Will it ever fly?

[seaboy4hire]

Here we go aviation afficionados!

 

http://www.787firstflight.newairplane.com

 

I'm not sure if today will be the day. I'm just south of Everett and it is as wet as the dickins. Not sure if these are the conditions that they are looking for. KMEM your thoughts please.

 

Hugs,

Greg

[+ azdr0710]

click on "click here......", then "webcast", in the link above to watch....

 

says 9:40am PT today, Dec. 15th.......

[KMEM]

I'm not sure if today will be the day. I'm just south of Everett and it is as wet as the dickins. Not sure if these are the conditions that they are looking for. KMEM your thoughts please.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

Thanks for the intro, Greg. I have heard the weather is very iffy and they will not launch if it continues. There could few things sillier than an airliner on a first flight with a mechanical problem and not able to see the ground.

 

I am hoping for the very best for this flight and this airliner. Boeing, even with all their mistakes, is still an American company first and foremost and we should wish them well, at the very least.

 

So, cross your fingers and remember, if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[Boston Guy]

The first flight of the Dreamliner was evidently a great success. I would have loved to have been on board that plane today and am looking forward to flying on it as a passenger.

 

BG

[+ glutes]

Good for Boeing! Hope I can fly on when it debuts passenger service.

 

http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/photos/boeing/787-dreamliner.jpg

[AdamSmith]

if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going.

 

...Of course, how much of it really is Boeing? Just came across this -- simplified! -- graphic:

 

http://www.3dcic.com/images/stories/press/787.jpg

[KMEM]

Didn't Calder already do that for Braniff?

 

Yes, you are illustrating one of my core gripes about how poorly Boeing is doing business these days. They are paying the price for "globalization" with late deliveries, parts that don't fit, bad engineering and all sorts. They also might have lost a DOD contract because of it and deservedly so. Still, they are my and America's airline manufacturer, so I won't give up on them easily.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[+ glutes]

Dreamliner or Nightmare Liner?

 

MIKE SIEGEL / THE SEATTLE TIMES

 

 

RICARDO SANTOS / AP

A Boeing 787 flight-test plane made an emergency landing Tuesday at the Laredo, Texas, airport after an electrical-equipment fire. No injuries were reported.

Related

 

A serious in-flight fire in the electrical-equipment bay of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner flight-test plane forced an emergency landing Tuesday in Laredo, Texas. All 30 to 40 people aboard were safely evacuated on slides.

 

The fire affected the cockpit controls and the jet lost its primary flight displays and its auto-throttle, according to a person familiar with the incident. The pilot lost some use of the flight and engine controls, which on the Dreamliner are electrically activated, the source said.

[+ azdr0710]

sometimes when I get overwhelmed with what is really a simple project at home or work, I just think of trying to design and build a new jet or trying to operate a war and I don't feel too overwhelmed anymore.....

[AdamSmith]

Ai yi yi... All this, and now the Rolls Royce engine trouble to boot.

 

Boeing tells analyst: 787 deliveries 'will take longer than expected'

Boeing management is telling Wall Street that the 787 Dreamliners already rolled out onto Paine Field are "in various stages of final assembly" and that delivery of those jets "will take longer than expected, particularly those with the Rolls-Royce engine."

By Dominic Gates

Seattle Times aerospace reporter

 

Boeing management is telling Wall Street that the two-dozen 787 Dreamliners already rolled out onto Paine Field are "in various stages of final assembly" and their delivery "will take longer than expected, particularly those with the Rolls-Royce engine," an analyst reported Tuesday.

 

In a note to investors, Robert Stallard, aerospace analyst with RBC Capital Markets, relayed the news after briefings from Boeing senior management in Chicago, including CEO Jim McNerney.

 

Stallard concluded that after the initial Dreamliner is given to All Nippon Airways in mid-February, the ramp-up of 787 deliveries will likely be "longer and shallower" than previously expected.

 

He projected just two dozen Dreamliner deliveries in all of 2011.

 

Previously, Wall Street analysts had been projecting around 80 deliveries next year.

 

Although the jets rolled out so far are painted in the livery of the airlines that will eventually take them, much of the interior installation work is missing due to earlier supply-chain problems.

 

The Rolls-Royce engine is a specific problem because Rolls is working to apply a fix to its engines after one blew up during a ground test in England in August.

 

Of the 25 Dreamliners that have so far rolled out through the Everett assembly plant's doors to the flight line, 17 are to be fitted with Rolls-Royce engines.

 

After those early airplanes are delivered, Stallard said, Boeing's leadership believes the supply-chain pipeline will flow more smoothly.

 

"McNerney thinks that most of the risk in the ramp-up process will be retired after the first 40-50 deliveries," Stallard reported.

 

Stallard offered better news on production of Boeing's other jets.

 

While the 787 assembly line will stay sluggish at best, the other assembly lines will be pumping out jets faster than they have ever done.

 

Stallard said McNerney indicated the production rate of the Everett-built 777 wide-body, at five aircraft per month but set to rise next summer to seven per month, could go even higher depending on the progress Airbus makes with its rival A350-1000.

 

And the analyst said McNerney may push output of the Renton-built 737 single-aisle — now at 31.5 jets per month — even beyond the 38 per month scheduled for 2013.

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2013385417_dreamliner10.html

[KMEM]

This whole thing is a shame. Some of it is not Boeing's fault but some of it certainly is. The US needs new and better technology products and this should have been or should be one of them. However, Boeing's attempt to become a "world" company has run into a brick wall. Brick walls can be gone over or around but they aren't fun to run into. Obviously, it is easy t o criticize Boeing for scattering it's manufacturing process for this aircraft. Parts don't fit, have to be "adjusted" after they arrive for assembly, don't arrive on schedule, etc.etc. A management miscalculation. The technical details were difficult enough without all the other "burdens" and, again obviously, they have not been solved before flight. But, they never will be. Why do you suppose they call them test flights? However, they aren't supposed to test your nerves, only the installed equipment and performance of the aircraft compared to the engineer's predictions. Rolls Royce has made a major contribution but unfortunately to the problem, not the solution.

 

Unfortunately, over the years, aircraft have been lost to "problems" during test flights. So long as Boeing does not lose any lives and, preferably, not an entire aircraft, they cannot on the face of it be accused of not using due diligence. Also, in today's world of instant communication, a test pilot with a sudden hang nail will be broadcast around the world in seconds. Never mind an aircraft with "problems".

 

If All Nippon calls me up and asks me to be on the delivery aircraft to Narita or wherever they will take delivery, I shall go.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

Edited November 10, 2010 by KMEM

[AdamSmith]

Why do you suppose they call them test flights? However, they aren't supposed to test your nerves, only the installed equipment and performance of the aircraft compared to the engineer's predictions. Rolls Royce has made a major contribution but unfortunately to the problem, not the solution.

 

Of course I take your points in this and the related thread that (1) Boeing is arguably the best in the world, (2) they had to go to composites, (3) their outsourcing and globalization experiment (a) turned out not to be quite flight-ready, (b) but (my point now, not yours) may still turn out to be the right way to do these things, but this first venture had to be undertaken, to prototype the process and go thru the inevitable hard knocks (feel free to disagree & debate!), (4) test flights can fail, (5) etc.

 

But I repeat my broken record that, possibly, composite materials simply were not engineered to be the structure itself. I had a long conversation with a materials engineer the other day where he convinced me of that. Eek. Time will tell.

 

Also & separately, having looked firsthand at the engineering and manufacturing work processes & conceptual thinking inside GE Aircraft Engines, Pratt, and Rolls, I have to say that Rolls is the most backward of the 3. Of course their engines get certified & are airworthy. But they have a pretty antiquated engineering culture, & I do sincerely wonder how long it can keep up with the increasing demands on performance, economy, etc. compared with its competitors, whose engineers and managers I think are a half-century ahead in their mode of thinking.

 

Just a few light thoughts for the afternoon.

Edited November 10, 2010 by AdamSmith

[KMEM]

Oh, well, you KNOW those socialist English engineers; not to be trusted.

 

I would prefer to compare this to "others" picking on your sister or brother and you taking up for him or her, but business doesn't always work that way. I am not about to say that Boeing is perfect or anything similar. However, they are the pre-eminent US aircraft manufacturer and I want them to succeed. I do not own any of their stock. This attitude is strictly patriotic in nature.

 

In some ways, engineers are more conservative than pilots, if that could be possible. They have their own criteria and few will be able to interfere with their conclusions, at least privately. However, I am sure you do not wish to return to the days before nylon, teflon and the like to such as rayon in, for instance, tires. They were not nearly as long lasting or as tough. Take my word for it.

 

RR has had its' problems with this engine design with the intent that it should be very powerful as well as fuel efficient. It may well do all that and with some "tweaking" be long lasting as well. But, that will take time.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[AdamSmith]

In some ways, engineers are more conservative than pilots, if that could be possible. They have their own criteria and few will be able to interfere with their conclusions, at least privately. However, I am sure you do not wish to return to the days before nylon, teflon and the like to such as rayon in, for instance, tires.

 

Yes. But, in addition to the O-ring example, I have seen too many other cases where engineering management overruled engineering itself as to what the "conclusions" should be.

 

Rolls needs to update its engineering culture. I can't tell whether the resistance (ignorance?) is from management, or from within the engineering culture itself. Wish I knew; if I did, maybe I could sell them more consulting.

 

But I am serious that RR is a materially more primitive engineering culture than GE or Pratt. I wish they were not. But they are Jurassic by comparison. Just a fact. They have paid me US$ to tell them that. Many smart individuals, but a fucked-up set of work processes, and of methods to inculcate project learnings and competitive intel into corporate knowledge.

Edited November 10, 2010 by AdamSmith

[KMEM]

I went to school with an engineer who worked for both Boeing and GE. He had both good and bad things to say about both. But, that was some time ago. I don't know what the culture is now. As you suggest, bad products or bad results can come from bad information, bad conclusions or bad management. I am sure it would be worth a commission from you if I could provide you with the correct answer.

 

Personally, I have seen some very "silly" things happen to aircraft but I have always thought that better attention to "duty" would cure many of them, even if only at the last moment. In other words, when an aircraft goes wrong, deal with it from knowledge, experience and the engineering that went on before you flew it. However, I do realize that the public has a right to perhaps a higher standard than that. I was put into the role of a test pilot many more times than once during my "early" days. It isn't right or fair to have the paying flying public put up with less than everyone's best efforts. Sometimes, that is not sufficient.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[Luv2play]

I remember as a teenager being over at my friend's cottage one fine summer day when the news came over the radio that an Air Canada jet had crashed apparently due to engine failure with great loss of life. Her uncle happened to be visiting and I saw his reaction when he heard the news. He turned white and said "I hope to God those weren't Rolls Royce engines". He was the president of Rolls Royce.

 

I realized then that airplanes are special creations, not like trains or cars or ships, that transport us to and fro. When they suffer some sort of calamitous failure, people question the manufacturers almost instantaneously. I wouldn't want to be in that business.

 

(And no, the engines weren't RR, but either GE or Pratt and Whitney, I don't recall.)

[GoodFella69]

If All Nippon calls me up and asks me to be on the delivery aircraft to Narita or wherever they will take delivery, I shall go.

 

Right on, KMEM. I would go too in a heartbeat. I've enjoyed reading this thread and couldn't agree with you more.

Goodfella

[+ glutes]

Never mind an aircraft with "problems".

 

If All Nippon calls me up and asks me to be on the delivery aircraft to Narita or wherever they will take delivery, I shall go.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

 

And never mind a rentboy with "problems", go for it Captain.

BTW, you won't be going on that ANA delivery flight any time soon:

 

By PETER SANDERS / Wall Street Journal

Boeing Co. on Wednesday suspended test flights of its 787 Dreamliner fleet as it investigated the cause of a cabin fire onboard one of the jets that caused a major onboard power failure and forced the plane to make an emergency landing in Texas.

 

The six Dreamliners in the test fleet will continue to conduct ground-based tests until the company clears the planes to fly again, a Boeing spokeswoman said. It's unknown for how long the flight tests will be suspended.

 

Chicago-based Boeing has about 850 orders for the plane, the fastest selling jet in Chicago-based Boeing's history. But the program is running nearly three years behind schedule.

 

On Tuesday afternoon, Dreamliner test jet No. 2 was on approach to Laredo, Texas, after a six hour test flight, when a fire broke out in the aft electronics compartment. The fire resulted in the failure of the plane's primary electrical power system, Boeing said Wednesday. It said the pilot's primary flight display, a main cockpit instrument, was not affected.

 

The fire triggered a series of cascading electrical failures that affected the flight controls as well as a number of computerized systems, a person familiar with the matter said.

[KMEM]

Not sure the "rentboy" with problems to which you are referring. I do know of a poster with LOTS of problems.

 

I expect to be around and willing and able to go when the 787 IS delivered. A little more faith in the US would be suitable, don't you think?

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[+ glutes]

Hope you are around long enough...

 

Not sure the "rentboy" with problems to which you are referring. I do know of a poster with LOTS of problems.

 

I expect to be around and willing and able to go when the 787 IS delivered. A little more faith in the US would be suitable, don't you think?

 

Best regards,

KMEM

 

Well there are now 8 less 787's for you and your favorite problem-ridden rentboy to fly away on Captain:

 

New York - Boeing says it lost eight 787 orders in the week that ended on Tuesday - the same day that one of the planes made an emergency landing.

 

That aircraft was on a six-hour test flight when it made an emergency landing in Texas after the crew reported smoke in the rear of the plane. Test flights for the 787 were later scrapped.

 

Chicago-based Boeing didn't say in its order log which airline cancelled the orders. A spokesperson wasn't immediately available for comment on Thursday.

 

Shares fell $1.66, or 2.5 percent, to $65.41 in afternoon trading.

 

The plane is already about three years behind schedule. Boeing had hoped to deliver the first 787 - which it calls the Dreamliner - to Japan's All Nippon Airways in the first quarter of 2011. - Sapa-AP

 

(I italicize quotes now, no confusion as to plagiarism Dear Captain)

[+ g56whiz]

MIKE SIEGEL / THE SEATTLE TIMES

 

 

RICARDO SANTOS / AP

A Boeing 787 flight-test plane made an emergency landing Tuesday at the Laredo, Texas, airport after an electrical-equipment fire. No injuries were reported.

Related

 

A serious in-flight fire in the electrical-equipment bay of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner flight-test plane forced an emergency landing Tuesday in Laredo, Texas. All 30 to 40 people aboard were safely evacuated on slides.

 

That's hitting close to home - literally!!

 

I was driving down Del Mar on my way to Gold's Gym when that damn thing passed over the building. The airport is about 2 miles away. I thought it was a bit too big for the normal commuter passenger jets that service our local airport. But then every once in a while FedEx or DHL has a larger plane landing here but then I read about it in the Laredo Morning News. Well at least it wasn't more narco violence in Neuvo Laredo in the press.

[KMEM]

Now you know one reason they may have used the slides, the airport did not have boarding equipment for this size plane. When the 747 first came out that was a very common problem; ditto the 380, and, of course, for airports that have little to no expectation for handling such, still is.

 

Aircraft orders come and go with the vagaries of the economy, the bottom line of the airline itself, the chairman of the board having a "bad night" and all sorts. Solve the technical problem and the orders will come flooding back.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[+ glutes]

 

I expect to be around and willing and able to go when the 787 IS delivered. Best regards,

KMEM

 

Captain, you are going to be running around in a wheelchair when this bird finally launches. I am sure Nurse Nicholas will be there for you to change your Depends...

 

A leading supplier on the delayed Boeing Co. 787 aircraft program said Wednesday that the outlook for deliveries next year "does not look particularly strong."

 

Suppliers have privately expressed doubts that Boeing will deliver few if any operational 787s next year in the wake of an onboard fire on a plane last month that grounded the test fleet. Boeing has said it will outline the impact on the delivery schedule in a few weeks. The first delivery is officially set to arrive in February.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704594804575649001896569306.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

http://one4theotherthumb.com/images/stories/2010season/week9/depends.jpg

[KMEM]

So now you rely upon vendors predicting what the manufacturer will do? Apparently someone left a wrench in a "J" box and being adrift, it managed to get into an electrical component. Again, why do you think they call them test flights?

 

Do they make Depends for the mouth?

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[fedssocr1]

I saw a photo in Airliners World of 16 ANA 787's sitting on the apron at Boeing's airfield. So once the tests are finally over delivery should be able to happen relatively quickly.

 

I wonder if the A350 will ever get off the ground...