways' commitment from February 2020 for up to 20 extra Boeing 787s is not significant for the sheer number of the aircraft, nor the sub-types (11 787-10s and up to 9 787-9s). The surprise in the February 2020-announcement is what will be under the wings: the Japanese airline has opted for .GEnx-1Bs instead of more .Trent 1000s. This makes All Nippon Airways (NH/ANA) deal just as interesting as that of Air New Zealand (NZ/ANZ) when they announced in May 2019 that it had ordered 8 787-10s with GEnx-1B-power instead of Trent 1000s they use on their 14 787-9s. The clear message from both airlines is that they have lost (some) confidence in the Rolls-Royce engines. And for a reason; both have suffered a lot from reliabilty issues. Just as a reminder; this is the same factory that was producing legendary and eternal RB211-535E4, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 1.882,1 mm / 74,1 in; BPR: 4,4:1; eng. architecture: 1F–6IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–3LPT), OPR: (25,8-28,0):1, rated between 176,30 kN / 17.978 kgf / 39.634 lbf and 192,40 kN / 19.619 kgf / 43.253 lbf, aimed for .757, twin-jet, narrowbody airliner...
..
All Nippon Airways was one of the first airlines in 2016 that recorded intermediate turbine (IPT) issues on the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000s. Soon after the first incidents and inspections it became evident not only IPT and high-pressure turbine (HPT) blades were showing excessive wear but intermediate-pressure compressor (IPC) blades as well. What followed were three years of multiple inspections and repairs while Rolls-Royce tried to fix the issue on Package B and Package C engines, only to find out that the latest Trent 1000 TEN-version wasn’t immune of problems either. The peak of ANA's 787 groundings happened between July and October 2018, causing major disruptions to the flight schedule. ANA completed the upgrade of turbine components in February 2019, and at the same time it launched fleet-wide upgrades and inspections of compressors. This program was completed during 2020.
..
..The GEnx-1Bs haven’t been without reliability issues either. General Electric produced a durability upgrade package in 2018 that included HPT's first-stage nozzles and blades, combustor linings and fuel nozzles, with the aim of improving on-wing performance by some 30 %. The GEnx-1B and GEnx-2B (Boeing.747-8) also benefitted from two Performance Improvement Packages, although at first they didn’t entirely bring the expected results. With GEnx orders from Turkish Airlines (TK), Korean Air (KE), Vistara (UK), Hawaiian (HA), China Aircraft Leasing Group Holdings Limited (CALC) and Biman (BG) since early 2018, the American engine maker has increased its market share well over 65 % it claimed at Farnborough 2018. It is with great anticipation we wait for a decision from Emirates which engine will power its 30 787-9s on order since the 2019 Dubai Airshow. Rolls-Royce most significant recent order was Lufthansa (LH)’s for 20 787-9s in March 2019…
..
…..…
…..…Image source: https://airlinergs.com/united-enters-first-boeing-787-10-dreamliner-into-service/
…..…United Airlines was the first carrier in the world to operate all three Dreamliner models: 787-8, 787-9 and 787-10
..
Unlike 787-9 and 787-10 that share the same MTOW (560.000 lb / 254.011 kg), the shortest member of the 787 Dreamliner family - 787-8, has a MTOW of 502.500 lb / 227.930 kg. During the introduction in the commercial service in October 2011 with ANA, the MTOW of the Boeing 787-8 was 484.000 lb / 219.538 lb. For the Boeing 787-9, that entered commercial service with NZ in August 2014, the MTOW was 557.000 lb / 252.650 kg. In April 2018, when the largest member of the family, Boeing 787-10, entered the commercial service, in April 2018 with SQ, its MTOW was 560.000 lb / 254.011 kg, just as it is now.
..
..In the recent years The Boeing Company has announced for a several times an increase of MTOW of its 787-10 aircraft, lately and 787-9, but this hasn't happened yet. From the recent issue of the type-certificate data sheet (TCDS) of the .787 aircraft: ..TCDS No.: EASA.IM.A.115 Issue: 26 dated on 03. Mar 2021 and ..T00021SE Revision 35 dated on 02. July 2021, the same way as Boeing 787 aircraft’s factory document - 787.ACfAP D6-58333 REV N from October 2021, it is not visible that the MTOW of 573.202 lb / 260.000 kg (or any other) is foreseen for either 787-9 or 787-10 aircraft in this moment …
..
..It would be interested to see if the mentioned 787-10’s MTOW increase of 6.000 kg / 13.228 lb, reportedly offered to NZ (787-10ER) in 2019, would have to partially include and increased OEW because of the possible needed redesigning, structural strengthening or reinforcment of any or more of the aircraft’s parts: fuselage, wingbox, wings, wings’ joins, horizontal stabilizers, landing gear... In some circumstances it is possible for the aircraft to land overweighted so the max load on the landing gear could be too high for its current design …
..
..The .787-10 Dreamliner aircraft is currently certified by two either .GEnx-1B74/75/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.821,9 mm / 111,1 in; BPR: (7,9-9,1):1; eng. architecture: 1F+4LPC–10HPC〧2HPT–7LPT), OPR: 58,1:1, each rated at 341,18 kN / 34.791 kgf / 76.700 lbf, .GEnx-1B76(A)/P2, 2-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines rated at 349,20 kN / 35.607 kgf / 78.500 lbf (UA, EY, BR, KL, VN and SV) or .Trent 1000-J3/K3, 3-shaft, high-bypass, turbofan engines (fan diameter: 2.844,8 mm / 112,0 in; BPR: 10,0:1; eng. architecture: 1F–8IPC=6HPC〨1HPT=1IPT–6LPT), OPR: 50,0:1, rated at 347,54 kN / 35.439 kgf / 78.129 lbf (NH, SQ and BA).
..
..If the .787-9 HGW and/or 787-10 HGW aircraft of the increased MTOW (260.000 kg / 573.202 lb) would need the engines of the higher thrust, General Electric has certified one engine model of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .GEnx-1B78/P2, 2-shaft turbofan, rated at 357,6 kN / 36.465 kgf / 80.392 lbf. On the other side Rolls-Royce has certified two engine models of the higher thrust than those above mentioned: .Trent 1000-M3/-N3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 354,65 kN / 36.164 kgf / 79.728 lbf and .Trent 1000-R3, 3-shaft turbofan, rated at 360,43 kN / 36.754 kgf / 81.028 lbf.
..As far as the Boeing 787-10’s engines are concern all I can say is: "If those current engines are already a 'racing' engines good enough for a couple races, those above mentioned, of even higher thrust, are definitely a 'pole-position' engines good enough for a couple of laps. Good luck with both of them …"
..
In 2015 during the one of the aeronautical fairs, Emirates’ president and COO, Sir Tim Clark, was asked on the Emirates’ requirement for a twin-aisle medium / long range complement to their .A380 and .777 fleets, respectively on the competition in between Boeing 787-10 and .A350-900 in the 300-seat segment. Namely, at that time conventional wisdom has been created that Emirates firmly leans towards the Boeing 787-10, especially after they canceled their order for the 70 A350-900s in 2014. However, Sir Clark responded that he doesn’t know where that comes from because the Boeing 787-10 is not coming up with the thrust requirements Emirates find necessary for their needs, whereas the Airbus A350-900 has more than enough supply of thrust. The most people could wonder how come the Boeing 787-10 could be short of thrust since no other customer has raised this issue. In the meantime EK/ EK gave up on 787-10 and now has 50 Airbus A350-900 and 30 Boeing 787-9 ordered. EK is also considering switching between 30 to 40 of its Boeing.777X orders for those of the smaller Boeing 787 Dreamliner. This is more than a third of the airlines' initial 777X order. In November 2019 besides a deal to purchase 30 787 Dreamliners, initial order of 156 777X aircraft was reduced to 126.
..
..That what the Emirates have been looking for out of the .787-9/-10’s engines, . Trent 1000, 3-shaft turbofans or .GEnx-1B, 2-shaft turbofans, is 373,65 kN / 38.102 kgf / 84.000 lbf of take-off thrust necessary to assure take-off with full loads all year round. It is interesting to note that Emirates’ Gulf neighbor, Etihad Airways (EY), which has an almost identical climate and elevation to the Emirates’ base in Dubai and deploys their B78X aircraft on the routes similar to those Emirates had in mind, haven’t had such demands. However, the people in Emirates are well aware of the fact that probably no other airline could have such a requirement and that The Boeing Company and the 787-9/-10’s engines’ factories are not going to develop a custom made aircraft and the new engine just for them.
..
..The Emirates are everything but an ordinary airline by any of the benchmarks. Their main hub, Dubai International Airport (DXB), experiences the ground temperatures of over 45°C / 113°F on many days of the year, and this affects in a great extent and in the same way both, the aircraft and the engines. The decreased air density directly impacts on the foreseen and necessary difference of the pressures on the top and the bottom of the wings, the difference that creates a lift-off force on the wings. So, to get to the same lift force, the aircraft has to go faster. Higher take-off speed requires more powerful engines or longer runways. Those Dubai International’s runways are long (12L/30R - 4.000 m / 13.123 ft; 12R/30L - 4.450 m / 14.600 ft), but there are other limits. You just can’t go too fast down the runway because of the tire-speed-limit. And if you want to reduce take-off speed, the MTOW has to be reduced…
..
..And when it comes to the engines, it is even worse. The lower air density not only lowers engine’s thrust but the engine also suffers internally from the increased air temperature. The air of the higher temperature enters the intake and passes through the whole front section of the engine - fan and LPC. As it passes the HPC, it can cause the engine computer (FADEC) to lower engine rotation speed since the HPC also increases the air’s temperature as the part of the compression, and that temperature can easily exceed the last HPC stages’ allowed maximum. On the other side, lower rotation speed, and which saves the last stages from being thermally overloaded, means disturbed/reduced air-flow, possible compressor’s stalling and/or surging, lower OPR and TIT.
..
..Generally, this flat rating max. temperature is normally set to happen at outside temperature of +15°C / 59°F over ISA temperature (the worldwide agreed standard) and Dubai has +30°C / 86 °F , i.e. 45°C / 113°F, on a large part of the year, what represents three to four times higher values. In the case the compressor alone ‘has no problem’ with the higher temperatures, the engine’s turbine will not accept those higher temperatures without the engine computer’s throttling back. This results in reduced thrust from the engine and what we have seen is that we need more thrust just to compensate for the thinner air. That reduced thrust comes from the engine’s computer injecting less fuel in the combustor just to save the compressors’ and especially HPT’s blades from melting. Don’t forget to add on all that the desert’s dust and the sand filling the turbines’ blades cooling system. The final result is that the engine loses the power and that the aircraft has to take-off with the lower MTOW. The only way to compensate for the thinner air and thrust loss is to haul less payload or to have more powerful engines on an aircraft with a larger wings. The problems with a very high thrust requirement for take-offs from Dubai International are especially known from the larger aircraft. That’s the reason EK didn't go for 78Js, especially those of inreased MTOW that would even more emphasize the lack of the sufficient thrust EK are looking for from 78J’s engines. In addition to the engines, the attitude of the Emirates is that the 787-10’s range is too short for their needs and because of this the company opted to order the 787-9 …
..
..It is not a secret the 787-10 already has some issues with the field performances at MTOW at high OAT (outside/ambient air temperatures) and/or HEA (high elevation airports), and increasing the MTOW (787-10ER) would not be of any help at all if that increasing won't be partially including increased OEW (f.e. bigger and heavier .GE9X derived, 2-shaft, high-bypass turbofans or .UltraFan, ‘2,5'-shaft, high-bypass, geared, turbofans and/or larger wing originally planned for 787-9…). The wingbox may be able to carry MTOW of 280.000 kg / 617.294 lb, but it doesn't make it competitive against the larger wings, and on the other hand the question arises whether the MLG can withstand such an increase of the aircraft's weight. MTOW is simply limited by the lift and the engines' thrust. More thrust is needed to reach take-off speed (assuming you have the same runway lenghts) or a bigger wing to be able to take-off with less speed because of the lowered thrust due to ambient conditions…
..
The 787 Dreamliner program has been hit with multiple issues over the years, including early battery problems in 2013, which led to all 50 787s in service worldwide being grounded for over three months. Last year, more problems were discovered, including quality issues with seams on the fuselage, forcing Boeing to rework around 100 undelivered 787s. Although the deliveries of the 787 took place earlier in 2021, they were halted again in May and are yet to resume. The Boeing Company has delivered just 14 787 Dreamliners in 2021, 2 787-8s and 12 787-9s …
..
…
…Boeing 787 - deliveries 2021
..
..The Boeing Company is currently dealing with several quality issues on its 787s and is working closely with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on the fixes. Its current production rate of the 787 Dreamliner is now at two planes per month. At its peak, The Boeing Company was producing 14 787s per month but has repeatedly slashed its production rate of the aircraft, which stood at 5 aircraft per month in the summer 2021. In October 2021, Boeing revealed that certain titanium parts on some 787s built in the past three years were not up to strength, citing problems with a third-party supplier. Affected parts of the plane include fittings that assist in securing the floor beam, while other fittings, spacers, brackets, and clips are still under investigation…
..
..At some point, the question of the quality of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft manufactured at the Boeing South Carolina (previously Boeing Charleston) plant was raised. Now all the remaining planes will be produced at that factory. It is not questionable whether there are enough engineers in The Boeing Company who can work on several projects simultaneously, but it is perfectly clear that the priority at the moment is to further establish the production and delivery of the 787 Dreamliner aircraft that their future customers are eagerly awaiting. Including Emirates …
..
..Mario

Do you have any links to your sources?

It's not formally launched but back in 2019 NZ alluded to Boeing offering a more capable version of the 78J which they ordered. Also this article shows a Boeing executive highlighting what to expect from the HGW 78J.

https://www.aviacionline.com/2022/01/bo ... er-family/

RinattheDriver wrote:

Does any one know what Westjet's delivery schedule is like?

I haven't seen a new tail in a while, wondering if there will be a few this year to finish off that order of 10.

Thanks

The last two built were put into storage, one in VCV and the other in San Antonio. 907 was the last one delivered, 910 is on the assembly line now. No idea when deliveries will happen.

ANA may have received two 787-9s towards the end of 2021 but they were delivered on contract in April and May.

These frames belong to Atlantis Aviation Corporation.

https://www.flightglobal.com/orders-and ... 21.article

A third will follow.

Does anyone have any idea which MSN was delivered in April and which in May?

Whiteguy wrote:

RinattheDriver wrote:

Does any one know what Westjet's delivery schedule is like?

I haven't seen a new tail in a while, wondering if there will be a few this year to finish off that order of 10.

Thanks

The last two built were put into storage, one in VCV and the other in San Antonio. 907 was the last one delivered, 910 is on the assembly line now. No idea when deliveries will happen.

Thanks for the info! Any idea why they are in storage? Company request? Or boeing issues?

RinattheDriver wrote:

Whiteguy wrote:

RinattheDriver wrote:

Does any one know what Westjet's delivery schedule is like?

I haven't seen a new tail in a while, wondering if there will be a few this year to finish off that order of 10.

Thanks

The last two built were put into storage, one in VCV and the other in San Antonio. 907 was the last one delivered, 910 is on the assembly line now. No idea when deliveries will happen.

Thanks for the info! Any idea why they are in storage? Company request? Or boeing issues?

Boeing issues. the two stored ones, LN 1106 and 1116 were only finished in june-july 2021 and by that time Boeing had to stop deliveries due to the FAA issues about quality control. Even if WestJet really wanted them they couldn't be delivered til now.

MEA-707 wrote:

RinattheDriver wrote:

Whiteguy wrote:

The last two built were put into storage, one in VCV and the other in San Antonio. 907 was the last one delivered, 910 is on the assembly line now. No idea when deliveries will happen.

Thanks for the info! Any idea why they are in storage? Company request? Or boeing issues?

Boeing issues. the two stored ones, LN 1106 and 1116 were only finished in june-july 2021 and by that time Boeing had to stop deliveries due to the FAA issues about quality control. Even if WestJet really wanted them they couldn't be delivered til now.

Makes sense to me, thanks for shedding some light.

Probably a blessing for Westjet at the moment anyways, I doubt they needed them this winter.

I think the ones (mainly ANA and AAL) that keep doing their monthly functional check flights are finished and ready to go once the FAA gives the green light.

RobK wrote:

I think the ones (mainly ANA and AAL) that keep doing their monthly functional check flights are finished and ready to go once the FAA gives the green light.

I am still curious what’s the actual problem. I mean, they stopped deliveries in like October 2020. And they do know what’s wrong with the aircraft. But why don’t deliveries restart?

ben7x wrote:

RobK wrote:

I think the ones (mainly ANA and AAL) that keep doing their monthly functional check flights are finished and ready to go once the FAA gives the green light.

I am still curious what’s the actual problem. I mean, they stopped deliveries in like October 2020. And they do know what’s wrong with the aircraft. But why don’t deliveries restart?

FAA sitting in the middle of the engineering revision process and deciding a path forward. It is VERY difficult for us suppliers to get a revision change for small things; for an entire fuselage join with enormous FAA pushback after what happened with the MAX, it will take a while. My understanding is Boeing has a handle on the problem, but is unable to get approval for the revision change without a huge amount of work to convince the FAA.

ben7x wrote:

RobK wrote:

I think the ones (mainly ANA and AAL) that keep doing their monthly functional check flights are finished and ready to go once the FAA gives the green light.

I am still curious what’s the actual problem. I mean, they stopped deliveries in like October 2020. And they do know what’s wrong with the aircraft. But why don’t deliveries restart?

Well, I guess simply filling the gaps with silicone sealant is unlikely to be acceptable to the customers, so Boeing will have to get their supplier to design and manufacture new parts that actually fit without having gaps between them big enough to fit your head in. That all takes time, and then there's all the supply chain issues actually getting them from Asia or wherever, to PAE and CHS. Last I heard, the boats finally managing to dock at the west coast ports had containers full of Christmas 2021 tat due last autumn, so yeah... this saga could easily continue for quite some time yet.

ben7x wrote:

I am still curious what’s the actual problem. I mean, they stopped deliveries in like October 2020. And they do know what’s wrong with the aircraft. But why don’t deliveries restart?

As I understand it, the FAA is not allowing Boeing to repair the frames on an ad hoc basis to get them into customers hands, but instead wants a complete solution that can be applied to the entire (stored) fleet as well as a plan to improve QA to prevent the problem in the first place at the suppliers and the FAL as well as a plan in place to address any currently delivered and in-service frames that are discovered to have the issue when they next undergo a maintenance service cycle that would include identifying such an issue (if it exists).

And as RobertoMugabe noted, this is not a quick process.

JannEejit wrote:

Curious, why would you apply the 'American' title/graphics when you haven't finished painting it ? Is this a new economy look for AA ?

I am curious too. That would suck!

Does anybody know details of the delivery schedule per year of the remaining 15 B789 of TK?

Stitch wrote:

ben7x wrote:

I am still curious what’s the actual problem. I mean, they stopped deliveries in like October 2020. And they do know what’s wrong with the aircraft. But why don’t deliveries restart?

As I understand it, the FAA is not allowing Boeing to repair the frames on an ad hoc basis to get them into customers hands, but instead wants a complete solution that can be applied to the entire (stored) fleet as well as a plan to improve QA to prevent the problem in the first place at the suppliers and the FAL as well as a plan in place to address any currently delivered and in-service frames that are discovered to have the issue when they next undergo a maintenance service cycle that would include identifying such an issue (if it exists).

And as RobertoMugabe noted, this is not a quick process.

I bet Boeing is somehow happy that COVID19 happened and airlines are not in a rush to bring in new widebody into their fleet, otherwise they will need to pay big bucks for compensation. Reactivating many used, well worn B772ER to cover the capacity shortfall ay many different airlines.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 022-01-20/

“deliveries of the 787 are expected to remain frozen until around April as U.S. regulators review production flaws, senior industry and government sources said.“

“For now, scrutiny remains intense.

When it comes to small gaps in the structure surrounding the passenger and cargo doors in the aft fuselage, for example, the FAA has required painstaking manual checks of some 100 aircraft.

That is instead of allowing Boeing to test only a sample of planes.

"For decades, that was an acceptable way of saying the fleet is good," the senior safety expert said. "Having to inspect every single airplane is technically, from a safety perspective, unnecessary. But in this climate it is required."“

It goes back to how much of this 787 debacle is just the FAA wanting to look like they’re doing their job and how much of it is actually technically sound?

Opus99 wrote:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-recovery-sidetracked-by-regulatory-tussles-big-jets-2022-01-20/

“deliveries of the 787 are expected to remain frozen until around April as U.S. regulators review production flaws, senior industry and government sources said.“

“For now, scrutiny remains intense.

When it comes to small gaps in the structure surrounding the passenger and cargo doors in the aft fuselage, for example, the FAA has required painstaking manual checks of some 100 aircraft.

That is instead of allowing Boeing to test only a sample of planes.

"For decades, that was an acceptable way of saying the fleet is good," the senior safety expert said. "Having to inspect every single airplane is technically, from a safety perspective, unnecessary. But in this climate it is required."“

It goes back to how much of this 787 debacle is just the FAA wanting to look like they’re doing their job and how much of it is actually technically sound?

Or it goes back, to how much Boeing had captured the FAA decision making.

The old Boeing disregard for safety and quality control proved to be wanting.

Permissible tolerances is a part of the design process. To just say the tolerances are to tight for the production process, so we just ignore them, is bad safety and quality control. Tight tolerances are either needed or not needed, but that is a design not a production decision.

After the design decision to open up tolerances, the certification process has to be run on that.

The whole current 787 debacle is produced at Boeing.

mjoelnir wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-recovery-sidetracked-by-regulatory-tussles-big-jets-2022-01-20/

“deliveries of the 787 are expected to remain frozen until around April as U.S. regulators review production flaws, senior industry and government sources said.“

“For now, scrutiny remains intense.

When it comes to small gaps in the structure surrounding the passenger and cargo doors in the aft fuselage, for example, the FAA has required painstaking manual checks of some 100 aircraft.

That is instead of allowing Boeing to test only a sample of planes.

"For decades, that was an acceptable way of saying the fleet is good," the senior safety expert said. "Having to inspect every single airplane is technically, from a safety perspective, unnecessary. But in this climate it is required."“

It goes back to how much of this 787 debacle is just the FAA wanting to look like they’re doing their job and how much of it is actually technically sound?

Or it goes back, to how much Boeing had captured the FAA decision making.

The old Boeing disregard for safety and quality control proved to be wanting.

Permissible tolerances is a part of the design process. To just say the tolerances are to tight for the production process, so we just ignore them, is bad safety and quality control. Tight tolerances are either needed or not needed, but that is a design not a production decision.

After the design decision to open up tolerances, the certification process has to be run on that.

The whole current 787 debacle is produced at Boeing.

No doubt. But if a process is actually not technically sound? But the climate is causing you to do it. Then what does that say about the FAA and what they are trying to prove

Opus99 wrote:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-recovery-sidetracked-by-regulatory-tussles-big-jets-2022-01-20/

“deliveries of the 787 are expected to remain frozen until around April as U.S. regulators review production flaws, senior industry and government sources said.“

“For now, scrutiny remains intense.

When it comes to small gaps in the structure surrounding the passenger and cargo doors in the aft fuselage, for example, the FAA has required painstaking manual checks of some 100 aircraft.

That is instead of allowing Boeing to test only a sample of planes.

"For decades, that was an acceptable way of saying the fleet is good," the senior safety expert said. "Having to inspect every single airplane is technically, from a safety perspective, unnecessary. But in this climate it is required."“

It goes back to how much of this 787 debacle is just the FAA wanting to look like they’re doing their job and how much of it is actually technically sound?

This is just how it works, FAA lost quite some credibility and needs to be extra careful to protect US aviation in the long run. It will cause a lot of pain now, but sector needs to go through this to return to the old process where other AA’s trust the FAA and don’t require extra effort per region from Boeing.

The annoying part for me is that Boeing is not in full cooperation mode with the FAA to restore trust and regain new positive way of working…

Opus99 wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-recovery-sidetracked-by-regulatory-tussles-big-jets-2022-01-20/

“deliveries of the 787 are expected to remain frozen until around April as U.S. regulators review production flaws, senior industry and government sources said.“

“For now, scrutiny remains intense.

When it comes to small gaps in the structure surrounding the passenger and cargo doors in the aft fuselage, for example, the FAA has required painstaking manual checks of some 100 aircraft.

That is instead of allowing Boeing to test only a sample of planes.

"For decades, that was an acceptable way of saying the fleet is good," the senior safety expert said. "Having to inspect every single airplane is technically, from a safety perspective, unnecessary. But in this climate it is required."“

It goes back to how much of this 787 debacle is just the FAA wanting to look like they’re doing their job and how much of it is actually technically sound?

Or it goes back, to how much Boeing had captured the FAA decision making.

The old Boeing disregard for safety and quality control proved to be wanting.

Permissible tolerances is a part of the design process. To just say the tolerances are to tight for the production process, so we just ignore them, is bad safety and quality control. Tight tolerances are either needed or not needed, but that is a design not a production decision.

After the design decision to open up tolerances, the certification process has to be run on that.

The whole current 787 debacle is produced at Boeing.

No doubt. But if a process is actually not technically sound? But the climate is causing you to do it. Then what does that say about the FAA and what they are trying to prove

I think it boils down to the fact, that the FAA does not believe that all the 100 aircraft are the same. If the production quality is the same on every frame and Boeing is believable if they say it is then the process is not technically sound. The problem seems to be that the FAA does not believe Boeing when they say, all the aircraft are the same and just checking 10 random aircraft is sufficient.

FluidFlow wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

Or it goes back, to how much Boeing had captured the FAA decision making.

The old Boeing disregard for safety and quality control proved to be wanting.

Permissible tolerances is a part of the design process. To just say the tolerances are to tight for the production process, so we just ignore them, is bad safety and quality control. Tight tolerances are either needed or not needed, but that is a design not a production decision.

After the design decision to open up tolerances, the certification process has to be run on that.

The whole current 787 debacle is produced at Boeing.

No doubt. But if a process is actually not technically sound? But the climate is causing you to do it. Then what does that say about the FAA and what they are trying to prove

I think it boils down to the fact, that the FAA does not believe that all the 100 aircraft are the same. If the production quality is the same on every frame and Boeing is believable if they say it is then the process is not technically sound. The problem seems to be that the FAA does not believe Boeing when they say, all the aircraft are the same and just checking 10 random aircraft is sufficient.

There was an article noting that according to the FAA, Boeing didn’t had clear documentation on which series was on which bird. That is probably the reason that a sample test is not sufficient…

American also saying deliveries will resume in April and from then they’ll take 13 jets this year