New delay for 787

Flightglobal today revealed that sources inside Boeing familiar with the 787 schedule have revealed another slip for Boeing. ZA001 was supposed to have been completed by the end of August, allowing for prep time for the first flight in October.

Now material completion has been pushed back to early October, which in turn slips the first flight back to December.

But there are also indications that the schedule could slip even further, which would push the first flight right into 2009.

And thats all before any strike action by the IAM is taken into account!

Doesn't look good guys, I doubt we will see a flying 787 this year at this rate.

www.flightglobal.com...

The IAM union has voted to strike, after a 48 hour delay. This means a high probability of no 787 in 2008 guys

www.flightglobal.com...

Boeing is being forced to halt jetliner production today (Saturday), costing the company up to $100 million per day as 27,000 machinists have voted to strike.

Negotiations between Boeing and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union (IAM) collapsed after a 48-hour contract extension yielded no new breakthrough.

Man, Boeing just gets one blow after another.

I little wonder iff will end up just like Fokker or Mcdonald Douglas.

These delays certainly arent healthy at all considering that the customers patience with boeing as a reliable provider off planes is wearing thinner and thinner.

reply to post by RichardPrice


Great News
i can imagine the Air Bus crew sitting around smiling at each other
while looking at this

reply to post by James R. Hawkwood


the AIB has found teh fuel system (and fuel) at fault with the BA trip 7 - and i know that has sent a ripple through the airlines

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by James R. Hawkwood

 

the AIB has found teh fuel system (and fuel) at fault with the BA trip 7 - and i know that has sent a ripple through the airlines

Actually the AAIB haven't found any such thing.

They have released an interim report saying that ice build up was the cause of cavitation and fuel starvation to the engines - but what caused the ice build up is currently unknown.

The fuel tested had lower than normal water content, and no notable contamination. The fuel system was in normal working order.

Several guidelines have been issued on the basis of likely reasons for the ice build up, but these have specifically been limited to the RR powered 777 - Boeing, GE and P&W are currently investigation whether the same issue could arise in their variants, and investigations are underway to determine if this will affect other aircraft types.

The crash investigation is on going.

the AIB report that has been released - interim or otherwise has alrleady got recommendations in it - that fuel additives are used in teh short term and longer term the fuel system in the trip 7 and RR engines needs to be looked at - thats what i read on teh numerous articles on flight.

[edit on 7/9/08 by Harlequin]

Originally posted by Harlequin
if you would like to read the flight articles based upon the released finsing - AND that boeing and RR are allready making mods based upon teh fuel system findings youl`ll find what you said isn`t totally true

I read the AAIB report - no need to read the article elsewhere.

The three safety recommendations made by the AAIB are as follows:

Safety Recommendation 2008-047
It is recommended that the Federal Aviation
Administration and the European Aviation Safety
Agency, in conjunction with Boeing and Rolls‑Royce,
introduce interim measures for the Boeing 777, powered
by Trent 800 engines, to reduce the risk of ice formed
from water in aviation turbine fuel causing a restriction
in the fuel feed system.

Safety Recommendation 2008-048
It is recommended that the Federal Aviation
Administration and the European Aviation Safety
Agency should take immediate action to consider the
implications of the fndings of this investigation on other
certifcated airframe / engine combinations.

Safety Recommendation 2008-049
It is recommended that the Federal Aviation
Administration and the European Aviation Safety
Agency review the current certifcation requirements to
ensure that aircraft and engine fuel systems are tolerant
to the potential build up and sudden release of ice in the
fuel feed system.

With regards to the fuel:

No evidence of contamination was found. The water solubility, which is the fuel’s ability to absorb and release water, was considered to be normal.

With regards to the fuel system:

The examination and testing found no faults in the aircraft fuel system that could have restricted the fuel flow to the engines.

www.aaib.gov.uk...


With regard to modifications by Boeing and RR:

While the nature of the interim measures has yet to become clear, the AAIB has today put forward two preliminary suggestions.

One option, it says, would be to use fuel additives designed to inhibit icing. At concentrations of 0.10-0.15% these inhibitors migrate to undissolved water in fuel, lowering its freezing point to around minus 43°C and preventing its becoming ice.

Investigators estimate that fuel uploaded to the BA aircraft before its departure from Beijing contained up to 3l of dissolved and 2l of undissolved water.

The tanks may have contained residual water from previous flights, and a maximum of 0.14l would also have been drawn in through the fuel-tank vents during the Beijing-Heathrow service. The AAIB says these levels are normal.

Although icing inhibitors are not commonly used in commercial aircraft - and none was detected in the fuel used on the BA 777 - they have routinely been used by armed forces on military types for decades.

An alternative measure, says the AAIB, would be the introduction of operational changes to reduce the risk of ice formation during critical stages of flight.

"Such changes could be implemented quickly but must not compromise the safe operation of the aircraft," it adds.

www.flightglobal.com...

The AAIB has not placed blame on either the fuel system nor the fuel, as you allude to - both were well within certificated parameters, and the AAIB found fault with neither.

I disagree with the slant you're giving to the report and your replies to Harlequin

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by James R. Hawkwood

 

the AIB has found teh fuel system (and fuel) at fault with the BA trip 7 - and i know that has sent a ripple through the airlines

Actually the AAIB haven't found any such thing.

They have released an interim report saying that ice build up was the cause of cavitation and fuel starvation to the engines - but what caused the ice build up is currently unknown.
The crash investigation is on going.

Actually I would say they have since I would take the use of "fault" by Harlequin in this context as responsibility for failure

Ice build up in the fuel system from water present in the fuel (although the water content was below normally levels). And could be prevented from by Fuel System Icing Inhibitor, a fuel additive. (although not commonly used in large public transport aircraft, but is approved for use on the Boeing 777) .

Had a read of the report, so from the report

Changes to the fuel system design could make the system more tolerant, but would take time to implement and would certainly not be available within the near term. Therefore, to reduce the risk of recurrence interim measures need to be adopted until such designs changes to the fuel system are available.

Further testing will be carried out to establish more clearly how ice forms within the fuel system and how it might cause the restricted fuel flows seen on this flight.

Originally posted by RichardPrice
The fuel tested had lower than normal water content, and no notable contamination. The fuel system was in normal working order.

Several guidelines have been issued on the basis of likely reasons for the ice build up, but these have specifically been limited to the RR powered 777 - Boeing, GE and P&W are currently investigation whether the same issue could arise in their variants, and investigations are underway to determine if this will affect other aircraft types.

The crash investigation is on going.

specifically been limited to the RR powered 777 because, from the report

However, it should be recognised that throughout the investigation all of the testing and research into the root cause of this accident has been conducted on the Boeing 777/Trent 800 aircraft engine combination

So the report recommends FAA and EASA should take immediate action to consider the implications for other certificated airframe/engine combinations.

Originally posted by RichardPrice
The AAIB has not placed blame on either the fuel system nor the fuel, as you allude to - both were well within certificated parameters, and the AAIB found fault with neither.

The report recommends the certification requirements be reviewed with regard to aircraft and engine fuel systems.

So they may not yet of found a defect with the fuel system or fuel, they have still concluded they were the likely cause of the crash.