cabin smoke in 787

Boeing Resumes 787 Flight Testing – ‘Santa’ arrived for fans of the Plastic Pig

Boeing Resumes 787 Flight Testing – ‘Santa’ arrived for fans of the Plastic Pig

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1571

News Release Issued: December 23, 2010 3:22 PM EST
Boeing Resumes 787 Flight Testing

– Interim solution verified through extensive testing

– Schedule assessment expected to conclude in January

EVERETT, Wash., Dec. 23, 2010 /PRNewswire/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) will resume flight test activities on the 787 Dreamliner later today. The company has installed an interim version of updated power distribution system software and conducted a rigorous set of reviews to confirm the flight readiness of ZA004, the first of the six flight test airplanes that will return to flight.
“Initially, we will resume a series of Boeing tests that remain to be completed in the flight test program. That testing will be followed later by a resumption of certification testing,” said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of the 787 program. Today’s testing will include an intentional deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which is a small turbine that is deployed when back-up power is required.
Boeing and Hamilton Sundstrand completed testing of the interim software updates earlier this week. Verification of the system included laboratory testing of standalone components, integration testing with other systems, flight simulator testing and ground-based testing on a flight test airplane.
In the last several weeks, the company continued ground testing as part of the certification program. Additional ground testing will be done by the company on the production version of the airplane to further verify performance of the changes being made.
“As we return to flight test and determine the pace of that activity, we remain focused on developing a new program schedule,” Fancher added. “We expect to complete our assessment of the program schedule in January.”
Flight testing of the 787 was suspended last month following an in-flight electrical incident on a test flight in Laredo, Texas.
Contact:
Lori Gunter
787 Communications office
+1 206-931-5919
SOURCE Boeing

Parsley – ANA working with rather than fighting them

Hi Parsley (This ones for you on Christmas day)
Rather than fight Boeing, ANA seem to be doing positive business and continuing a harmonious relationship with Boeing.
It does not mean that ANA are ignoring the 787 delays but maybe they are going to use alternatives as interim measures and thereby gain in favourable commercial relationships with Boeing.

Boeing and Air New Zealand Welcome Airline’s First 777-300ER Into Fleet

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1570

News Release Issued: December 22, 2010 5:53 PM EST
Boeing and Air New Zealand Welcome Airline’s First 777-300ER Into Fleet

EVERETT, Wash., Dec. 22, 2010 /PRNewswire/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) and Air New Zealand welcomed the airline’s first 777-300ER (extended range) at a ceremony today at Paine Field in Everett, Wash. Air New Zealand ordered the first of five 777-300ERs in August 2007 to complement the eight Boeing 777-200ERs already in its long-haul fleet.
The airline intends to use the first three airplanes to operate between Auckland, Los Angeles and London beginning April 2011.
Air New Zealand’s Boeing 777-300ERs feature a unique, innovative seat experience in the Economy, Premium Economy and Business Premier classes. For example, “Skycouch” seating, known as CuddleClass, is available in the first 10 rows of Economy Class and will allow passengers who book three-wide seat space to raise the footrests with the touch of a button to create a lie-flat space similar to a sofa at home.
Air New Zealand’s Premium Economy “Spaceseats” will feature a larger seat area and more room between passengers. When the seat reclines, it slides forward, preserving the personal space of the passenger sitting behind.
All seats have in-seat power and USB connections, allowing passengers to connect their MP3 players with the in-flight entertainment systems.
“The Boeing 777-300ER was an excellent choice for the routes Air New Zealand operates, especially given its 15 percent fuel efficiency improvements over current aircraft and excellent customer proposition,” said Air New Zealand Group General Manager, International Airline, Ed Sims.
“The ability to customize the 777-300ER has enabled Air New Zealand to create a number of world firsts,” said Sims.
“Few, if any airlines have invested time and money beyond First Class. We have re-invented our Economy and Premium Economy customer experience in every aspect.
“We’ve created the world’s first economy seating that enables people to lie-down, and a Premium Economy seat many airlines call Business Class.
“We’re also the first commercial airline to introduce induction ovens for all cabins to give our customers real food; and have developed an IFE system to enable people to be in control of their whole in-flight experience,” Sims said.
Air New Zealand was named 2010 Airline of the Year by Air Transport World because of its passenger-pleasing innovations. “The interior of Air New Zealand’s Boeing 777-300ERs, with new-concept seats and a sophisticated in-flight entertainment system, is a great example of why Air New Zealand is Airline of the Year,” said Marlin Dailey, vice president of Sales & Marketing for Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
“The 777-300ER is an ideal platform for enabling Air New Zealand to once again demonstrate that they are a forward-thinking airline with revolutionary ideas,” Dailey said.
Air New Zealand currently has 35 Boeing jets in its fleet and will be the first to take delivery of the 787-9 Dreamliner, with eight on order. The airline also operates Boeing 737-300s, 747-400s and 767-300ERs.
The 777-300ER is 19 percent lighter than its closest competitor, greatly reducing its fuel requirement. It produces 22 percent less carbon dioxide per seat and costs 20 percent less to operate per seat. The airplane has a maximum range of 7,930 nautical miles (14,685 km). The 777 family is the world’s most successful twin-engine, twin-aisle airplane. Sixty-one customers around the world have ordered more than 1,100 777s.
Contact:
Miles Kotay
+1 206-766-2923
+1 425-306-4537 (mobile)
[email]miles.kotay@boeing.com[/email]
Contact:
Debbie Heathers
+1 206-579-5159
[email]debbie.heathers@boeing.com[/email]
Photo and caption are available here: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/
SOURCE Boeing

There were always lots of funny smells when I used to be on long haul,you couldn`t solve many of them..often down to passengers who would not own up( I mean smoking in toilets !!)

Boeing Completes Acquisition of Summit Aeronautic Group in Montana

News Release Issued: December 21, 2010 12:22 PM EST
Boeing Completes Acquisition of Summit Aeronautic Group in Montana

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1568

Helena, Mont.-based hard-metals facility to be renamed Boeing Helena

SEATTLE, Dec. 21, 2010 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) announced today the completion of the acquisition of the business and operations conducted by Summit Aeronautics Group in Helena, Montana. Terms of the transaction, announced on Nov. 22, were not disclosed.
The newly acquired business will be named Boeing Helena. It will become part of Boeing Fabrication, a division of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. Boeing Helena will manufacture titanium and other hard-metal structures for Boeing commercial aircraft including the 747-8, 767 and 787.

Forward-Looking Information Is Subject to Risk and Uncertainty
Certain statements in this release may be “forward-looking” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “intends,” “projects,” “believes,” “estimates,” “targets,” “anticipates,” and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements. Examples of forward-looking statements regarding the proposed acquisition of Summit include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the expected timetable for completing the transaction, future business prospects, our guidance relating to 2010 and 2011 financial and operating performance, product development and benefits and synergies of the transaction, as well as any other statement that does not directly relate to any historical or current fact. Forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions about future events that may not prove to be accurate. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in these forward-looking statements. As a result, these statements speak to events only as of the date they are made and we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by federal securities laws. Specific factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the effect of economic conditions in the United States and globally, the ability of the parties to satisfy the transaction conditions and complete the acquisition, the risk that competing offers will be made, our ability to successfully integrate Summit’s business and realize anticipated synergies, and other important factors disclosed previously and from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Contact:
Cris McHugh
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Communications
+1 206-851-9884
More information: http://www.boeing.com
SOURCE Boeing

Boeing is serious and involved with their suppliers in this positive move. – a comment especially for Parsley. You don’t have to go to war with suppliers or manufacturers – you simply work with them (or even financially support or own them) rather than threaten them. If they aren’t worthy of your custom then find another.

I have no evidence to say that Boeing isn’t willing to understand the customer

But with respect what has what subcontractor Boeing use got to do with the customer ?…the customer signed on the dotted line with Boeing not whoever Boeing choose to subcontract work to…I think you are missing the point that when the customer signed on the dotted line Boeing committed to deliver the plane by a certain date..what is ignorant about a customer expecting to get their product when the supplier said they would deliver it ?

and yes I know all about the testing,new materials etc..but clearly as regards delivering the finished product to the customer Boeing were rather foolish in promising delivery dates they couldn’t keep (or quoting dates before they knew exactly how long it would take to put this aircraft in service)

Hi Parsley
I have no evidence from anyone to say that Boeing isn’t going to understand customers issues with the delays, but that is the point many on this thread have tried to make clear, that the customers that are delayed cannot ask for purely huge sums of money when they can use Boeing alternatives interim.
Money will not buy an identical equivalent Dreamliner from anyone and that’s final.- There aren’t any
Customer airlines that are affected had better do some quick arithmetic and start flying the routes planned for the Dreamliner with ideally Boeing alternatives, make some real money as otherwise they made be in up to their necks in a quagmire, if all they wish to do is use a ‘big legal’ stick.

Boeing made their forecasts regarding the Dreamliner prior to the start of the huge global economic recession and that has affected all sub contract suppliers (costs, quality, etc)

What is perturbing is to suggest that Boeing get ultra heavy handed with their sub contract suppliers as I am sure that is making an assumption that they aren’t constantly communicating priorities which I am sure is an incorrect assumption.

Hi Parsley – so Boeing made a bad business forecast – no one dead though.
My bet’s on Boeing winning.
Maybe some of their third party suppliers are from countries like India and Japan (many more countries involved of course) so maybe if AI ‘kick’ Boeing what you are advocating is that Boeing ‘kick’ the suppliers harder. Not a great global trading result all round is it? More like an ‘ignorant trading war.

In one of my recent posts I mention that with any new innovation (a huge one – this new 787 project) new tests have to be invented, designed, written, modified and even after certification testing will I hope go on for years.

Engineers and scientists have to set parameters based on known data for these new materials and create tests. Some of these new materials on the 787 have not been exposed to the usage the 787 is putting them to (e.g. exposed to the elements at high stress levels).

The recent incident given Boeing’s own recent statement (see my previous post) is being resolved mechanically and with some changes to software (monitoring software very likely) and Boeing are working with the primary suppliers on this.

AI need to get their act together – do they want a fight in court with one of the world’s greatest engineering giants or to run an airline making money (maybe slightly less due to higher fuel costs) by using interim alternative aircraft.

AI definitely will not get the money they are asking for as there is nothing equivalent they can buy.

Sensible negotiation and a working compromise with a safe and hopefully still friendly Boeing is the option I would hope AI see fit to take.

But with respect what has what subcontractor Boeing use got to do with the customer ?…the customer signed on the dotted line with Boeing not whoever Boeing choose to subcontract work to…I think you are missing the point that when the customer signed on the dotted line Boeing committed to deliver the plane by a certain date..what is ignorant about a customer expecting to get their product when the supplier said they would deliver it ?

and yes I know all about the testing,new materials etc..but clearly as regards delivering the finished product to the customer Boeing were rather foolish in promising delivery dates they couldn’t keep (or quoting dates before they knew exactly how long it would take to put this aircraft in service)

Dreamliner’s woes pile up
As Boeing prepares to announce yet another delay for the 787 Dreamliner — at least three months, possibly six or more — the crucial jet program is in even worse shape than it appears.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2013713745_dreamliner19.html

Hi Parsley – so Boeing made a bad business forecast – no one dead though

…no airline company would expect to take delivery of an aircraft that isn’t anything other than fully certified as safe and fit for purpose….what Boeing have done however is tell their early customers that the aircraft would be in service by a certain date before they had real understanding themselves of the time frame involved to actually get it into service (or even flying)..

Hi Parsley – so Boeing made a bad business forecast – no one dead though.
My bet’s on Boeing winning.
Maybe some of their third party suppliers are from countries like India and Japan (many more countries involved of course) so maybe if AI ‘kick’ Boeing what you are advocating is that Boeing ‘kick’ the suppliers harder. Not a great global trading result all round is it? More like an ‘ignorant trading war.

In one of my recent posts I mention that with any new innovation (a huge one – this new 787 project) new tests have to be invented, designed, written, modified and even after certification testing will I hope go on for years.

Engineers and scientists have to set parameters based on known data for these new materials and create tests. Some of these new materials on the 787 have not been exposed to the usage the 787 is putting them to (e.g. exposed to the elements at high stress levels).

The recent incident given Boeing’s own recent statement (see my previous post) is being resolved mechanically and with some changes to software (monitoring software very likely) and Boeing are working with the primary suppliers on this.

AI need to get their act together – do they want a fight in court with one of the world’s greatest engineering giants or to run an airline making money (maybe slightly less due to higher fuel costs) by using interim alternative aircraft.

AI definitely will not get the money they are asking for as there is nothing equivalent they can buy.

Sensible negotiation and a working compromise with a safe and hopefully still friendly Boeing is the option I would hope AI see fit to take.

……there are some customers out there who are very very very hacked off with the situation…the public remarks from ANA in the last week bearing testament to that

I don’t think this is in question.
But dragging Boeing to court with hyperinflated claims for money is not a solution :rolleyes:
All that is going to do is make Boeing (and Airbus too) think twice before doing business with AI again. Who wants to do business with someone that will come back at them with unreasonably high claims when should something go wrong?

They should work together with Boeing and agree on a more reasonable solution. Perhaps some interim aircraft, new 772ERs to replace their older ones. Some 737s thrown into the deal perhaps.
The 772LRs which are currently useless to AI can and should have been used to cover any new routes planned for the 787. Not efficient, but better than letting them sit idle and blaming Boeing.

Hi Parsley I am sure both parties’ lawyers will be hard at it, but I think in this day and age supply chains can be ‘king’ and I am sure Boeing have gone as hard against their suppliers as they possibly can.
I am repeating myself Boeing does NOT wish these delays at all, but have to abide by prioritising passenger safety before profit. Any reversal of these priorities and there will be no Boeing in a few years, as lives will be lost.
Instead I think negotiation and compromise between the supposed aggrieved airlines and Boeing as to operating alternative ‘interim’ high quality Boeing aircraft at highly preferential leasing rates is a way forward.
Nothing will come by AI or any other airline bloodying their noses by going tooth and nail against Boeing who will simply keep legally stalling them using their lawyers until the 787 rolls out. When that day arrives the new customers will grab at the 787 and overtake the antagonistic airlines.
Many US airlines have deferred their planned purchase date of their 787s.
See my post quoting the URL of several business analysts’ comments.
I particularly like the one which ends with the ….High Barriers to Entry”
This is Boeing’s salvation for a long time yet.
Airbus will win some orders in the meantime but lets see if when the A350 roll out time comes if it’s a ‘piece of cake’ or otherwise.

yes I see what you are saying but I think the prioritising safety against profit is something of a red herring…no airline company would expect to take delivery of an aircraft that isn’t anything other than fully certified as safe and fit for purpose….what Boeing have done however is tell their early customers that the aircraft would be in service by a certain date before they had real understanding themselves of the time frame involved to actually get it into service (or even flying)..and I certainly don’t think customers are “supposed aggrieved”..there are some customers out there who are very very very hacked off with the situation…the public remarks from ANA in the last week bearing testament to that

Hi Parsley I am sure both parties lawyers will be hard at it

Hi Parsley I am sure both parties’ lawyers will be hard at it, but I think in this day and age supply chains can be ‘king’ and I am sure Boeing have gone as hard against their suppliers as they possibly can.
I am repeating myself Boeing does NOT wish these delays at all, but have to abide by prioritising passenger safety before profit. Any reversal of these priorities and there will be no Boeing in a few years, as lives will be lost.
Instead I think negotiation and compromise between the supposed aggrieved airlines and Boeing as to operating alternative ‘interim’ high quality Boeing aircraft at highly preferential leasing rates is a way forward.
Nothing will come by AI or any other airline bloodying their noses by going tooth and nail against Boeing who will simply keep legally stalling them using their lawyers until the 787 rolls out. When that day arrives the new customers will grab at the 787 and overtake the antagonistic airlines.
Many US airlines have deferred their planned purchase date of their 787s.
See my post quoting the URL of several business analysts’ comments.
I particularly like the one which ends with the ….High Barriers to Entry”
This is Boeing’s salvation for a long time yet.
Airbus will win some orders in the meantime but lets see if when the A350 roll out time comes if it’s a ‘piece of cake’ or otherwise.

Hi Parsley
I have not suggested that customers simply shrug their shoulders and ignore the lost revenue due to the ensuing delays.
I have said that there are always alternative ways to ‘skin a cat’ rather than resorting to possibly hyperinflated financial claims against Boeing.
Negotiation with Boeing on absorbing the cost of the losses by offering preferential leasing of alternative aircraft.
The cost of the law suit alone will cripple most airlines and Boeing can drag it on until they launch and then when the rest of world jumps on the bandwagon and buys the 787 where will the antagonistic airline customers be?
Nothing is gained by heavyweight legal threats against Boeing who are probably as anxious to speed up delivery, but find their hands tied due to modern safety requirements involving repeat testing following failures.
There are bound to be cancellation clauses and lawyers on both sides will be fully aware of these but whether there are in depth legal clauses to cover delays out with the control of the manufacturer, I am not competent to comment.
This is an all new design and innovative aircraft and it is taking time for testing which is inevitable (tests had/have to be written/invented) and the learning curve in testing is currently steep on this one.
We may all get quite a pleasant surprise in a few months if she does ‘roll out’ as deliveries to customers.

Yes ok but the fact remains that the contracts no doubt stated that Boeing would deliver to customer x a 787 on or within a short time of a specified date – certainly not 2 and a half years after it…the fact that a lot of delays have occurred due problems with parts from Boeing’s subcontractors is on the whole irrelevant to the customer..it is after all Boeing’s problem to sort that out….the issue seems to have been that Boeing have totally underestimated the time it would take to get this aircraft in service and in the process have created the atmosphere that now exists….one cannot ignore the fact that some of the “antagonistic airline customers” as you put it may have been loyal and prolific purchasers of Boeing products up to now

Analysts see Boeing 787 deliveries in 2011 — maybe

Analysts see Boeing 787 deliveries in 2011 — maybe
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2010/12/12/787.html
I have just put in snippets below –

….Boeing had hoped to deliver the first 787 to All Nippon Airways in the first quarter of 2011. And that was a big hope, considering the program is already nearly three years behind Boeing’s initial schedule……

…With all the new technology being incorporated into the 787 — much of which was done by other companies in Boeing’s disparate design and supply chain — problems and delays were inevitable,….

…the program has suffered from the setup of the supply chain.

…Boeing had at one time projected the 787 program to be profitable after a few hundred deliveries. …..it will take four-digit delivery numbers for Boeing to turn a profit now, taking into consideration customer charges and the costs associated with the continued delays….

…“It’s a good thing that people still need an aircraft in this category,” .. “(Boeing) is lucky that it’s in an industry with very high barriers to entry.”

There you have it – what is there in it’s league at present?
Innovation and daring to be different can cost a company money but better money than lives

Jay
You seem to be saying that the customers should just accept this and not upset Boeing ?

..substantial costs are going to be passed to Boeing (and were probably prewritten in to many contracts)..prehaps not at the levels that AI are claiming but items such as extending leases on aircraft the 787 was going to replace or the cost of leasing in aircraft…you can also be sure that if a company has to operate for an extra two years a 767 which should have been replaced by a shiny 787 they are going to try and get their extra operating costs on that 767 (i.e.extra fuel burn – 20% more,maintenance etc) for that 2 year period.

Hi Parsley
I have not suggested that customers simply shrug their shoulders and ignore the lost revenue due to the ensuing delays.
I have said that there are always alternative ways to ‘skin a cat’ rather than resorting to possibly hyperinflated financial claims against Boeing.
Negotiation with Boeing on absorbing the cost of the losses by offering preferential leasing of alternative aircraft.
The cost of the law suit alone will cripple most airlines and Boeing can drag it on until they launch and then when the rest of world jumps on the bandwagon and buys the 787 where will the antagonistic airline customers be?
Nothing is gained by heavyweight legal threats against Boeing who are probably as anxious to speed up delivery, but find their hands tied due to modern safety requirements involving repeat testing following failures.
There are bound to be cancellation clauses and lawyers on both sides will be fully aware of these but whether there are in depth legal clauses to cover delays out with the control of the manufacturer, I am not competent to comment.
This is an all new design and innovative aircraft and it is taking time for testing which is inevitable (tests had/have to be written/invented) and the learning curve in testing is currently steep on this one.
We may all get quite a pleasant surprise in a few months if she does ‘roll out’ as deliveries to customers.

Clawing back money can leave business relationships very soured.
There are other ways to ‘skin this cat’, preferential rates on temporary alternatives with buy back options,etc.
Do the companies want to run an airline business or make war with Boeing is what it finally comes down to?
It is far better that Boeing make a very safe, innovative aircraft and when they deliver it there may be losses for a period but once the 787 is accepted for what is really is then business picks up again.
Anybody care to recall way back the disaster of the Airbus prototype crash at Le Bourget Paris Air Show. They’ve come a long way since then haven’t they ?
The old fashioned word ‘break even point’ may shift into later deliveries but for Boeing to shift into high gear of the Commercial World of aviation – so what?
Boeing make good aircraft and they will wish to keep it that way, that’s enough of a mission statement “To push the leading edge of aviation, taking huge challenges doing what others cannot do”.
Do you think that Boeing’s employees or long term customers doubt this statement?
Good customers/airlines must recognise that although the economic recession isn’t what’s directly causing Boeing’s 787 delays – the impact of ‘shoddy’ workmanship on third party supplied products makes quality assurance a very expensive and unwieldy task.

Jay

You seem to be saying that the customers should just accept this and not upset Boeing ?

although the customers may well recognise Boeing’s mission statement and want a fully tested and safe aircraft they also are to say the least not going to be happy that an aeroplane they signed for with a quoted delivery date of such and such is not going to be in service at least 2 years later than promised…substantial costs are going to be passed to Boeing (and were probably prewritten in to many contracts)..prehaps not at the levels that AI are claiming but items such as extending leases on aircraft the 787 was going to replace or the cost of leasing in aircraft…you can also be sure that if a company has to operate for an extra two years a 767 which should have been replaced by a shiny 787 they are going to try and get their extra operating costs on that 767 (i.e.extra fuel burn – 20% more,maintenance etc) for that 2 year period.

No major carrier is in a position to just shrug their shoulders and accept the situation..the fact that the launch customer ANA (what could be classed a loyal and substantial Boeing customer) is now making very loud noises about their general displeasure with the situation would bear this out.

Hang on, how can one single model of jet be responsible for $250m per year?
AI was supposed to get their first 787 in September 2008. That makes it 2 years late for them. $500m for 2 years lost revenue from a fleet that would at best only been 5 or 6 frames strong at this point? Never mind your figures, AI are saying they want $1.3m for the same time frame. Do they even make $750M in revenue per year as whole? Now, if they were supposed to get all 27 aircraft in September 2008, the figure of $500m might add up.
They’ve had 777s sitting on the tarmac instead gathering dust that could have been used to cover new routes making any losses much less.
Also, I believe the 77LRs are not a completely seperate issue here.
They could be used to show a precedence for AI to incorrectly calculate revenue projections. Any hot-shot lawyer could use that to cast doubt on AI’s calculations and therefore bring into question the ammount being claimed for. Who orders several extremely expensive jets with no need for them?
I’m just saying it how I see it. When claiming for damages, any incompetence on the claiments behalf will be looked into.

Don’t get me wrong though, Boeing have to answer for the delays, there is no doubt about it. But the ammount AI are going for is insane they basically want all their aircraft for free and then some.

The damage done by the delay of the 787 to AI has been substantial, whether one likes it or not. Even with all the red-tape that AI is burdened with the airlines route expansion is practically on hold due to non-availability of aircraft. The 787 was supposed to be a game-change for AI. At the moment they are actively looking and are in the final stages to arrange for 10 A330s to fill the void.

Yes they mucked up with the 77LRs but that is a whole separate issue.

Since the delays I strongly believe AI would have lost projected revenues in excess of $500 million easily.

As $1.3 billion does indeed sound a little high, AI has a solid case against Boeing to gain substantial amount of compensation.

This is very true. But all in good taste and reason surely.
I very much doubt AI has lost $1.3 billion or even 800m in revenue and they will need to justify why they are claiming for such a large ammount.

Have they been disadvantaged? Yes.
Have they lost $1.3billion in revenue and associated costs? Doubtfull, a shortfall like that would close the airline!
Are they just trying to gold dig while they see the opportunity? I’d bet on it!

Clawing back money can leave business relationships very soured.

Clawing back money can leave business relationships very soured.
There are other ways to ‘skin this cat’, preferential rates on temporary alternatives with buy back options,etc.
Do the companies want to run an airline business or make war with Boeing is what it finally comes down to?
It is far better that Boeing make a very safe, innovative aircraft and when they deliver it there may be losses for a period but once the 787 is accepted for what is really is then business picks up again.
Anybody care to recall way back the disaster of the new delivery Airbus A320 (1988) crash at Mulhouse-Habsheim. Airbus have come a long way since then haven’t they ?
The old fashioned word ‘break even point’ may shift into later deliveries but for Boeing to shift into high gear of the Commercial World of aviation – so what?
Boeing make good aircraft and they will wish to keep it that way, that’s enough of a mission statement “To push the leading edge of aviation, taking huge challenges doing what others cannot do”.
Do you think that Boeing’s employees or long term customers doubt this statement?
Good customers/airlines must recognise that although the economic recession isn’t what’s directly causing Boeing’s 787 delays – the impact of ‘shoddy’ workmanship on third party supplied products makes quality assurance a very expensive and unwieldy task.

Given the amount that AI are claiming,no doubt other customers will do similar or have some hefty delay clauses written into their contracts…in which case could be quite some while before Boeing actually makes any money on this aircraft or actually makes a loss on a lot of the first aircraft off the line