787 gets another delay

[JF Mezei]

They found structural problem with in the upper side of wing/body join.

It will be several weeks before they can set a date for first flight and
the new first delivery.

Virgin's purchase of 330s and now talks to buy 350s is probably due to this.

And there I was, confident that Boeing had finally worked through the
glitches and would start to shine (as that its shares would climb :-(
Boeing shares lost 6.2% today.

Boeing has a web cast on its web site about this.

The problem was found during continuing tests of the static aircraft.

Stressed areas were 1 or 2 square inches in multiple locations (about
18). They occur where there are multiple materials joined (composite,
titanium, aluminium). Parts come from Mitsubishi/Fuji.

Boeing was extremely vague and non-committal about the fact that it will
take weeks befor Boeing can establish a new schedule, yet Boeing
stressed this was a simple fix that was easy to retrofit.

Is there a start of real worries about the project, or is this really
par for the course and finding such a structural problems where wings
meet the aircraft body expected with a new aircraft ?

I am somewhat worried that their computer models might have been overly
optimistic and Boeing will start to uncover a lot of structurally weak
areas during flight testing.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.

[JF Mezei]

Didn't catch this last thursday:

Qantas cancelled 15 787-9 that had been due 2014-2015 and defered by 4
years another 15.


going to the horse's mouth gives more details:
http://www.qantas.com.au/regions/dyn/au/publicaffairs/details?ArticleID=2009/jun09/3936

Defers 15 787-8
Cancels 15 787-9


However, Qantas remains the largest 787 customer after this change:
35 787-9 and 15 787-8

Qantas still expects 15 787-9s for Jetstar starting in mid 2013. (3
years later than originally planned).

15 787-8, originally expected for Jetstar starting in mid 2010 will
start to be delivered at end of 2014 over one year. (will replaced
767-300).
20 787-9s for both QF and Jetstar will start at end of 2015 and take 2
years.




This cancellation brings Boeing back in the negative tally for the year.
It had managed to rise to a positive net 9 orders, and would now be down
to -6.

The original purchase announcement:
http://www.qantas.com.au/regions/dyn/au/publicaffairs/details?ArticleID=2005/dec05/3369

65 787s total
Delivery starting in 2008 for Jetstar, and July 2009 for Qantas.

787-9 was to have been ready in 2011.

I find interesting that Boeing has not talked about the 787-9 in recent
times. Has anyone heard anything about it ?


Lack of information beckons speculation. If the 787 were to have some
serious design flaws, is it possible that the 787-9 will represent
enournous challenges to Boeing because the core design of the fuselage
won't scale to those lengths ? (which would mean significant delays for
the -9 beyond the -8 delays as well as greater overweight problem ?

The last 2 weeks have made the Airbus 350 look better and better. (Of
course, Airbus may end up having similar problems and delays).

However, Airbus has more recent experiences with composites since it
finished the 380 project while Boeing's last new aircraft was the 777 in
1995. And more importantly, just like Boeing was able to avoid software
design pitfalls that besieged Airbus, Airbus might be able to avoid
structural problems in its 350 because it learned from Boeing's 787
experience.


I still think Boeing should have gone ahead with first flight of the
787, even if the profile was so benign as to being useless because it
would have prevented the significant tarnishing of the 787's image.

A first flight would not have prevented the Qantas cancellation (and
whatever else is brewing), but it would have helped reduice the PR impact.
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.

[w***@googlemail.com]

Post by JF Mezei
I still think Boeing should have gone ahead with first flight of the
787, even if the profile was so benign as to being useless because it
would have prevented the significant tarnishing of the 787's image.

afaiu, Imho and all that jazz :

Boeing can not apply the fixes (doublers, whatever) to an already
(over)stressed part of the plane.

Thus the possible flight envelope seems to be so much narrowed down
that they do not dare risk their only reasonably complete airframe for
an
otherwise valueless marketing stunt.

wid
--
misc.travel.air-industry is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
***@airinfo.aero, and see http://mtai.airinfo.aero for the FAQ and policies.