Boeing is highly likely to lose large sums of money on the first 400 to 600 Dreamliners

[Cees Binkhorst]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

De vliegtuigbouwer gaat onderuit door het eeuwige gevecht met de
werknemers/unions, de houding van de regering en het economische klimaat.

Het 'uitzetten' van het werk bij andere bedrijven (gedeeltelijk in ander
valuta), die bijdragen in de ontwikkelingskosten, in tegenstelling tot de
situatie bij Airbus (hup, nog een lening), gaat Boeing mogelijk het hele
bedrijf kosten.

Groet / Cees

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2009565319_boeing30.html

Boeing 787 wing flaw extends inside plane

By Dominic Gates

Seattle Times aerospace reporter

The wing damage that grounded Boeing's new composite 787 Dreamliner
occurred under less stress than previously reported — and is more
extensive.

An engineer familiar with the details said the damage happened when the
stress on the wings was well below the load the wings must bear to be
federally certified to carry passengers.

In addition, information obtained independently and confirmed by a second
engineer familiar with the problem shows the damage occurred on both sides
of the wing-body join — that is, on the outer wing as well as inside the
fuselage.

The structural flaw in the Boeing design was found in May during a ground
test that bent the wings upward. Stresses at the ends of the long rods
that stiffen the upper wing skin panels caused the fibrous layers of the
composite plastic material to delaminate.

The damage at the end of each of the 17 long stiffening rods, called
stringers, on each wing's upper skin happened just beyond the aircraft's
"limit load," which is the maximum load the wing is expected to bear in
service.

Last week, The Seattle Times mistakenly reported that the damage occurred
later in the test, just beyond "ultimate load." That is defined as 50
percent higher than the in-service limit load and is the Federal Aviation
Administration's test target. The tearing at the end points of the
stringers well before the wing reached ultimate load means the problem is
worse than suggested in last week's story.

Because the wing test fell short of the ultimate load target, the plane
could have flown only under restrictions that would have severely limited
the usefulness of a test flight.

It also helps explain why Boeing canceled the first flight planned for the
end of June.

The fact that there is corresponding damage on the fuselage side of the
wing join adds to the complexity of any fix and the time and cost involved
in implementing it.

The wings of the 787 are made by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in Japan.

Inside the fuselage, on the other side of where each wing joins the jet's
body, there is a structure called the "center wing box," made by Fuji
Heavy Industries, also in Japan.

This center box is constructed much like the outer wing, with
composite-plastic skin panels stiffened by composite-plastic stringers.

The stringers on the fuselage side mate at the wing join, fitting with
those on the wing side.

Because the wings are designed to transfer the loads into the fuselage
box, the damage that occurred in the test was mirrored on either side of
the join.

Though a single fix, once designed and tested, will work on both sides of
the join, mechanics performing the necessary modifications inside the
airplanes already built will have to duplicate the work inside the wing
and inside the fuselage.

According to the engineers, Boeing is focusing on a solution that will
require mechanics to create a U-shaped cutout in the end of each upper
wing-skin stringer.

This would have the effect of transferring part of the excess load into
the titanium fitting at the wing-body join instead of into the wing skin.

The mechanics must then fasten the reshaped stringer ends with newly
designed parts to the titanium fitting.

The goal is to reduce the stress-point loads enough to prevent future
delamination.

The delamination of the composite-plastic material isn't likely to lead to
catastrophic failure of the airplane, but it would require constant
monitoring and potentially costly repairs by the airlines.

Any tear would have to be promptly fixed to prevent it from spreading.

The way the stringers terminate and mate at the join, the focus of the
problem, is Boeing's responsibility and not that of its Japanese partners.
Boeing will have to pay for the cost overruns.

Engineers will have to validate Boeing's chosen solution in tests before
they modify the wings and center wing boxes already built.

Company spokeswoman Yvonne Leach said 10 Dreamliners have been completed,
including two ground-test airplanes. About 30 more are in various stages
of production.

The Dreamliner is already two years late.

CEO Jim McNerney said last week that a new schedule for first flight and
delivery will be ready within the next two months.

Estimates by the two engineers of the minimum time needed to fix the
problem suggest the plane is now unlikely to fly until next year.

Until the new production timetable is announced, Wall Street analysts are
unable to calculate the precise additional cost of this latest delay.

Analyst Joe Campbell, of Barclays Capital, this week downgraded Boeing's
stock. He cited an increased risk that the company will book a large
accounting loss this year to cover the extra expense of the repeated
delays.

In a note to clients, Campbell estimated the total cost overrun of the
Dreamliner program so far — extra startup and engineering costs, penalties
owed to customers for delivery delays and contractual obligations to
suppliers for engineering changes — as "in the vicinity of $11 billion."

Because 850 Dreamliners have already been ordered, Campbell still believes
the jet can be "highly profitable" over two decades of full production.

But with that level of cost overrun, Campbell said, "Boeing is highly
likely to lose large sums of money on the first 400 to 600 aircraft."

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********