Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After Years of Delays, Boeing 787 Dreamliner gets FAA Certification
Seattle PI ^ | August 26, 2011 | Staff

Posted on 08/27/2011 5:42:53 AM PDT by lbryce

Edited on 08/27/2011 7:12:52 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

After years of setbacks and delays, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner was certified Friday by the U.S. government as safe and ready to fly passengers.

The official FAA certification was announced at a ceremony at the Boeing site in Everett, just a few weeks before the first scheduled delivery of the airliner to Japan's All Nippon Airways on Sept. 28. The aircraft was also certified by the European Aviation Safety Agency.


(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 787; boeing; dreamliner; faa
Well, Boeing, thanks for nothing; much too little, too late. Airbus engorged on having eaten America's technological lunch in one fell swoop. Dreamliner, my *ss.
1 posted on 08/27/2011 5:42:59 AM PDT by lbryce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Gee, I am surprised nobody has swooped on your comment to say “Airbus is an American made product too!”


2 posted on 08/27/2011 5:46:15 AM PDT by rlmorel ("When marching down the same road, one doesn't need 'marching orders' to reach the same destination")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
As someone once said,

"If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going.."

3 posted on 08/27/2011 5:48:24 AM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

When the first 787 crashes that plastic plane will shatter into a zillion parts and burn up.


4 posted on 08/27/2011 5:49:44 AM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Hey, you’re not nobody. Your swoop is as good as anyone’s.


5 posted on 08/27/2011 5:50:05 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

I’m guessing most of the delay and cost overruns were government induced.


6 posted on 08/27/2011 5:51:56 AM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

>>> When the first 787 crashes that plastic plane will shatter into a zillion parts and burn up. <<<

As opposed to an aluminum plane that breaks up into a zillion pieces and burns up?

It doesn’t really matter what it’s made of; any aircraft auguring into the ground is going to ruin your day.


7 posted on 08/27/2011 5:55:45 AM PDT by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
The guy's making whoosh! whoosh! jet engine sounds as he runs across the room with the toy model.
8 posted on 08/27/2011 5:56:42 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

So? That’s basically what happens when all planes crash.


9 posted on 08/27/2011 5:57:52 AM PDT by krb (Obama is a miserable failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
Can you say “look for the union lible”...
10 posted on 08/27/2011 5:58:03 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

This is great news and finally!

I’m a Boeing guy and a Southwest guy, so I can’t wait to fly on one.


11 posted on 08/27/2011 5:59:13 AM PDT by sillsfan (Reagan and Sarah are right- WE win, they lose!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

LOL...not me. It seems like the common first comment.


12 posted on 08/27/2011 6:06:17 AM PDT by rlmorel ("When marching down the same road, one doesn't need 'marching orders' to reach the same destination")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

Heh, that was my first thought as well.


13 posted on 08/27/2011 6:08:35 AM PDT by rlmorel ("When marching down the same road, one doesn't need 'marching orders' to reach the same destination")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

The guy’s making whoosh! whoosh! jet engine sounds as he runs across the room with the toy model.


I thought the pictures was kind of goofy. Reminded me of the miniature Stonehenge from Spinal Tap.

I think they should have had a leggy model holding the plane.


14 posted on 08/27/2011 6:11:10 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Are you better off now than you were four trillion dollars ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
A whole lot of nothing new is right. Another tube with wings stuck on it. Other than the structural material change and fully electric systems (no hydraulics, not even the brakes), it's just another wide body.

Boeing engineered the quality out of their products years ago to increase profits so this will be a piece of junk like all of their other new builds are.

And Albaugh is a flat-out admitted communist. One thing about Boeing, it never met a liberal cause or committed progressive it didn't love. He's the only CEO I know that can openly lose $4B in his first two years on the job and still stay employed.

15 posted on 08/27/2011 6:13:56 AM PDT by liberty_lvr (Drill Gaia like a 3 am prom date)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
busty works, too.
16 posted on 08/27/2011 6:14:27 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
I’m guessing most of the delay and cost overruns were government induced.

They were Boeing induced.

Beware of environmentally sensitive airplanes.

ML/NJ

17 posted on 08/27/2011 6:15:57 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
If you think this is bad, there are rumors that there are SERIOUS development problems at Airbus over the upcoming A350 competitor to the 787.

Indeed, these issues are forcing Rolls-Royce to uprate the Trent XWB engines. The original plan was 75,000 lb. thrust for the A350-800, 85,000 lb. thrust for the A350-900 and 95,000 lb thrust for the A350-1000; it now appears Rolls-Royce may have to uprate each of the Trent XWB designs about 8,000 to 10,000 lb. thrust with likely loss of fuel efficiency.

No wonder why airlines that can afford it are buying a lot of Boeing 777-300ER's.

18 posted on 08/27/2011 6:22:16 AM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

It’s not that it’s safe, it’s that they threatened the unions with a new plant. Of course the two are not related.


19 posted on 08/27/2011 6:22:41 AM PDT by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

Watching the story over the years, it appears most of the delay and overruns were due to outsourcing major structural parts to incompetent suppliers.


20 posted on 08/27/2011 6:25:13 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

Or deep sea diving in the airbus case.

Fly on lots of ABs, I’ll take Boeing any day.


21 posted on 08/27/2011 6:54:48 AM PDT by dusttoyou ("Progressives" are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: liberty_lvr

“A whole lot of nothing new is right. Another tube with wings stuck on it.”

Nothing new other than a 20% increase in fuel efficiency....

20% is an amazing accomplishment for Boeing AND the engine suppliers, GE & RR.

“Boeing claimed the 787 would be near to 20% more fuel-efficient than the 767, with one-third of the efficiency gain from the engines, another third from aerodynamic improvements and the increased use of lighter-weight composite materials, and the final third from advanced systems.”


22 posted on 08/27/2011 7:01:26 AM PDT by BwanaNdege (“Man has often lost his way, but modern man has lost his address” - Gilbert K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

As I looked at the photo I thought that the plane was MUCH smaller than I thought.


23 posted on 08/27/2011 7:08:14 AM PDT by Loud Mime (Democrats: debt, dependence and derision)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

Do you realize how many Boeing employees are not part of a Union? The Mechanics, and those touching the parts in the supply chain are, but behind them you many thousands of others who are not. Purchasing Agents, Oder Management, Project Management, Human Resources, Safety, Security, Clerks of all kinds, and many others.


24 posted on 08/27/2011 7:12:57 AM PDT by NavyCanDo (Go Mama Grizzly! Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime

25 posted on 08/27/2011 7:17:13 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

“auguring into the ground”

Now there is an old Test Pilot term I haven’t heard in a while. Chuck Yeager used it often in his books.


26 posted on 08/27/2011 7:18:36 AM PDT by NavyCanDo (Go Mama Grizzly! Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime
Yes. I had the same thought when I saw the image. You've been waiting years to receive FAA certification for that?
27 posted on 08/27/2011 7:25:12 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: liberty_lvr
OK we got it, you hate Boeing.

As for me, I have been working there for 25 years and we DO put out a quality product that can match or better anything else flying.

28 posted on 08/27/2011 7:29:01 AM PDT by NavyCanDo (Go Mama Grizzly! Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo

great way to make fence holes!


29 posted on 08/27/2011 7:45:50 AM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo

between you and me Navy, and having been an aircraft mechanic, I trust Boeing far more than I trust Airbus.


30 posted on 08/27/2011 7:46:46 AM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
“I’m guessing most of the delay and cost overruns were government induced.”

Delay Number 1 – September 2007
A three-month delay due to a parts shortage.

Delay Number 2 – October 2007
A three-month delay due to supply chain problems.

Delay Number 3 – January 2008
A three-month delay due to lack of progress on “traveled work”.

Delay Number 4 – April 2008
A delay on deliveries until the third quarter of 2009, 15 months behind schedule. The first test flight rescheduled to the fourth quarter of 2008.

Delay Number 5 – November 2008
A delay on the first flight until the fourth quarter of 2008 due to a machinist’s strike and other problems.

Delay Number 6 – December 2008
A delay on the first flight until the second quarter of 2009 due to parts supply problems.

Delay Number 7 – June 2009
A delay in the maiden flight due to a need to reinforce part of the aircraft’s body.

Delay Number 8 – July 2010
Delayed first delivery until early 2011 due to an explosion of one of the aircraft’s engines while on a test bed.

Delays are expected on a very first airplane of it's type. But three years is costly. Boeing will have to sell alot of these before turning a profit on them. But still the breakthrough gain from this airplane will I think me a mile stone in aviation history.

31 posted on 08/27/2011 7:49:18 AM PDT by NavyCanDo (Go Mama Grizzly! Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime

The 787 is really a 757/767 replacement - it will look small next to a 777. But its range should allow airlines to find profitable long-haul runs with smaller passenger loads.


32 posted on 08/27/2011 7:51:12 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ( "The right to offend is far more important than any right not to be offended." - Rowan Atkinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo

I absolutely agree with you on the planes built in Washington state. But a big piece of the 787 is built in Charleston and it is not the same. Boeing has been in decline ever since McDonnell Douglas bought them with their own money back in 1996. It went from a company run by engineers to one run by rank opportunists from the McDonnell side. I.E Stonecipher, Sears, Condit, etc. Every successful aircraft Boeing sells now was designed and built before 1996 or is a derivative of that era. After the geniuses tried to sell off or outsource every manufacturing piece during the last 15 years this is what you get. Remember the first six of these aircraft wee scrapped because they were unairworthy with a billion dollar write-off.


33 posted on 08/27/2011 7:51:29 AM PDT by Just_de_facts ("Charity degrades those who receive it and hardens those who dispense it." - George Sand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Mind you, the Dreamliner would have been certified YEARS ago, had the Boeing Mechanic’s Unions not gone on a 9 month strike. You know, the SAME union that thinks Boeing building planes in North Carolina is an attack on Washington Unions. . .


34 posted on 08/27/2011 8:31:30 AM PDT by Salgak (Acme Lasers presents: The Energizer Border: I dare you to try and cross it. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberty_lvr
A little bitter, are we?
35 posted on 08/27/2011 8:40:43 AM PDT by starlifter (Pullum sapit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf

The French Mirage jets were referred to often as “lawn darts”.


36 posted on 08/27/2011 8:50:15 AM PDT by WellyP (REAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Salgak

A 9-month strike causes “years” of delay?

That must be metric.


37 posted on 08/27/2011 8:51:04 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: NavyCanDo

Yeah and all being made to look bad by the few that are. Read the article labor issues and strikes. Mice....


38 posted on 08/27/2011 8:53:51 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

That’s nice but I guess mice fits too,


39 posted on 08/27/2011 8:54:54 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

so were the Canadian starfighters, I think the F-101s, or was it F-100s, I’m too rushed to check at the moment, going to head out the door, will verify later heh.


40 posted on 08/27/2011 9:01:42 AM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Bulwyf

Actually, the F-16 had that moniker as well.


41 posted on 08/27/2011 11:29:54 AM PDT by rlmorel ("When marching down the same road, one doesn't need 'marching orders' to reach the same destination")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

really? The F-16 could at least glide a little, there was so little wingspan on the F-101 whatever it’s called, that it was more a rocket than anything heh.


42 posted on 08/27/2011 6:10:08 PM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Correction, it’s the F-104 I was thinking of. It’s what I think they designed the lawn dart game after heh.


43 posted on 08/27/2011 6:13:12 PM PDT by Bulwyf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
I’m guessing most of the delay and cost overruns were government induced.

Nope. The reasons for the delays mostly fell into two categories:

A.) Beancounters at Boeing HQ wanted to reduce the financial risk and financing costs for Boeing itself as much as possible. That's why they outsourced everything they could as to take advantage of subsidies in Japan or Italy and make their suppliers risk-sharing partners. That came back to bite them in the *ss when companies like Alenia couldn't deliver the first time.

B.) Boeing got overambitious because of experiences with the smooth 777 program. They promised not only a revolutionary plane but also one that relies on a completely new production method. And that in record time.

The reason why Boeing cancelled the 737 replacement recently and went for a re-engining instead was not because they couldn't come with new technology, but because they couldn't come up with a way to get the supply chain up and running in the desired timeframe.
44 posted on 08/29/2011 12:50:30 AM PDT by wolf78 (Inflation is a form of taxation, too. Cranky Libertarian - equal opportunity offender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson