Months of delay likely for 787, Boeing partner says

Seattle Times ^ | 06/25/09 | Dominic Gates

[AngelesCrestHighway]

The structural flaw that has grounded Boeing's 787 Dreamliner will likely add months of delay to the new jet program, an executive with one of Boeing's key Japanese partners said Wednesday. Kiyotaka Ichimaru, an executive at the aerospace division of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), which makes the 787's carbon-fiber composite plastic wings in Japan, also said the problem announced Tuesday stems from Boeing's engineering design, not MHI's — an assessment confirmed by Boeing. Ichimaru said MHI engineers are drawing upon the experience of similar problems on the Mitsubishi F-2 jet-fighter program in working with Boeing to fix the problem: a need for reinforcement of the structure where the Dreamliner's wing is joined to the load-bearing box at the center of the fuselage.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

...."the problem announced Tuesday stems from Boeing's engineering design, not MHI's — an assessment confirmed by Boeing.".....

Sounds structural to me.....

[Sig Sauer P220]

And in further news, Boeing and Spirit Aerosystems to announce layoffs due to the 787 predicament. Just anticipating that to be news soon.

[Slapshot68]

“Sounds structural to me.....”

That’s the report I heard. Of course, the MSM was very negative in the article about the delay.

Hey, rather they fix the problem than find out about structural problems the tragic way (right Airbus?)

[AngelesCrestHighway]

for sure....as long as the patch holds.....

[AngelesCrestHighway]

You bet!....I went through one of those layoff waves at Boeing, Seattle.

[2CAVTrooper]

“Hey, rather they fix the problem than find out about structural problems the tragic way (right Airbus?)”

More Boeings have broken up or had other major structural failures in flight than Airbus built aircraft.

[ml/nj]

My August 2007 comment here

ML/NJ

[colorado tanker]

Gee, it might have been a better idea to build the plane in the USA?

[AFreeBird]

I don't think fab location is the issue. Something unforeseen? Don't know myself, but considering it's a new design, new materials, new processes; not uncommon for things to crop up in an initial build of a test aircraft.

Although I'm surprised to hear that it's in the area of the wingbox. I thought I had read reports that it passed the stress tests on the wing.

[jaydubya2]

Just use more glue.

[colorado tanker]

At the Boeing tour I took the wonderful thing about the airplane was that components would be built all over the world and assembled just in time in Seattle.

I'm not at all an anti-globalist, but I do think in the case of this airplane incorporating cutting edge technology, Boeing would have been much better off sticking to their historical model of making most of it here.

[AFreeBird]

Well, I agree, I think their first 2 out of 6 planned test birds should have been built here. Just to get the kinks out of the design, and mfg processes. But on the other hand, if they were going with the outside supply chain for major sections, they need to debug that as well and could have dealt with those issues on the remaining 4 birds, passing along the lessons learned in-house.

Overall, they should have probably given a less aggressive delivery schedule.

[colorado tanker]

Overall, they should have probably given a less aggressive delivery schedule.

Absolutely. Never assume Plan A is going to work. Always have a Plan B.

[redgolum]

To many cooks spoil the soup.

[Rummenigge]

The trick was to build a plane out of carbon fibre and Mitsubishi had the technology to build large parts out of CFC (or claimed successfully to have...)

There’s no other company that could have offered what they offered... let’s see if they really could.

[colorado tanker]

let’s see if they really could

The $64,000 question!