Boeing's Blight Bottoms With FAA

The FAA has been supportive of the 787, and is left with no choice but to ground the aircraft as it tries to sort out what the final answer is for the aircraft.  At this stage of, "no one’s knows the answer", but many have a good idea what may be involved with a failed system, concept or design.  This has entered the insanity stage of any investigation.  Definition of "insanity" goes by the rule of thumb, “You do the same thing over, and over again, expecting a different result," becomes a form of insanity in its purist form.     

Now we have the FAA shutdown of the 787. The flow chart of problem solving has just started.

Glossary of terms used in the investigation.

• Risk
• Inconsistent
• Anomaly
• Retired
• Assumption
• Pass/Fail
• Theory
• Tests
• Positive (is a negative result and something must change)
• Negative (is a positive result and Boeing does nothing)
• Lithium-Ion  
• And so forth.....

Back To Basics:

1. The Boeing Company, has a Theory that you could build an all-electric airplane and dispense of substantial weight, through the elimination of hydraulics systems that make a plane fly heavier.

 2. It has a second theory of building an all plastic airplane eliminating additional weight because plastic is lighter, stronger and more corrosion resistant than aluminum and other metals found in older aircraft.

3. It has a third theory of wrapping all its systems up into a core technology which runs the aircraft through a central process corridor and manages its systems without unnecessary duplication or wasted weight and space.  The savings on weight makes way for necessary duplication of systems. These three theories alone save the aircraft immense weight and improves fuel burn and saves lots of money to operate the aircraft over its competitors.

In the theory stage, each layer of theory is separated with assumptions that gives life support to that theory during its gestation period. Each assumption has legs until tests are complete. Then all assumptions are pulled completely out of the structure, and replaced by real live tests affirming that everything is Okay.  Live test are done over, and over again, until the Company and Governing Bodies are convinced the 787 is air-worthy. Then the Governing Body issues an airworthiness certificate to fly.

Now, the Governing Body is going back on the same ground worked-up in the test phase prior its airworthiness certification, because batteries exploded, generators stopped and electrical panels failed!  The 787 will sit until there is answer.

It is good to remember that the Boeing tests models did not exhibit a propensity of smoking, burning and exploding batteries.  It is important to note it had a fire in an electric control panel on a test 787, during the last stages of test that caused a six month delay until a redesign of that panel.  Even with all the testing changing and adjusting, Boeing had an extra three years to get it right. Those test aircraft did not have electrical failures, and were pushed to the extreme in speed, height and slowness.  They turned, dived and shut off engines.  Boeing overloaded systems and then overloaded systems again, but no failures like the airlines have just now experience, all at once. Even though they were flying standard milk runs, and not using the aircraft under extreme flight conditions.  The faulting aircraft are new and have not flown 4,700 hours like the test copies. So its not a duration problem, its an upfront problem for new production aircraft.  The FAA doesn't have answer neither does Boeing. So the Airplane referee has blown its whistle and called a time out for Boeing.  This is not "group hug time, for team building", it is group therapy time, until the insanity stops.

Here is a second list called the "Usual Suspects".

• Are there some remaining assumptions not retired, that should not be still alive supporting supporting theory?
• Are there changes in electrical components from manufacturers not accounted for?
• Is there a flaw not considered by anybody that has not had its day in court?
• Are Manufacturers inconsistent with key components?
• What is the fly in the Theory ointment?

The above are are brief points to look at for a big problem! 

The below are,

FAA Advantages:

• However, dare I mention the investigation teams have complete air-crafts to inspect?
• They are not wasting time to reconstruct.
• They know what to look at from day one; the Lithium-Ion Battery and its complementing electrical systems.

Boeing has a plethora of data to examine systems, or better stated: people, places or things, in the Noun category.

The FAA has a multitude of to-do in the Verb category, burning, smoking and failing.

The Boeing's Board of Directors are tasked with Adverbs, efficiently, effectively and by all means quickly.

 The report writers are assigned Adjectives from the FAA findings.  Scorched, Swollen, and Seared.

This is what Boeing is up against where words become just as effective as an actual disaster when an actual disaster has just happened and now the words. Boeing is having another near miss on the same journey.  The FAA who is an objective organization is now subjecting Boeing to having its feet held to the fire, until a conclusive result is obtained.  It is good to have this shut down.  It is good that they know where to look, and it further good, all parties are extremely motivated to make it a totally safe airplane. 

Money movers who make their money, moving money from stock to stock are jumping out of Boeing's extra large aircraft windows.  People who are sane and wise hold the line, because this story is a long way from finishing.  They are not doing those same thing over and over again expecting a different result.  Boeing and the FAA will not look at the Same Stuff Different Day either.  They will have to look beyond that, to purrfect the 787.

More Fire And Smoke Strikes From ANA's 787(Latest News)

This is a quick Link to the lastest (1-15-13) Lithion-Ion Fire.  I will weigh in later once more information is available.  ANA has grounded its 787 fleet until cause is known.   This is not good news for the program.

Another Part...Of Boeing Comes Home and Other Bits and Pieces (((Updated)))

Updated information Link below related to this article

Boeing Breaks Ground On 777X Wing Factory

Boeing brings home the Horizontal stabilizer for the 787-9.  Early on in the Boeing program the theme was to out and out have everyone else build the assembly parts of this highly complex aircraft.  Now that fifty 787's are on revenue flights what has changed with Boeing's "Delusions of Grandeur" and having psychotic episodes of risks are for suckers, and designs fall into "Do What I Say, Don't Do What I Do".  Now the  Horizontal stabilizer  for the dash 9 moves to Salt Lake City and back into Boeing's fold as another lost sheep returns home.

Outsourcing frames is not always such a good idea when you are a World Leading Aircraft Manufacturer. The contract goes to those who earn its chops such, as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Alenia Aeronautica could not cut it early on. 

The foreign foot print in Charleston was washed away in some regretful Boeing Storm years back.  Boeing has changed tack in the Americas Cup Race of airplane building.

The 787 Footprint gradually changes for the Horizontal Stabilizer

After examination of this chart, I came to the conclusion that Boeing may reel in a few sources that are under preforming partners as it surges forward with the -10 as well.  They are many prime examples of excellent partners in this venture.  It will always remain a World Aircraft.  

Boeing has to remain on top of those items, when it loses control,  even to the extent of bringing it home with a shorter leash. Like any major corporation it unloads under-performing divisions and builds new branches that will outperform the former divisions. 

This is an on-going process for any successful mega company, and true even down to the mom and pop affairs. As in, "Do we close that other restaurant across town and open up a new one next to interstate".  Boeing is now gleaning through the assets, like Mom and Pop did when it closes down one and builds another. Boeing has turned the corner on the 787 project.

Because it has to at this time, if wants to go through with a successful program.  The Captain says, "cut all boat anchors and full steam ahead". Boeing will continue to trim sails or throw out the spinnaker.  I am a more cautious sailor.  I don't like sailing close into the rocks and risk floundering. Boeing did that early on and came out with a few scrapped hulls. Fortunately nothing sank.  Like in the America's cup the Kiwi's came out with a superior hull and beat the Americans.  You don't hear much about that race anymore, since the down-under boys started beating everybody as well. America owned that race for decades.  Boeing is now getting back into its race. Now is time to move metaphorically on.

More Bits and Pieces:

That song long ago from The Dionne Warwick mentioning San Jose has this snippet... 

In flight: ANA’s Boeing 787 from San Jose [PHOTOS]

I want to leave you all with these cheery thoughts of happy landings while  going to and from Japan and San Jose.  I can't wait for San Diego happy landings and post the 80's song "Sailing Away".
-----------------------------------------------------------
My apologies to the City of San Diego and Lindbergh Field for not doing this earlier, I Lived in San Diego in the early 80's and this song was played all the time.  It is so appropriate for JAL's new service coming to San Diego at this time.  Sit back and enjoy the flight with this song. By Christopher Cross "Sailing Away"

cc: memories anybody?

777X Wing Factory

Update: As Boeing builds plastic Wings at the Everett facility, near Paine field. Even though this is not part of the 787 project, it becomes a significant anchor for the 777X project for its composite wings as it will be made at the new 1.3 million sq ft center complex in Everett, which it just has broken ground this September 16, 2014. Below is the full detail for this update.

For your convenience the complete story linked below:

Boeing Breaks Ground On 777X Wing Factory

Part III:... Is IT?:Core-Rectal(ional) Examination

The FAA, not to be confused with the Future Farmers Of America (FFA), is sending its most powerful examination tools towards the 787 aircraft and program. Boeing is going to wince with discomfort as the scopes, clamps, and magnifiers tries to recreate what went wrong, with the so called (by the FAA and its own standards) "A Safe Airplane", otherwise known as the 787.  Upfront, I want to remind all that I am a big fan of the 787 and its future follow-on siblings. I too, believe it is a miraculous aircraft, but I don't drink the Kool-Aid from Boeing, to make my day.

The NSTB Is Reaching Into Places with a Bright Light, where people shouldn't have to reach into, at this JAL's 787 young age.

The probe has just begun, even as bad as this may sound for Boeing, it’s part of the maturation process of validating something that is already off-the-scale of complexity, and now the FAA is reviewing what has not been done before, as the "World's Largest Aviation Giant, Boeing", winches in silence(I had to write that for Mr. Leahy :)). Even though the A-380 was off-the-scale as in Ginormous, it has had its day in aviation court with a blown (up and out) engine, cracked wings and other design issues. The most important thing is that, it made it through with the safe efforts of pilots, and design features playing up against possible catastrophic disasters.  

This is where the Boeing 787 now finds itself.  Treat the JAL 787 fire issue with urgency, as if it had actually crashed, when approaching these all the new and recent problems. So much study and rethinking has already gone into this model, that it is more than important to finish the journey. The "Journey" continues today, in the capacity of going through an examine, as  "Proof of Real World Operations" with the FAA. This is not a test sequence, it is the reality of what Boeing is experiencing with its customers during continuous operations.  Real mechanics, flight attendants and pilots, who ply the airline skies without engineering degrees, or computer simulations by their sides, discover abruptly when something goes sideways.  It's hard to build  computer models that will isolate problems in reality, the engineers only can deal in theory and give an optimal account of what should or could happen.  However, in the supplier and production world that the 787 now exists in, the 787 is no longer a child of an absolute controlled environment, when being assembled, and stuffed with parts from all over the world.  The FAA will compare theory with reality and try to find necessary steps to close that gap, so Boeing will have a sound supply chain and assembly process for all components going into the 787.

The FAA will hopefully feed off the following NTSB on three important talking points.

1. What went wrong in all cases?

2. What Went Right in all cases?

3. Or was it luck?

Nobody has been harmed at this point. All the incidences have been recoverable or occurred off-flight. That is a testament to its design and timing luck.  The timing luck comes from engine parts flying out before initial take-off during tests, before its scheduled delivery to Air India. Fire occurring long after plane has landed and passengers are gone from the JAL 787. Passengers have been spared any anxious moments as the aircraft courses its way to a safe haven when suffering another embarrassment, or a calamity and rests out of view from paying passengers.

So far, the design points recover the aircraft while in-flight when something bad happens.  A bad electrical control panel(United), or generator(United and Qatar), have back-ups installed (let us not forget the failed brake and non-electrical issues of a cracked cockpit window). Design backs-up the critical nature and dependency of electrical motors for flight surfaces, and also its electronic dependency for keeping the aircraft flying.  Add to that, the system tasks for in-cabin atmosphere and other fundamental life support systems, which rely on electrical power for those passengers on-board. Electricity then is the core component for flying and keeping its passenger going, during 41,000 feet high excursions.  A passenger shouldn't worry.  Passengers already rely on a bleed-air by-pass system on pre-787 passenger aircraft, where that feature is does not even into view of their (passengers)conscience state when flying on that type of system. But over time (the last 60 years) and millions of miles it does essentially does the same thing for the aircraft during its flight as the 787 aircraft does, where this older system imposes a greater fuel penalty during flight. In essence, Bleed-Air/By-Pass indirectly powers everything you need when flying. But with engines out, the plane is on limited power, allowing for a limited amount of time for control to glide it down.

The 787 has a longer flight control time with engines out, on its back-up power systems  with the higher price of greater reliance on electricity to fly the airplane. So if electricity fails with engines going, the flying equation becomes complicated.  But, a reserve PTO  would/could step in and assist aircraft electrical functions through back-up generators, control panels and systems.  This an important point to know when flying during ETOPs routes.

The FAA will seek a broader scope 787 examination and leave no stone unturned. Then they will narrow it down to route causes for Boeing to respond in final analysis. They will look at each process and system that goes into the airplane. They will examine Boeing's ISO procedures and Quality Management controls, tying them back to incidences that have already occurred   FAA will take the problem and expand it out to the source creators (suppliers) and then bring it back to installation on the aircraft. Then compare it with a sound and in service  787.
Boeing will chase the FAA around before both go to the principals office.  Many problems will solved and fixed before the final report from FAA. Boeing will build a big rubber stamp, for the final report that has lettering on it,  indicating "We Concur".  A smaller stamp saying "All issues addressed by FAA are now in compliance of the FAA Findings and Recommendations." I know this to be true, because many a time during my own reviews as an Internal Auditor, it was difficult for management to come to grasps with Findings or even the Recommendations, because of their denial for failure found within the program. A Manager has the responsibility for those things under their supervision.   This will be tough days for some careers.  The "right thing to do" is now upon Boeing, and changes will be made.

This is a vast generalization of the process, but everyone needs an understanding of the enormity of this undertaking with Boeing, and the time it will take to finish the FAA review project. The time period of study starts in 2003, and continues through to 2012. Many non-essential areas, already solid, will not receive a detail review, but will have a good cursory review non-the-less.  Affected critical systems, and prior testing documentations relating to those systems will occur in extreme detail. Suppliers relating to affected systems will have to bear the brunt of the attention from the FAA  during its conducting of reviews.

Here Are More bullet points shot from my imaginary To-Do FAA Cannon:

• Incorporate NTSB Findings and Recommendations Into  General FAA Examinations
• Core Technology Investigations on electrical systems
• Electric systems, software, firmware Investigations
• Work processes leaning towards  core technology examinations from supplier and assembly by Boeing.
• Conduct A Source supplier examination, and documentation reviewing areas  deemed critical.
• Test Boeing Assumptions related to critical areas as valid reliance on systems. In other-words does Boeing accept on face value and give trust towards its supplied parts from out of company sources without further validation tests?

The Hanging Chad Makes A Comeback With The FAA

What the FAA has tasked itself to do is look under every part, every shelf and every system to determine if any related functions/functionality contributes towards an established unsafe conditions that are found in recent 787 aircraft, or are there any other unseen airworthiness problems, not before determined or addressed.  They must check system assumptions to see if they are valid under the conditions that caused the JAL fire. They must go farther than Boeing did, to find out what happened, and correct it with Boeing's help in the problem solving tasks. While this going on, Boeing needs to keep flying safe with no problems.  The FAA Electron Microscope has wheeled itself into position, and will be looking at Boeing's DNA.

This brings us to the the 60 Billion dollar question:

• Will the FAA findings lead to a major redesign of Boeing's dependency for an all electric system?
• Or will it find minor tweaks that assures the system is fundamentally safe, and can be trusted if those following steps or changes are made?

I suspect the answer is found in the second option, additional safe guards built-in to the aircraft, and Quality Management steps installed to prevent any occurrence of electrical failures .  Had the systems and precautions prevented a failure of the Lithium Ion battery and fire in the first place, then Boeing wouldn't be faced with a very personal and private examination of its 787. 

In A Long While, FAA's, Mr Michael Huerta,Will Answer One Of Those Two Questions! 

Part II: Is It Safe? The 787 Is Receiving An Endoscope From The FAA

A No Picture Blog This Time:


While the NTSB is going through charred remains of an Japan Airlines 787 electrical control systems, and its Lithium Ion Batteries in an effort to summarize, "what just happened here!" The FAA is going to conduct a comprehensive examination, and further testing of suspect parts, programs and processes found on the 787. The press would like to cry out in A# The Chicken Little Symphony in B-Flat. The first symphony of "So Many Faults In So Little Time", was received well in news outlets around the World.

However, back to the FAA.  Boeing is breathing a sigh collective relief because, Qatar's chief did not dog pile on the events.  The government expressed confidence in these 787's, as a safe airplanes.  Boeing is trying to keep quiet as much as possible and not say something stupid, like "it wasn't me"!  When all the Lithium Ions settle, I expect something beneficial for Boeing, Airlines, and the Flying public, will come out well from this episodic turn of events.  Boeing, please embrace the FAA like a proud father has for his son when he takes a drug test to play sports. Show off everything you have done to make sure nothing bad would happen. Find out what happened, kick the guy that said outsourcing is the only way to fly.  Boeing, you have a great airplane, but you don't own it.  Your subcontractors own it.  Too bad, had you owned more of it, less of that would have happened.  Do you really know what you are snapping into place each time a 787 is assembled, or are you relying on your family of contractors, to do it right as you had hoped?  That's what the FAA will find out, is how well did the world do, doing its job building the parts for your airplane.  Now you own it, where the  subcontractor's Mea culpa is a weak fall back point for a very proud company.

Take  a look at what's in play:  From the Kansas City Star

If it made the Star, then its already around the world more than twice.

"The Federal Aviation Administration is conducting a comprehensive review of the design, manufacture and assembly of the Boeing 787, but government officials declared the plane safe despite recent incidents, including a fire and a fuel leak earlier this week.

Michael Huerta, the FAA administrator, said at a news conference Friday that there is nothing in the data the agency has seen to suggest the plane isn’t safe, but the agency wants to figure out why the safety-related incidents are occurring."

Boeing just received the FAA "Big Duh".  Now they want to know whats going on with the 787.  I say great, because then Boeing will help out in a big way, with... "what's up with that", and FAA should find out how outsourcing so much was possible, in the movie, "A Bridge Too Far".

If I had answers I would certainly offer it as it would immensely increase the blog following.  It's my desire to come up with a plausible outcome for the 787.  So here comes my obligatory talking points on what the FAA will find and will recommend without knowing what is going on.  Top ten Findings  and recommendations as follows:

Findings:

• The company responsible for faulty systems, did not address any issues with Boeing during development
• Boeing installed and tested systems to the best of its ability without having an over-all conceptual or origination knowledge at the level of the supplier systems when testing. Even though contractor worked along side with Boeing engineers, Boeing was not intimate with the functioning of each systems installed.
• Boeing relied on the expertise of the contractor rather than assessing all designs with an internal 3rd party review. 
• Faulty parts, systems and technology is passing through to assembly. ie (bad circuit boards)
• Boeing's electrical systems in theory are safe, but in practice lack quality controls required for its sophistication.

Being an internal auditor in my prior life, these are some of the nose bleed statements that the FAA may make after its comprehensive review. I will go on with some mock recommendations which are forth coming from the Pretend FAA.

Possible Recommendations:

It is recommended,

• Boeing should have assurance testing prior to installation of all foreign parts coming into its system.
• Boeing must make additional safety containment from fires in battery area(s)
• All incidence reports resulting in faulty parts, installation or applications on new aircraft in first year of service, must have a six month assurance testing validating the replacement parts, systems and installations replaced as a result of a fault.
• Supply Chain Components must have validation and authentication from supplier of its compliant functions. In other words, the supplier proves it meets all standards with comprehensive testing before shipping.(Bad Circuit Boards were shipped)
• Automatic fuel-line cutoff when a disconnect is detected

Even though this a is make-believe audit summary report, it shows what the FAA may do ad- nauseum. Even though Boeing is already doing more, however, the question still remains how did all these faults happen in the last three months?  The FAA is that extra set of eyes with a keen interest in the aircraft. They flew with it, accompanied its development, and is probably the worlds second most authority on the 787. So they need answers, and so does Boeing!  They will team-up and make all doubters go away at the end of the day.  All the press wants to do is sell copy, and Boeing is helping them do that.

I am hoping its a few sloppy items creeping through the new production and technology systems that need cleaning up. Even small items leave a big mark on a big airplane and they shouldn't be over-looked. 

Part I:Is It Teething Woes? (Updated (2) with Boeing Response)

Boeing and its customers are undergoing what Boeing has classified as "Teething Woes" or are these problems really "Root Canal" surgeries?  The 4,700 plus hours of test flights did not reveal repeated problems like the customer aircraft are now experiencing.

Remember publicized development curses, in general as follows:

Test Stage Short List.

• Fastener Issues, because lacking supply chain quantities to assemble test aircraft.
• Fastener Installation Issue of not properly installing correctly or using correct fastener in Charleston
• Italy had incorrect tail area required extreme shimming remedy.
• De-lamination issues and corrective shimming procedures
• Wing Box Area Fixes 
• Fire in the Electrical (G-spot) on late test flight. (Redesign, six month delay) 

G-spot defined as,  Electrical, Generator, and Battery systems

Customer Stage:

• ANA and Japan Airline Engine Issues and other squawks
• United Airlines Electrical Area G-spot(Generator) issues
• Air India multiple squawks with several operational stand-downs
• Air India, Parts-Departing From Engine Charleston Airport/grass fire 
• Qatar G-spot (generator) issue 
• Japan Airlines Fire in G-spot (battery) operational shut down on aircraft
• Japan Airline Fuel leakage

Now that about 50 aircraft are delivered; suppliers, Boeing and assembly are into a routine of making the 787. No longer are six months used to push an aircraft out the door. The due diligence cannot convert to negligence.  However these issues, great and small are fixable, and have not yet caused a call-back to the drawing board in a whole-scale level. Engineering changes yes, but no concept changes, that would  be similar to  a major redesign and cause the customer fleet a redo as in the pre-delivery days.  Currently there are about 20 aircraft in change incorporation that are in the process of redo.  These are taking up to an additional two years.  Boeing would be extremely smart to come clean on its status of its early issues. They remain confident of the aircraft.  It is still a brilliant Idea, but I also wonder how many engineers are running down Boeing's hallways with there hair on fire, while "Baghdad Bob" explains, "we are slaughtering the competition in airplane wars." Are these really typical start-up squawks for an A-typical airplane?

Increased complexity increases the squawks, Airbus take note. These are just A-typical squawks for an A-typical airplane going through teething pains that are not routine issues for a new airplane.  An all electric architecture is not typical.  The good news is as follows.  Boeing overbuilt new systems never before employed.  They took the NASA route of multiples for everything until further notice. A test Airplane catches fire in electronics bay during flight over the Rocky Mountains, Boeing just landed later in Texas and found out what went wrong. Safety, redundancy and planning has kept this aircraft flying through the root-canals in its jaw bone.

What is amazing is the safety measures installed on this aircraft.  Bugs are still hitting the wind screen, yet it keeps its passengers safe.  The Dreamliner may be known as the airplane with an Indomitable Spirit.  Forging safely ahead with its all new advances, despite the set-backs.

My First Video Link

Boeing top engineer says he's confident 787 is safe

Written by  Media Sources

• Wednesday, 09 January 2013 17:34

(Reuters) - Boeing Co rolled out the Dreamliner's chief engineer to try to quell concerns about the new jet following three mishaps in as many days, including an electrical fire that caused severe damage to a plane.

At a news conference on Wednesday, the engineer, Mike Sinnett, defended the 787, the world's first plastic plane, and said its problem rates are at about the same level as Boeing's successful 777 jet.

Relatively few technical problems prevent 787s from leaving a gate within 15 minutes of scheduled departure time, he said. "We're in the high 90 percents," he said. "We're right where the 777 program was" at this stage.

The prevalence of more significant issues, such as a battery fire, is in the same order of magnitude as previous programs, he added. "There's no metrics that are screaming at me that we've got a problem."

Sinnett explained in detail how the lithium ion battery system that burned on Monday was designed by his team to be safe and prevent smoke getting into the cabin in the event of a fire during a flight. "I am 100 percent convinced that the airplane is safe to fly," he said.

Asked why smoke entered the cabin on Monday, Sinnett said the plane lacked cabin pressure to expel smoke because it was on the ground. In that scenario, "We expect that there would be sufficient time to evacuate the plane safely," Sinnett said.

The battery fire, on a 787 jet operated by Japan Airlines, occurred in Boston on Monday while the empty plane was parked at a gate after passengers had deplaned. That was followed by a fuel leak on another JAL 787 on Tuesday, and by brake problems on an All Nippon Airways 787 that forced the airline to cancel the flight on Wednesday.

These mishaps represent the most serious test of confidence in the Dreamliner since it began flying customers just over a year ago, following more than three years of delivery delays.

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are looking into what caused the fire, which came just weeks after Boeing endured a string of other electrical problems that briefly grounded three of the planes. The new jet also has suffered an engine failure and fuel leaks in the 14 months it has been in service.

Sinnett said the electrical faults that occurred in rapid succession in December were traced to a single lot of circuit boards manufactured at one time. He didn't name the supplier.

Analysts said they did not think regulators would ground the 49 Dreamliner jets currently in service due to this week's incidents, but some expected days or weeks to pass before firm details about the mishaps emerge - making it difficult to assess the severity of the problem, and the cost to fix them.

"It's clear through the conversation (from Sinnett) that it appeared to be manufacturing as opposed to design issues," said Jason Gursky, an analyst at Citigroup in San Francisco. "The fact that we've seen a multitude of small issues crop up and are not seeing the same issue time and time again would support that view."

Further detail from regulators are likely to take more time. In July, regulators took three days to decide whether to launch an investigation of a General Electric engine that failed on a 787, and another week passed before they provided details.

"We'd expect a similar timeline here," said Deutsche Bank analysts Myles Walton and Amit Mehrotra, in a note to clients Wednesday.

Boeing declined to discuss any aspect of the investigation into the battery fire. Analysts said the company still faces an image problem over the build quality of its marquee plane.

"There's no doubt in my mind that on the engineering side they are doing the right thing as far as dealing with these issues," said John Goglia, a former National Transportation Safety Board member and mechanic.

"They need to really reach out strongly with information to the press corps to make sure they understand exactly what happened and exactly what they are doing about it."

Boeing shares closed up 3.5 percent Wednesday, after losing more than 5 percent earlier this week.

"TEETHING PROBLEMS"

Of this week's incidents, the battery fire is of most concern. Lithium-ion batteries are heavily scrutinized by those who use them - not just airlines, but increasingly automakers as well.

"We cool our batteries. We put them through tests like you wouldn't believe," General Motors Chief Executive Dan Akerson said during a roundtable event Wednesday.

Shares of Japan's GS Yuasa Corp, which makes batteries for the 787, fell sharply for a second day on Wednesday.

Before Wednesday, Boeing had said little about the problems, though some of its most critical customers, like the CEO of Qatar Airways, have come to its defense.

Qatar Airways, the largest customer of the Dreamliner in the Middle East with an order for up to 60 of the aircraft, currently has five 787 jets. CEO Akbar al-Baker said the airline had no other issues since noting an electrical problem on one of its jets in December.

"Of course there will be teething problems from time to time, but this is foreseen with any new aircraft program," Al-Baker told reporters at an event in Doha on Wednesday.

Baker said he had no plans at the moment to cancel any plane orders with Boeing. "When we have to start grounding planes, then it becomes an issue and then they (Boeing) have to get their check book out," he said.

(Reporting by Alwyn Scott in New York, Tim Hepher in Paris and Karen Jacobs in Atlanta; Additional reporting by Ben Klayman and Deepa Seetharaman in Detroit and Deborah Charles in Washington, D.C.; Writing by Alwyn Scott and Ben Berkowitz; Editing by Leslie Adler, Bernard Orr)

Read more http://news.yahoo.com/boeing-say

Randy's Journal (Randy Tinseth, VP Boeing)

 http://boeingblogs.com/randy/

Update on 787 event in Boston

The 787 has been in the headlines quite a bit this week, and I wanted to take this opportunity to address the incidents at Boston Logan Airport.

First, today’s issue with one of Japan Airlines’ 787s (a different airplane than the one involved in Monday’s incident) was resolved after a four hour delay and the airplane took off for Tokyo.

As for Monday’s incident involving another JAL 787, we’ve been working closely with the airline, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and other government agencies. JAL tells us that after the airplane landed and all passengers had disembarked, smoke was detected. The smoke was later traced to the battery used to start the auxiliary power unit.

We can’t talk about any specific details while the investigation is ongoing. But I can tell you that nothing we’ve seen in this case indicates a relationship to any previous 787 power system events, which involved power panel faults elsewhere in the aft electrical equipment bay. We’ve shared the information about those prior events with the NTSB and they’re aware of the details. Since we want to deal in facts rather than speculation, we’re giving our technical teams time to look over everything. Our full statement is here.

In the meantime, 787s continue to fly all over the world. The airplanes are in service with eight customers— having logged more than 18,000 flight cycles and flown more than 50,000 hours. We have complete confidence in the 787 and vow to take care of any issues our customers are experiencing— day or night.

2013 Outlook For Airplane Framers (Must Read)

This is a share note for readers. Take a look at Aviation Week's Outlook Article for 2013

As brief as my notation is, this is a good background article to take forward in 2013.

Article #2

Its Not An Airplane Its Not A Blimp

Enjoy.

2013 Will Prove Out A Boeing Strategic Decision Making Plan

Dark Horse Rising For 2013, The Boeing 787

The Year 2013, has just started.  It is my goal to review 2012 and glean what tidbits of information out from that year, and determine its strategic value for 2013.  This may be a difficult task.  I am not looking at trends, slopes, and markets. I am looking at the underlying Strategic sense from Boeing, for determining what the Company hopes to accomplish during 2013.

First up to bat: is how Boeing intends to play Frogger with Airbus? A game where the frog jumps onto lily pads over other frogs to get to the other side of the pond.  Landing on the next Lilly pad is tantamount of coming out with a new aircraft that supersedes the other Aircraft framer (Airbus) as a show stopper.  This game started many years ago with the Airbus A-320/B-737 match and is still raging onward today with engine war strategy.  The Airbus company went with super sizing everything like MacDonald's did, with its hamburger. Airbus is asking its customers, "Do you want  (flying) with that", on all orders?  This is where the tongue meets the cheek, and the rubber meets the flight line. As Ginormous the A-380 is, its for people needing people, when size matters.

Here are Boeing's Strategic Talking Points For 2013:

• Keep Airbus Busy At The Copy Shop
• Advance Product In A Timely Manner Soon After Airbus Commits To Its Designs
• Lead From The Front, But Shoot From The Back

Below is a near-do-well authored, best selling 3 chapter Book, about Boeing Strategic goals: Critics are raving about its simplistic strategic genius. Please read all chapters if you have a minute.

Chapter I: (The Year 2013 Will Prove Boeing's Strategic Decision Making)

Keep Airbus At The Copy Shop

Strategic goal number one:

An Airbus panel section is hoisted into its Boeing-like copy shop. First Airbus said (paraphrased), " the 787 is not going to work, The A-380 is the answer". Two years later in a staff meeting, a High-up staffer for Airbus, was laser pointing his way through a meeting showing how Airbus has to catch-up with plastic airplanes. "Panels are the answer, if we do it in barrels, we would be just copying Boeing." So panels it is! Or in this case above, kinda a half barrel :<)   Now what we have, since 2005, is a Airbus Copy shop making a wider (6"s), and Bigger Airplane over the 787, just like Boeing's stuff (not really because Boeing has barrels and so much more than Airbus). Everybody complained (the copy paste press), about the 7-late-7, but is Airbus able to copy the Boeing? No in many areas, and yes in one fundamental area, a plastic hull. Airbus has spent an immense amount of time cherry picking Boeing subcontractors and industries, grabbing anything non proprietary it can from Boeing's play book. That all goes to the copy shop for a large F€€.

However, Airbus has shortened the distance when following Boeing's path, by not adding all all electric architecture, and skipping to a standard bleed-air, by-pass system. Used to power its hydraulic and other non Boeing compliant systems, but its still a plastic panel wagon! Airbus probably has unpublished issues at this time, since it has not had a test flight, they remain silent on the A-350-late and -9 (closing time is at 5:00 pm and its late, about 3:50 pm). When test flying does occur, I hope the press gives Airbus the same due diligence for every squawk. Just like they did for Boeing during its experiences, and journey to first delivery.  The Boeing all electric has reduced weight factors built into the system, since it lacks bulky hydraulic fluid, and lines as found on the Airbus.    

Strategic Goal For 2013 is to Keep Airbus Copying. It ties up resources for Airbus, and keeps it chasing Oz-like rainbows and Pooka's with its own second tier all new plastic airplane. Most flying customers wouldn't notice the all electric vs the hydraulic models, but bean counters, maintenance crews and airline bottom-lines will notice. 

Chapter II:  for: (The Year 2013 Will Prove Boeing's Strategic Decision Making)

Advance Product In A Timely Manner Soon...

After Airbus Commits To Its Designs

Strategic Goal Number Two:  777X and 787-10X

I am a big 787 fan (biggest understatement ever)! That being said, it is paramount that Boeing launches the 777X at the right time.  If 2013 finds a spot to make the most out  its customers, and its technological configuration, then 2013 is the time to leap frog the A-350 in the game of  Airplane "Frogger".  Airbus will be locked and loaded during 2013 for its A-350 line.  A 777X could set Airbus back a bunch, if Boeing can trump the A-1000 and A-900 in a three card game of 777X(-8,-9) and 787X-10. 

Airplane Frogger is Now In Play

Take time to compare the numbers as seen on the internet. You will surmise, dimensions, quantities and weights are not far apart for a 17 year old airplane compared to an Airplane that has yet to fly.  Boeing will not just go match up numbers straight across, it will find 787 commonalities, enhance structural integrity and space for the 777X.  Add new engines and weight saving technologies and this aircraft without using Airbus-like Carbon panels. It will meet and exceed the A-350's all-carbon-bird, with the 777X using light weight aluminum,  Carbon wing box and wings or flight surfaces, and it should match match or exceed, the A-350.  This is what the market wants to see before it goes on some Ginormous time payment plan when buying A-350's or 777X planes.

Giraffes are surmising when the Sun is rising

(If its blurry on your screen, I apologize. Double click image and use viewing magnifier to assist reading numbers in the comparison.  otherwise view on your screen in at 200 %.)

              The Old 777 (delta X ) is Taking on the:                  The New A-350           

The Old 777 (delta X ) is Taking on the:                                                                      New A-350           

Chapter III:   (The Year 2013 Will Prove Boeing's Strategic Decision Making) 

Lead From The Front But Shoot From The Back

Strategic Goal number 3: 777X, 787-10X and 787-9

But the 777X could be that "shot taken from behind", in Boeing's 2013 strategic plan.  The 787-10X is  the "lead from the front", item during 2013!

First the 787-9 will relax the naysayers into a pleasant ride on the 787-9

The 787-9 is just an execution of an already solid plan. Having aged 9 years with a refined configuration by sitting on the electronic chalk board. 2013 is the nine's year.  This is already in motion and has legs. Any 787 Concept Risks are retired and momentum is now in play. The 787 has already left the station while the Airbus A-350 has not yet flown. All the A-350 risks are in the flight bag waiting for take off.

Hence, the 777X is very important in 2013, as part of its shoot from behind strategic plan. Though the 787-9 and -10 will lead the way during the year with photographers, journalist and executives, who are more than ready to move onto the 787-9; with that attention garnered by the press and Airbus, Boeing holds the real target in view,supremacy, and out from the the rear, the 777-X takes its shot on the competition.   2013 promises to be an exciting year, similar to the test flight years for the 787 2009-2010 and the first deliveries in 2011. 2013 has a few surprises in it, which will keep the presses rolling. Boeing's strategery is unfolding at the wing tips.

Glossary score card:

Ginormous (Merriam- Webster says a real word from WWII British Military description of Big weapons, later used by Will Farrrel on (SNL))

Glean: After dinner you sweep up the crumbs to see what people ate from the field.

Paramount (not a picture studio, but more like a VIP who is more than important)

Pooka (No fairy is more feared in Ireland than the pooka. This may be because it is always out and about after nightfall, creating harm and mischief, and because it can assume a variety of terrifying forms.)

Tantamount (a well stacked supposition in an ill fitting sentence structure)

Surmise  (A half hour before sunrise)

Stategery (not a word, but needs to go in somewhere)

Tax Season Has Hit The 777X

Boeing's long term dabbling on the chalk board and note pad for the 777X program ended awhile back. New computers were installed in the various technology pits within Boeing's world footprint. All this during a time when productivity of the 777 expanded, a surge line for the 787 was completed and Charleston rolled out and delivered a flyable 787.  Even though all this was going on, the 777X remained at bay, somewhere in a cement and glass encased buildings where cars are parked nearby, and don't move for long periods of time.  The Tax dragging down the 777X is listed below:

• Resources for R&D are limited,
• Cost reductions from production efficiency needed from the 787 project, and other projects.  
• Project maturation not yet acquired for rolling technology forward to the 777X in design and configuration completion.
• Cash flow management lean, because of 787-9,-10 infusions.
• Enough people available that prevents show stoppers like the 787 program had for X long years.

These are just a few resources that taxes Boeing's Juggernaut of expanding its family line of aircraft.  Already multiples Gulf customers and others have expressed a serious interest in the 777X.  

Emirates may buy 100 Boeing 777X jets if new model built-report

Boeing is not concerned with customers at this point, but knows exactly what it needs to do before proceeding. An announcement can be made anytime in the next three years.  Even very soon, as in Paris 2013, if necessary. That maybe the key moment to blow up the party balloons around the Boeing Paris Pavilion.  If it does not happen then, its not because of lack of potential customers, because they do have a 777 backlog in play and interested customers as mentioned above.  The important thing, is similar to any major operation, you make a list and check it twice.  Ever since, I was child, the adults had a saying, "before you do that, get your ducks in a row". 

Boeing's ducks are not yet in a row or on a time table, when getting things right is more important.  It's not so much if Boeing can't execute the 777X, but its more of when it will be ready to execute the 777X.  Its like planning an invasion, where Boeing is marshaling all hands on deck, within a definite time period. No mention yet, of suppliers involvements, or potential partners on the project. Other than the usual suspects.  When the X announcement is made, the die has already been cast.  This is not a 777 make-over, it is a "777 game changer". Does Boeing have secret intelligence, that suggest the Airbus, A-350 family will not beat the 777-300, or does it have have a strategic move up its sleeve? Mystery surrounds the slow down, of both the 787-10 and 777X.  One can only surmise it is a pacing maneuver that makes sure a continuous flow of what is proposed or promised delivers at the right time and without setbacks.  A coiled spring is better than a limp rope.  It took awhile for Boeing to wind up the 787 project rope.

Boeing 777 wikipedia photo

Aspire Aviation Article   Boeing Develops 777X To Challenge Airbus A-350     

"Under the Chicago-based airframer’s latest schedule on the 777X development in December, the concept development of the 777-8X and -9X has been successfully accomplished at the end of 2011, with a firm configuration of the aircraft due in the second quarter of 2012, followed by the securing of an authority-to-offer (ATO) from Boeing’s board of directors in the third-quarter, Aspire Aviation‘s multiple sources at Boeing revealed."

"The GE9X engine will have a 10% lower engine specific fuel consumption (SFC) than the GE90-115B1 engine and will incorporate the twin annular pre-mixing swirler II (TAPS II) instead of the dual annular combustor (DAC), composite variable-bleed valve ducts at the exit of the booster stage. The GE9X will have the same fan diameter of 325 cm (128 inches) as the GE90-115B1 engine and delivers a thrust of 99,500 lbs (443 kN), compared to the GE90-115B’s 115,300 lbs (512 kN) of thrust.

“I’m spending over US$50 million on technology development on it in 2012. We’ll be ready,” GE Aviation chief executive David Joyce told Bloomberg, adding the new engine powering the 777-9X will be 6%-8% more fuel efficient than the GE90-115B1 engine.

The GE90-115B1 engine burns 0.25 pounds of fuel per pound of thrust delivered per hour (lb/lbt/hr) whereas the GEnx-2B engine on the 747-8 burns 0.274 lb/lbt/hr. It is noteworthy, however, that a direct comparison between the GEnx-2B and GE90-115B1′s fuel burn figures is skewed as the engine fan efficiency improves as the fan size increases. As the GE90-115B1 has a fan diameter of 135 inches, including the engine nacelle, whereas the GEnx-2B engine has a diameter of only 105 inches and the -1B engine has a diameter of only 111 inches,Aspire Aviation‘s sources say a 10% reduction in engine specific fuel consumption (SFC) of the GE-9X versus the GE90-115B1 engine is achievable."

• "Meanwhile, the 777X will feature a 787-styled composite/super-critical wing that is going to have a considerably better lift-to-drag (L/D) ratio and is significantly lighter than the wings of the 777-300ER, with a wingspan of as large as 71.1 metres (233.4 feet)."
• The larger wing of the 777X will make it an International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Code F aircraft instead of the Code E category that the 777-300ER and -200LR are in today as well as a US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airplane Design Group (ADG) Group VI aircraft whereas the 777-300ER and -200LR are Group V aircraft. The ICAO Code E and FAA ADG Group V categories include airplanes whose wingspan is between 52 m (170.6 ft) to 65 m (213.3 ft) whereas the Code F and ADG Group VI categories include airplanes with a 65 m (213.3 ft) to 80 m (262.5 ft) wingspan.
• Moreover, the same sources say Alcoa’s 3rd-generation lightweight aluminium lithium (Al-Li) is a “viable option” for the 777X, which will feature a 10% weight saving and a 6% reduction in skin friction drag, while cautioning the decision in the choice of the material for the 777X’s fuselage will not be made anytime soon.
• Indeed, a 777X featuring an advanced aluminium-lithium fuselage with a composite wing makes sense in significantly trimming weight, thereby further improving the fuel burn performance of the aircraft. In addition, advanced aluminium-lithium (Al-Li) is a well understood technology that requires little to no modification in the production process and will not complicate the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certification for the 777X. Put it simply, advanced aluminium-lithium technology is what Aspire Aviation‘s sources characterise as a “low-hanging fruit” that could be incorporated into the design and the production of the 777X very easily, while providing a considerable weight saving."

Aspire Aviation,    By Daniel TsangFebruary 9, 2012

Since this Aspire article on February 9, 2012. Boeing has not been sitting still. However, what is really happening is the owners of  777-300 are getting anxious about the roll out of the A-350-9. This is a real poker hand being played by both companies.  Either the 777X invasion is not ready, or they are waiting for Airbus to commit to a winter campaign of the A-350, before Boeing has a great spring in Paris.

You can see at this point, either this is a Boeing bluff or an Airbus full house in play. I'm willing to speculate that Boeing is shooting the moon, as in the game of "Hearts", and is not sloughing off the Queen of Spades onto Airbus.