787 service entry – six months delay

Boeing were practically late on everything , they cought up on a lot of things (some of which i cannot disclose) over the last 24 months , some things were much serious then what issues plague the program now .

Normal for pretty much every program I guess. Problems were similar for the B747 I guess. And I think Airbus or MDD have not had less issues.

A FCS isn’t really rocket science, its not as if they changed the number of control surfaces or anything. :confused:

Even re-sizing the surfaces only really results in gain changes through the different loops, they aren’t fundamental re-codes, more re-tunes.

I dispute that, at least I want to put that in perspective. Designing flight control laws for a civil airliner is surely not comparable to making such for a fighter aircraft. After all, a civil airliner is restricted to much smaller flight envelope in terms of CG, speed (Mach and IAS), altitude, external stores, angle of attack and sideslip angle.
BUT the flight control laws have a huge impact on design loads. Little changes in flight control laws may result in 5% more load on the wing. May sound little, but with structure designed to be optimised, it means a lot. Add to that the tendancy of rising OEW (~2-3 tons for the B787 since 2004), you have serious issues at hand.
Optimisation takes lots of time, it is basically a trade between handling qualities and loads. Boeing has a different approach than Airbus here, and has less experience in control design for civil aircraft (Airbus started 10 years earlier). The whole issue can take time, needs lots of loops and is safety critical. Airbus learned its lessons in the early 90s, and I guess it wasn’t a matter of month.
Still I don’t understand why Boeing subcontracts this issue to an outside company. This means another interface. Takes time, reduces flexibility.

EDIT: And do not forget the issues that come with flexibility of the airframe, different than on the previous programs. Airbus will have pain with that, too.

That sounds…. strange.

Yeah strange , but true

FCS isn’t really rocket science, its not as if they changed the number of control surfaces or anything.

I agree , however their has to be a reason why boeing were late to finalize the design and send frozen specs to the sub-contractors (in this case honeywell) , the true reason may be never be known and boeing doesnt have to legally explain that part IMHO .

You push it all through quickly, you increase the chances of missing something. Everyone that knows the old funds spent/funds committed graph from systems engineering knows how bad something missed is.

I know that , that is why i said that once the buffer time was exausted their was no way boeing could meet the deadlines . Thankfully now that the buffer time has been replenished into the new schedule it has a good shot of going through .

IMO thats a bit of a red herring from Boeing

Boeing were practically late on everything , they cought up on a lot of things (some of which i cannot disclose) over the last 24 months , some things were much serious then what issues plague the program now . However things have a way of catching up to you and with the software delay we know that it does . Software alone isnt why the 787 is late , had it been only software i would have said maybe a 2 month or 3 month delay , the problem stems from ALCOA , and shortage of fastners in general .

Flight control issues were related to late firming up of software requirments thus making delivery late . The software IIRC has now been delivered to boeing .

That sounds…. strange.

A FCS isn’t really rocket science, its not as if they changed the number of control surfaces or anything. :confused:

Even re-sizing the surfaces only really results in gain changes through the different loops, they aren’t fundamental re-codes, more re-tunes.

The development period for the 787 was very short and enthusiastic , a 6 month delay will still make it a very impressive Launch to EIS .

As Schorsch has said – that can be an issue in itself. You push it all through quickly, you increase the chances of missing something. Everyone that knows the old funds spent/funds committed graph from systems engineering knows how bad something missed is.

Software definition was late so naturally the software maker (honeywell) will be late to deliver .

Meh – the final definition may have been late, but its not as if Boeing decided to drop canards or switch flap designs or anything.

IMO thats a bit of a red herring from Boeing.

It’s an aviation discussion forum and that’s what we’re doing..or so i thought

While discussions about the performance of either company tend to become fact free pretty soon. The true causes for technical problems, if they are technical at all, are often not disclosed to the public. And often there is no single fault, it is a conglomerate of reasons, where one seemingly small delay causes another item to be shifted backwards, causing a delay elsewhere. It is the typical friction that is not accounted for, happens in any program. The big “failure” is hard to identify, and even if there is “failure”, it can hardly be reasoned that a company is “generally too stupid” to accomplish something.

What one can say that the schedules are from the onset unrealistic or very optimistic and against better knowledge. This is to pressure people and to increase the financial performance of the company, and the attractivity of the Executive Board to the shareholders. Finally it often turns out that it went exactly the other way.

The statements given by official Airbus or Boeing releases are like a Chinese newspaper.

It’s an aviation discussion forum and that’s what we’re doing..or so i thought

Folks lets keep this thread clean of any A vs B please . Lets discuss the topic at hand rather then the A380 .

As for the A380 being a disaster all the airlines that have ordered 165* planes can’t be wrong!!!!
* Airbus figures from September

And orders have slowed to a trickle..they’ll be very lucky if the sell enough to break even

I don’t think you really want to go there. The programs are not even remotely comparable. The A380 program had been a disaster and almost 2 years late and way over budget. That’s a far cry from the well run Dreamliner program. Don’t even get me started on the differences in new materials and technology between the two programs.

Ok…………..

i’m neither Boeing or Airbus but…………

You shoot yourself in the foot with your own question….Yes the Dreamliner has new technologies such as the CFRP barrels……new technologies will bring problems as it unproven in previous projects on such a scale.

Airbus is a consortium of different countries that are contracted to supply different parts I.E. Wings from England, Rudder and tail components from Germany!!! etc etc etc…. It is a proven supply chain that has worked very well on all Airbus projects.

Boeing has chosen to risk share alot more components for the 787 to far more countries than it has done in previous projects, leading to comments like the “787 only Assembled in Seattle”. When you have a global supply chain and some suppliers are singing from a different page on the hymm sheet, then delays will happen!!!.

Now i’m sure Boeing wasn’t stupid enough to realise that everything would run on time and they built in buffer zones…but these have become eradicated and now its leading to a 6 month delay.

If memory serves me correctly, the 777 was 6 months late in to entry due issues with suppliers and so was the 747-400 for other reasons.

As for the A380 being a disaster all the airlines that have ordered 165* planes can’t be wrong!!!!

* Airbus figures from September

Why do we need to compare the 2 programmes? This thread is for the 787, so why keep bring the A380 up, correct the projects are completely different.

The A380 has been kicked around enough over the last 2 years, its Boeing time now so lets play fair and slag them off, fairs, fair after all.:dev2:

Paul
P.S. I will not be joining in by the way, there but for the grace of God go all of us.

I’m not pro-Airbus/anti-Boeing in particular. Its just devine retribution for all those pro-Boeing folks who so bashed Airbus over the A380!

I don’t think you really want to go there. The programs are not even remotely comparable. The A380 program had been a disaster and almost 2 years late and way over budget. That’s a far cry from the well run Dreamliner program. Don’t even get me started on the differences in new materials and technology between the two programs.

Actually still a mistery for me how they could mess that up.

Most probably the Design was late to freeze up and the deadlines were pushed forward with a hope that they could cover some ground later.

further do not understand why they source this essential piece of knowledge out. Boeing becomes an aircraft retailer.

$$$$$$$ . Boeing expects to earn more money , have a lower risk share and allocate less $ upfront while cash flow remains pretty much the same . Boeing had 3 studies (that i know of ) independently sanctioned to see the financial aspect of long term partners as risk sharing- and all of them were unanimous , BCA will pretty much remain a designing , R and D and integrating house now with a vast majority of production being done by the partners . I think that eventually airbus will adopt a similar strategy although they will probably be not as open to partners as boeing but in essence operate in similar fashion (high percent development and risk transfered to parnters) . I also expect that eventually the companies will grow to a point where both will be raking in big money and will be increasingly cooperating making stuff for the others’s aircrafts (more so then now) .

Maybe that are two of the basic shortcomings of the B787 development period.

LOL:)

Flight control issues were related to late firming up of software requirments thus making delivery late . The software IIRC has now been delivered to boeing .

Actually still a mistery for me how they could mess that up. Normally such things are “at hand” for new aircraft. I further do not understand why they source this essential piece of knowledge out. Boeing becomes an aircraft retailer.

Compensation is a big Mess as we know from airbus’s expereince . As of now boeing will need to look into the production schedule to see how many deliveries will slip . Different contracts are differently worded and compensation can be in many different ways , anything from discounted 777’s to discount over exerc. of options . Airbus used all of these effectivly to keep 380 customers comfortable with a 2 year delay .

I am sure that no airline will lose money through that, like none lost money due to A380 delays (maybe in some lost profits). I guess some lower profile customers will easier take delays in delivery as other. Some maybe even cancel or shift their delivery dates to 201x. As we learned with the A380, delay can extent as production people understand their problems fully when they standing knee-deep in the ****, and that normally happens when fully equipped (with cabin!) production aircraft are supposed to roll out, but don’t.

The development period for the 787 was very short and enthusiastic , …

Maybe that are two of the basic shortcomings of the B787 development period. :diablo:

Boeing has also mentioned flight control software issues, which could be either minor, or very major indeed.

Flight control issues were related to late firming up of software requirments thus making delivery late . The software IIRC has now been delivered to boeing .

reported to have caused delays, in itself.

Was Clearly denied by Carson in the last update

as they could hardly explain to their shareholders that the let the money pass without grabbing it.

Compensation is a big Mess as we know from airbus’s expereince . As of now boeing will need to look into the production schedule to see how many deliveries will slip . Different contracts are differently worded and compensation can be in many different ways , anything from discounted 777’s to discount over exerc. of options . Airbus used all of these effectivly to keep 380 customers comfortable with a 2 year delay .

Does this mean the blame could, maybe, get shifted to the outsourced partners

They are partners however the buck will stop at boeing . The development period for the 787 was very short and enthusiastic , a 6 month delay will still make it a very impressive Launch to EIS .

I was speaking to a chap who works for a CFRP company the other day, trying to get some myself, and he said that there is somewhat of a shortage of the stuff Worldwide at the moment. I imagine it is quite a strain on the industry considering it is still somewhat in its infancy and there is now such a huge demand for it.

CFRP resin or whatever is preordered well in advance given a production run , the shortage comes from ALCOA mainly (the nuts and bolts maker) and those are titanium fastners mainly . Software definition was late so naturally the software maker (honeywell) will be late to deliver .

A Delay was much predicted (read my comments on the other thread) and it would be great effort for boeing to get this baby into service even 6 months late . The 787 is a superb aircraft and will earn a lot of profit for its customers and for boeing despite delays and/or compensations .

What boeing now needs to look at is when they can ramp up .

The article says manufacturing delays. Does this mean the blame could, maybe, get shifted to the outsourced partners – the one’s actually making the CFRP barrels etc? I am not saying it is NOT Boeings fault – it is there program and they are the ones responsible for it, but it may be issues out with their control….

One of the production problems is said to be a shortage of fasteners. Manufacturers need to increase production. That would be a problem with Boeings supply management. Boeing has also mentioned flight control software issues, which could be either minor, or very major indeed.

The publicity stunt rollout is reported to have caused delays, in itself. The story is that the airframe had to be fixed together with whatever Boeing could get hold of. The plan was to remove all the unsuitable fasteners, & replace them with proper ones ASAP. But it seems that in the rush to meet the promised date, they failed to keep track of which fasteners were pukka & which weren’t, so to be safe, they have to dismantle the whole thing & put it back together with a complete new set of fasteners. That delays completion of the first prototype, which delays the start of flight testing.

Note that apart from the mention of FCS in the Boeing press releases, which I have seen myself, I cannot vouch for any of the above, although I have no reason to doubt it.

If the contract offers compensation after a certain grace period (and for the big customers this will surely be the case), these companies will seek compensation, as they could hardly explain to their shareholders that the let the money pass without grabbing it.

Source: The Australian

QANTAS says it will seek compensation after Boeing announced a delay in the delivery of its 787 Dreamliner aircraft.

Chief executive Geoff Dixon said Boeing today assured Qantas that the 15 Dreamliners due for delivery between August 2008 and December 2009 would all be delivered by the 2009 date.

“Boeing said the August 2008 aircraft would slip, but not by six months,” he said.

”Once that aircraft arrives, the remaining 14 aircraft deliveries will be staggered until December 2009.”

Qantas has 65 firm orders for the 787s, 20 options and 30 purchase rights.

The first 15 aircraft are scheduled for use by Qantas’s low cost offshoot Jetstar for its international operations.

Mr Dixon said Qantas had contingency plans for any short-term capacity shortages.

”Once Boeing confirms a revised delivery schedule we will assess the need for any other measures such as delaying the retirement of aircraft,” he said.

”Compensation issues will be the subject of commercial negotiations between the Qantas and Boeing companies.”

Hmmm an odd silence on this topic from the Airbus bash brigade who were all so vociferous in slagging Airbus over the A380 delay 😀 😀 😀 :diablo:

And the “Airbus brigade” refrains from senseless bashing, as it should be.

Hmmm an odd silence on this topic from the Airbus bash brigade who were all so vociferous in slagging Airbus over the A380 delay 😀 😀 😀 :diablo:

Well as I wrote when AB announced some delays on the A380 program, there is no surprise here. Most of the big projects like this have to face some unexpected problems.
No big deal.

I wonder if any of the launch customers will seek or indeed Boeing offer some form of compensation

If the contract offers compensation after a certain grace period (and for the big customers this will surely be the case), these companies will seek compensation, as they could hardly explain to their shareholders that the let the money pass without grabbing it.