Boeing postpones 787 first flight

[LifelinerOne]

After saying at the Paris Air Show last week that the 787 will fly before the end of June, Boeing now announces that the plane will not fly.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=720

Reason is that an area within the side-body of the aircraft needs to be reinforced.

It will be several weeks before a new schedule will be available.

Cheers!

[Verbal]

***This message is being sent by Scott Carson, president and CEO of Commercial Airplanes, to all Commercial Airplanes employees.***

Postponing 787 flight testing

There are times when making the prudent and right choice is the only choice. That’s what we have done today with our announcement that we will take the time to reinforce an area within the side-of-body section of the 787 before we begin flight testing.

Based on our preliminary analysis, and as recently as last week, we believed we could work through this issue and still begin flight test this month. Subsequent analysis over the last few days led us to conclude that a modification must be made before flight test. As we have stated in the past, we will fly only when our team is convinced that we are ready to fly and can conduct a productive flight test program.

Our testing process is designed to identify these issues, and experience tells us that structural modifications are not uncommon for development programs. We gave consideration to a temporary solution that would allow us to fly as scheduled, but we ultimately concluded that the right thing was to develop, design, test and incorporate a permanent modification to the localized area requiring reinforcement.

Now, it is important that our team has the time and resources to develop a solution, conduct the appropriate testing to validate the solution and incorporate the modification prior to first flight. First flight and first delivery will be rescheduled after we determine the required modification and testing plan.

The emotions we feel today should not take away from the 787 team’s incredible progress in recent months. We have had strong results from our engine tests, our systems tests and, with this exception, our structural tests. We believe in the technologies, the design and the systems that will make the 787 a revolutionary airplane for our customers and their passengers.

As a team, we have worked through many challenges in bringing this breakthrough airplane to life. I am confident that as a team, we will work through this issue as well. We will stay focused on executing the best solution as quickly as possible, while keeping up the progress on the other areas of the program.

I thank everyone on the team and everyone at Commercial Airplanes for the hard work, dedication and perseverance as we continue on this journey together.

Scott

.

[Taliesin]

Verbal, I think it's time you replaced the A380 with a 787

[Eric Diffoot]

HA , like your idea there taliesin. Not surprised at all and nothing matters until that plane's wheels gets off the ground.

[TAP-A343]

This seems completely ridiculous to me.

At least, Boeing could just have kept quiet about the B787's first flight during the Paris Air Show.

I just wonder what credibily is left for Boeing as far as the B787's customers are concerned.

As an aviation enthusiast, I want to see this plane flying and having a smooth EIS soon.

[Dantheman]

I would rather have them deliver a safe aircraft so if there are delays then so be it.

[AA 1818]

At least, Boeing could just have kept quiet about the B787's first flight during the Paris Air Show.

Exactly what I was thinking! This recent news rattles the reliability of Boeing in that it either makes the aircraft seem quite unreliable, or, it equates their being poor communication between the management team at Boeing. Either way, I am sure that customers are a bit concerned.

Either way, I wish to see this aircraft fly soon, and well. I cannot wait to see the pics, and more than that - I cannot wait to see when she shatteres records (as she is more than sure to do), and take on her role as the pride of (and backbone of) future fleets.

A side note; as we have never had an aircraft be built so largely of composites, how will this aircraft's 'Gauntlet' differ from most? Any highlights of testing that we need to look out for?

[LX-A343]

Well, well, well ... I can still remember those anti Airbus rants over the A380 delays some years back. Where yre you now?

Seems, that when developping a new aircraft, it's better to besafe than fast. Airbus has proved it and now Boeing.

[Alpha Sierra]

Looks like Boeing are experiencing some problems with their expensive composites. I suggest they contact Airbus who may be able to assist them with their extensive experience in the use of cheap composites !

On a more serious note, it is certainly disheartening to be faced with yet another delay to the Dreamliner program. On the other hand, I agree that Boeing are doing the right thing to ensure that the Dreamliner will be everything it promises to be once it takes to the skies.

This just goes to underline the difficulties faced by aircraft manufacturers when launching an entirely new product, using new technologies, materials and methodologies and also highlights the fact that the problem is not just restricted to one manufacturer, Airbus, who received so much criticism for the delay of the A380. Where are all those critics now?

[BoeingBobby]

787

As you can assume from my screen name I am a Boeing person by profession. However the Airbus has certainly filled a niche in the field over the last couple of decades. I just dead headed on an A340-200 from IST to BOM yesterday, and it was a very nice and comfortable ride, although it was in First class (in our contract). On a side note however, and I am not trying to ruffle any feathers here. Every time Airbus has come up with a new design, it has NEVER met the speed, range, or payload numbers that were projected. Boeing on the other hand has always met or most often beat their projections. So let us see how this new beauty unfolds.

BB

[Taliesin]

Every time Airbus has come up with a new design, it has NEVER met the speed, range, or payload numbers that were projected.

The A380 exceeded its range projections.

[Alpha Sierra]

Boeing on the other hand has always met or most often beat their projections. So let us see how this new beauty unfolds.

It appears that this may not be the case with the Dreamliner, at least for the early production models. From Wikipedia:

"In early 2009 a number of 787 customers started to publicly mention their dissatisfaction with the reduced specifications on the 787, specifically weight/range issues. Industry insiders have stated Boeing has reduced its range estimates for the 787-8 from 14,800-15,700 km to 14,150-15,170 km, a reduction of over 500 km. There have also been reports that this led Delta to delay deliveries of 787s it inherited from Northwest in order to take later planes which may be closer to the original estimates. Other airlines are suspected to have been given discounts to take the earlier models.^[120] Shanghai Airlines stated in March 2009 it wished to either delay or cancel its first order. Boeing expects to have the weight issues addressed by the 21st production model.^[121]

In May 2009, a press report indicated that a 10%-15% range reduction for early 787-8 aircraft is anticipated due to these planes being about 8% overweight. This means a range of about 6,900 nmi (12,800 km) instead the originally promised 7,700 to 8,200 nmi (14,800-15,700 km). Substantial redesign work is expected to correct this, which will complicate increases in production rates.^[79] Boeing confirmed on May 7 that early 787s would be heavy and is working on weight reductions. The company stated the early 787-8s will have a range of almost 8,000 nmi (14,800 km).^[122]"

Let's hope Boeing are able to resolve these issues in later production models.

[BoeingBobby]

The A380 exceeded its range projections.

I do not want to start with the Boeing good Airbus bad thing all over again. Having said that, the 380 only beat the range estimate by slowing down to a .80 M long range cruise speed. Where as they originally said it would cruise at .84 -.85 M like the 747-400 does. You can bet by the time the 787 gets it's first coat of paint in a company livery, it will be right where they said it would be or better. Remember all of the figures they have at this point are done on paper and computer models right now. Once they are in the air, as always they will meet or beat the original numbers Boeing said they would. I would bet a month's salary on it. I started on 707's and 720's flew 72's and now on the 74. Absolutely the finest aircraft I have ever had the pleasure to operate.

BB

[Taliesin]

Having said that, the 380 only beat the range estimate by slowing down to a .80 M long range cruise speed. Where as they originally said it would cruise at .84 -.85 M like the 747-400 does.

Do you have a source to back that up? That's the first time I hear of this and I dont believe airlines would have been very happy with that kind of restriction and rather gone with less payload. The 747 cruise speed is quite high and even beats the 777 cruise speed, to my knowledge it was never the goal to get to the same cruise speed as the 747.

[BoeingBobby]

Do you have a source to back that up? That's the first time I hear of this and I dont believe airlines would have been very happy with that kind of restriction and rather gone with less payload. The 747 cruise speed is quite high and even beats the 777 cruise speed, to my knowledge it was never the goal to get to the same cruise speed as the 747.

I can only go by what a couple of friends of mine that fly the Airbus for EK have told me. They have been on the aircraft since EK first got them. I have no personal experience flying a bus at all so I default to them for the information.

BB