Will it ever fly?

[EZEtoGRU]

Here is a thoughful article on the troubled history of the 787 development program and its certification......and the problems continue now with the FAA grounding (first grounding by the FAA in 39 years BTW). No doubt that Boeing can get to the bottom of the problems and ultimately fix them. The question is how long will this take? If it takes more than a few months and the planes stay grounded, look for consumer and airline loss of confidence in the aircraft and serious financial consequences for Boeing. If they can get it diagnosed and sorted in circa 30 days, the situation can still be rescued. At what point do the airlines start filing lawsuits against Boeing? ANA now has 17 of these aircraft grounded and, no doubt, it is really affecting the airline's ability to operate at full schedule.

 

As an aside, I was transiting NRT yesterday and saw a bunch of ANA 787 aircraft at a remote parking spot. Sad.....really sad.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-18/boeing-787-plane-of-future-struggles-to-overcome-past.html

[bigvalboy]

Here is a thoughful article on the troubled history of the 787 development program and its certification......and the problems continue now with the FAA grounding (first grounding by the FAA in 39 years BTW). No doubt that Boeing can get to the bottom of the problems and ultimately fix them. The question is how long will this take? If it takes more than a few months and the planes stay grounded, look for consumer and airline loss of confidence in the aircraft and serious financial consequences for Boeing. If they can get it diagnosed and sorted in circa 30 days, the situation can still be rescued. At what point do the airlines start filing lawsuits against Boeing? ANA now has 17 of these aircraft grounded and, no doubt, it is really affecting the airline's ability to operate at full schedule.

 

As an aside, I was transiting NRT yesterday and saw a bunch of ANA 787 aircraft at a remote parking spot. Sad.....really sad.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-18/boeing-787-plane-of-future-struggles-to-overcome-past.html

 

Very good article EZE...thanks for the post, interesting read.

[KMEM]

First grounding in 39 years? I guess you missed all the others to include AA for gear problems, etc., etc. There are routine situations that either do or will call for grounding if not fixed within a limited amount of time.

 

It is "interesting" that some pay no attention to a long time member of the industry but instead rely upon the "expertise" of frequent flyers who are, after all, just customers of the industry. Amateurs trying to look into a technological world. Other than with disdain, I have no idea why I am wasting my time reading such drivel.

 

I suppose trying to educate such is just a bad habit.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[EZEtoGRU]

First grounding in 39 years? I guess you missed all the others to include AA for gear problems, etc., etc. There are routine situations that either do or will call for grounding if not fixed within a limited amount of time.

 

Wrong again. It is indeed the first time in many many years that the FAA has issued a directive effectively grounding an entire aircraft model. The situations you describe often related to a single airline due to issues related to that airline....... or the groundings related to a subset of a aircraft model.

 

It's interesting how some techincal types (think engineers, pilots, etc) often think they are capable at making accurate business assessments of a situation. In my experience,good at they are in their technical field, those folks make awful businesspeople. I faced those sorts of folks endlessly in the corporation. Leave the business strategy, evalution, and tactics to the professionals please.

[KMEM]

Just leave the flying to us and we will get along famously.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[EZEtoGRU]

Just leave the flying to us and we will get along famously.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

 

I'm quite happy to leave the flying to you. Business management assessments & decisions for an airline or aircraft manufacturer? No way.

[RexAll]

Why Can't We All Just Get Along?

 

I don't know anything about flying except as an ordinary consumer, or anything about finance or investing

(more's the pity). But this whole thread has reminded me of a classic. Enjoy!!!

 

[video=youtube;Vg5cwSBnyQU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg5cwSBnyQU%26sns=em

 

Rex

[KMEM]

I'm quite happy to leave the flying to you. Business management assessments & decisions for an airline or aircraft manufacturer? No way.

 

So, Tom Braniff, Robert Six, Eddie Richenbacker, Bob Crandell, Herb Kelleher and others do not meet with your approval? Aviation has traditionally been more about flying and less about business until somewhat lately much to my chagrin and the loss to the flying public. I am sure you understand this as a FF. If you do not, you are entirely too interested in the bottom line.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[EZEtoGRU]

....well we are a week on from the ANA 787 incident. Focus is clearly on the lithium battery. A quick investigation indicates the ANA 787 battery in the last incident had not been "over-charged" thereby ruling out a charging error. It is starting to look like this issue could take months to resolve as the use of highly flammable lithium batteries on the 787 is now under scrutiny. In addition to the unprecedented FAA grounding and investigation, the French and Japanese have investigations underway as well. As I predicted, this may get very ugly.

 

If Boeing is smart, they are well into planning a non-lithium battery alternative....Which will be challenging given the amout of electric power a 787 requires.

[bigvalboy]

....well we are a week on from the ANA 787 incident. Focus is clearly on the lithium battery. A quick investigation indicates the ANA 787 battery in the last incident had not been "over-charged" thereby ruling out a charging error. It is starting to look like this issue could take months to resolve as the use of highly flammable lithium batteries on the 787 is now under scrutiny. In addition to the unprecedented FAA grounding and investigation, the French and Japanese have investigations underway as well. As I predicted, this may get very ugly.

 

If Boeing is smart, they are well into planning a non-lithium battery alternative....Which will be challenging given the amout of electric power a 787 requires.

 

Thanks so much for the update EZE...and I think in the end you are right on several fronts. Yes this is more than growing pains and yes it very likely that it will get ugly. As Glutes once said that this might be a PR nightmare. I had read about the charging problems with the batteries, and going to an alternative is problematic, since as you point out the 787 requires large amounts of electric power. The Carbon fiber skins seems to be a real concern. GM solved much of the same problems with the Volt. Of course catching fire at 70 miles an hour on the ground is different than 500 mph at 30,000 feet.

[EZEtoGRU]

Looks like the 787 Dreamliner grounding is going to continue for quite a bit longer. My interpretation is that the current battery arrangement will be de-certified and an alternative will need to be developed. Who knows how long it will take Boeing and its suppliers to develop a more reliable and safer battery.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/ntsb-studying-certification-batteries-boeings-787-162918663--sector.html?.tsrc=yahoo

[KMEM]

Is the glass half empty or half full? Boeing is suggesting it may have answers in about 3 weeks. That remains to be seen.

 

Best regards,

KMEM

[AdamSmith]

So much kerfuffle re nada. Battery problems will be fixed pronto. If the problems had arisen in the composite airframe then the 787 program would have been in deep doodoo. But this electrical stuff is easy to fix. Aren't there any engineers on this forum?

[EZEtoGRU]

So much kerfuffle re nada. Battery problems will be fixed pronto. If the problems had arisen in the composite airframe then the 787 program would have been in deep doodoo. But this electrical stuff is easy to fix.

 

Seemingly not so easy to fix. Dreamliners are still grounded and most airlines that operated them have completely removed them from their forward schedules until August at the earliest......for planning purposes. Boeing have also started laying off people from the 787 production line. First Dreamliner test flight by Boeing was last week and the aircraft included the "fix" to the battery. My understanding of the "fix" is that it is a much more substantial casing around the lithium battery so that when the battery catches fire it will be well-contained within the casing. I understand that they have not yet diagnosed the root problem of why the battery is prone to catching fire and how to prevent that from happening.....although I am willing to be corrected on that statement if someone else has other information. It's also worth noting that Airbus has decided it will not utilize the lithium battery in the A350 as it had previously planned. At this point, Boeing seems to still be commited to the battery type for thee 787. Will that change with time?? Who knows?

 

No clear view on when the FAA will re-certify the plane and under what circumstances. Some suggest that the the FAA could re-certify the aircraft but greatly reducing the ETOPS profile......meaning no long over-water flights. That would seriously undermine the value proposition of the aircraft for the airlines that have or are purchasing them.

 

This story gets uglier by the week.

 

Lastly, BVB asked me on another thread if I would go on the Dreamliner again once it is up and flying. My answer would be that yes I would do a domestic flight on one in the lower 48 as its pretty easy to find a diversion airstrip to land on quickly in the event of an emergency. On the other hand, I don't think I would be doing any long-haul overwater flights on a 787 for the next few years until Boeing's current or future battery "fix" is truly proven out.

[bomerrang]

I fly regularly for business, and quite comfortably / reliably in both Airbus and Boeing planes. However, one of the earlier excuses offered when the first 787 problems started becoming

apparent was that 'teething problems' are far from uncommon with new planes, on the basis, perhaps, that two wrongs will make a right, or that a 'teething' problem is less serious than a'normal' problem. (Is a crash caused by a teething problem also more survivable, I wonder?)

 

Please review the below timeline of Boeing 787 Dreamliner incidents to the plane’s first flight in 2009 from Bloomberg, they are more than teething to me:

 

** Today, All Nippon, Japan Airlines ground their entire fleet of 787s after an All Nippon plane makes emergency landing because of smoke coming from aircraft *Both carriers cancel all 787 operations for tomorrow *All Nippon says emergency landing may have been caused by battery issue *Japan’s Transport Ministry says it considered today’s emergency landing as “serious” incident that could have led to an accident *India aviation regulator sets up team to study 787 problems; State-owned Air India has six Dreamliners * Jan.14, Japan transport ministry sets up team to investigate previous 787 incidents on ANA, JAL planes * Jan.13, fuel leaks on JAL plane at Tokyo’s Narita airport during maintenance; same plane leaked oil at Logan airport on Jan.8 * Jan.11, cockpit window on All Nippon 787 cracks during flight; Carrier’s another Dreamliner suffers oil leak * Jan.8, JAL 787 returns to Logan Airport after fuel leak * Earlier, UAL finds one improper battery wiring after it inspects Boeing 787 following JAL fire at Logan Airport: Dow Jones * Jan.7, U.S. officials investigating JAL flight 008 at Boston’s Logan airport after a fire in the avionics bay * JAL 787 fire caused “severe” damage to APU unit, NTSB says * BA sees no link between 787 fire and prior woes * Dec. 14, UAL 787 has problem with electrical panel, Qatar Airways says its 787 remains grounded w/faulty generator that is similar UAL’s * Dec. 5, FAA issues airworthiness directive for 787 inspections after fuel leaks on two planes; one a JAL aircraft, other an All Nippon Airways plane * Dec. 4, United 787 makes emergency landing in New Orleans when one of its six generators fails * Oct. 4, GEnx Sept. engine failure caused by dislodged air nozzle in LP turbine * Aug. 9, engine shaft damage detected on GEnx 787 engine during test * Feb. 23, BA says replacing shims improperly installed on 787 to take 10-14 days per plane * NOTE: Aug. 18, 2011, BA to provide JAL with predictive maintenance service * Jan. 18, 2011, initial delivery to All Nippon Airways delayed for 7th time until 3Q after test-jet fire; delay includes time to manufacture, install; test updated software, new electrical power panels * Nov. 9, 2010, fire aboard 787 test jet forces emergency landing in Laredo, Texas. Test flights halted * NOTE: UTX’s aerospace units make 787 electrical system * NOTE: Click here for Bloomberg Industries backlog screen

[bigvalboy]

Seemingly not so easy to fix. Dreamliners are still grounded and most airlines that operated them have completely removed them from their forward schedules until August at the earliest......for planning purposes. Boeing have also started laying off people from the 787 production line. First Dreamliner test flight by Boeing was last week and the aircraft included the "fix" to the battery. My understanding of the "fix" is that it is a much more substantial casing around the lithium battery so that when the battery catches fire it will be well-contained within the casing. I understand that they have not yet diagnosed the root problem of why the battery is prone to catching fire and how to prevent that from happening.....although I am willing to be corrected on that statement if someone else has other information. It's also worth noting that Airbus has decided it will not utilize the lithium battery in the A350 as it had previously planned. At this point, Boeing seems to still be committed to the battery type for thee 787. Will that change with time?? Who knows?

 

No clear view on when the FAA will re-certify the plane and under what circumstances. Some suggest that the the FAA could re-certify the aircraft but greatly reducing the ETOPS profile......meaning no long over-water flights. That would seriously undermine the value proposition of the aircraft for the airlines that have or are purchasing them.

 

This story gets uglier by the week.

 

Lastly, BVB asked me on another thread if I would go on the Dreamliner again once it is up and flying. My answer would be that yes I would do a domestic flight on one in the lower 48 as its pretty easy to find a diversion airstrip to land on quickly in the event of an emergency. On the other hand, I don't think I would be doing any long-haul over water flights on a 787 for the next few years until Boeing's current or future battery "fix" is truly proven out.

 

Thanks for the response EZE. I am genuinely curious as to the thoughts of fellow travelers. I fly Virgin on all domestic flights, and have not flown international in a couple of years, but starting next year I will be flying to Asia on a routine basis. My concerns about the on going problems and the apparent cover up, or lack of concrete information coming out of Boeing is disturbing to me. Boeing sub-contracting out most of the parts, and then admitting that they may never know the what caused the battery meltdown in the first place, is most unsettling. I know that much of the decisions are political and financial in nature, I get that, as the FAA must be under tremendous pressure to certify. For myself however, I fly out of necessity, and have alway been just a tad bit uneasy about flying, so I am not sure how safe the new Dreamliner" will be regardless how often Boeing tries to spin the public relations channel......

Edited March 30, 2013 by bigvalboy

[Steven_Draker]

Having observed from the ground one of these giants land at LAX last week ... it's far from being pretty or gracious.

 

I've already been twice this month on that giant and I'm in owe of the pilot/captain who lifts that whale in the air.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Farnborough_air_show_2006_a380_landing.jpg

Edited March 30, 2013 by Steven_Draker

[EZEtoGRU]

I fly regularly for business, and quite comfortably / reliably in both Airbus and Boeing planes. However, one of the earlier excuses offered when the first 787 problems started becoming

apparent was that 'teething problems' are far from uncommon with new planes, on the basis, perhaps, that two wrongs will make a right, or that a 'teething' problem is less serious than a'normal' problem. (Is a crash caused by a teething problem also more survivable, I wonder?)

 

Please review the below timeline of Boeing 787 Dreamliner incidents to the plane’s first flight in 2009 from Bloomberg, they are more than teething to me:

 

** Today, All Nippon, Japan Airlines ground their entire fleet of 787s after an All Nippon plane makes emergency landing because of smoke coming from aircraft *Both carriers cancel all 787 operations for tomorrow *All Nippon says emergency landing may have been caused by battery issue *Japan’s Transport Ministry says it considered today’s emergency landing as “serious” incident that could have led to an accident *India aviation regulator sets up team to study 787 problems; State-owned Air India has six Dreamliners * Jan.14, Japan transport ministry sets up team to investigate previous 787 incidents on ANA, JAL planes * Jan.13, fuel leaks on JAL plane at Tokyo’s Narita airport during maintenance; same plane leaked oil at Logan airport on Jan.8 * Jan.11, cockpit window on All Nippon 787 cracks during flight; Carrier’s another Dreamliner suffers oil leak * Jan.8, JAL 787 returns to Logan Airport after fuel leak * Earlier, UAL finds one improper battery wiring after it inspects Boeing 787 following JAL fire at Logan Airport: Dow Jones * Jan.7, U.S. officials investigating JAL flight 008 at Boston’s Logan airport after a fire in the avionics bay * JAL 787 fire caused “severe” damage to APU unit, NTSB says * BA sees no link between 787 fire and prior woes * Dec. 14, UAL 787 has problem with electrical panel, Qatar Airways says its 787 remains grounded w/faulty generator that is similar UAL’s * Dec. 5, FAA issues airworthiness directive for 787 inspections after fuel leaks on two planes; one a JAL aircraft, other an All Nippon Airways plane * Dec. 4, United 787 makes emergency landing in New Orleans when one of its six generators fails * Oct. 4, GEnx Sept. engine failure caused by dislodged air nozzle in LP turbine * Aug. 9, engine shaft damage detected on GEnx 787 engine during test * Feb. 23, BA says replacing shims improperly installed on 787 to take 10-14 days per plane * NOTE: Aug. 18, 2011, BA to provide JAL with predictive maintenance service * Jan. 18, 2011, initial delivery to All Nippon Airways delayed for 7th time until 3Q after test-jet fire; delay includes time to manufacture, install; test updated software, new electrical power panels * Nov. 9, 2010, fire aboard 787 test jet forces emergency landing in Laredo, Texas. Test flights halted * NOTE: UTX’s aerospace units make 787 electrical system * NOTE: Click here for Bloomberg Industries backlog screen

 

The Dreamliner issues are so far beyond "teething problems" its not funny. A grounding of this type is unprecedented.....at least in my lifetime. If the final fix remains to be only a more robust casing (with nothing to address the root cause of the battery fires), I think the 787 program in total could find itself in serious trouble as airlines and the flying public lose confidence in the aircraft. I still think Boeing can rescue things if a true solution can be found quickly........but yes....time is ticking.

 

Anyone suggesting the Dreamliner issues are "teething problems" is simply clueless.

[bigvalboy]

The Dreamliner issues are so far beyond "teething problems" its not funny. A grounding of this type is unprecedented.....at least in my lifetime. If the final fix remains to be only a more robust casing (with nothing to address the root cause of the battery fires), I think the 787 program in total could find itself in serious trouble as airlines and the flying public lose confidence in the aircraft. I still think Boeing can rescue things if a true solution can be found quickly........but yes....time is ticking.

 

Anyone suggesting the Dreamliner issues are "teething problems" is simply clueless.

 

I think EZE hit the real problem that Boeing has now, 'Public confidence'....that, as they say, is the "64,000 dollar question." I am not as confident about flying as other posters here who are in the airline industry, and I don't have the luxury of flying private, So for me, it will take a long time and some serious convincing before I climb aboard a "Dreamliner." While Boeing might have created this monster, the FAA certainly has it's hands dirty as well. As long as I can hop across "the pond" without the now infamous 787, I intend on doing just that.....there is clearly dirty hands here, and we will most likely 'never' know the truth, which is all any of us really want from Boeing in the first place.

[+ FreshFluff]

I have yet to read about this plane, but didn't some old jets have a second story first class lounge complete with bar and couches? Is the idea to bring that back?

[bigvalboy]

I have yet to read about this plane, but didn't some old jets have a second story first class lounge complete with bar and couches? Is the idea to bring that back?

 

Aaaahhh...those were the "good ol days"

[EZEtoGRU]

I'm sure everyone is aware that the Dreamliner has been cleared to fly once each of the airframes have received the battery fix. UA is the only US carrier that currently has 787 aircraft. They have just released the 787 re-introduction schedule which is as follows:

 

5/20 IAH-ORD until 6/9

5/21 IAH-DEN X4 Daily (Then one daily on 6/10)

5/24 IAH-LAX until 6/9

 

6/10 IAH-LHR until 7/31

6/10 DEN-NRT

 

8/1 IAH-LOS

8/2 LAX-PVG

 

Dates shown indicate start dates. Seems they will start with domestic runs before expanding to international flights on June 10. Make your bookings now!!

[bigvalboy]

I'm sure everyone is aware that the Dreamliner has been cleared to fly once each of the airframes have received the battery fix.

 

"Will it ever fly?".....The Ethiopians seem to think so.

[EZEtoGRU]

And the Dreamliner nightmare continues for Boeing. An Ethiopian Airlines 787 caught fire at Heathrow today. No casualties....but a real headache for Boeing. Its not yet clear if this fire was the result of a faulty battery or something else. Boeing shares dropped significantly during the day. Any bets on when the Dreamliner will be grounded again?

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100883050?__source=yahoo%7Cfinance%7Cheadline%7Cheadline%7Cstory&par=yahoo&doc=100883050%7CDreamliner%20Fire%20Sends%20Boe

[bigvalboy]

Looks like the "teething" problems are getting a little long in the tooth

 

And the Dreamliner nightmare continues for Boeing. An Ethiopian Airlines 787 caught fire at Heathrow today. No casualties....but a real headache for Boeing. Its not yet clear if this fire was the result of a faulty battery or something else. Boeing shares dropped significantly during the day. Any bets on when the Dreamliner will be grounded again?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100883050?__source=yahoo%7Cfinance%7Cheadline%7Cheadline%7Cstory&par=yahoo&doc=100883050%7CDreamliner%20Fire%20Sends%20Boe

 

I find it amusing that it was Ethiopian Air. Of course I am probably the only one that thought it was amusing that Boeing let the Ethiopians be the guinea pigs in the first flight with passengers. A parked plane catches on fire...uuumm, they appear not only unsafe flying, but parked as well. My money is on the battery problem, and on another grounding.