FAA expected to respond to Boeing 787 proposal next week. Longer grounding expected.

Today Michael Huerta, the FAA chief, testified before a House subcommittee on aviation that he expects that his staff will complete their review of Boeing's return to flight proposal next week but does caution that "Once we approve the plan, then we have to go through the process of actually implementing the plan, which will involve a great deal of testing, a great deal of further analysis and re-engineering before these planes are back in the air".

He characterized Boeing's plan as comprehensive as it deals with the issues on a cell level, battery level and airplane level, referring the to the multi layers of protection that Boeing had presented last week to the FAA.  Still GS Yuasa has indicated that Boeing should add in protection against external current surges. Obviously GS Yuasa feel that the issues lay not with their battery but from other external factors.  This may complicate Boeing's ability to return the 787 to revenue flight in a timely manner according to an article in the Wall Street Journal.

This indicates that the 787 for customers will be on the ground for much longer than Boeing anticipates.  I am willing to venture that the grounding will last through May with final re-certification of the lithium ion batteries coming around that time and resumption of revenue flight in June. Already many current customers (8 thus far) are planning for resumption of service around the summer time with LOT Polish Airlines planning for a resumption in the fall time though this is probably very extreme.  The Seattle Times has an excellent article about today's testimony and the current situation with regards to the 787.

So what does this mean for the timing of 787 delivery resumption? Boeing will have 23 complete 787s by Feb. 28. If I assume that customer flights resume by the end May which would mean that customer deliveries won't resume until the end of the second quarter as Boeing would need a month of pre-delivery ground and flight tests before they can deliver new 787s.

This means another 4 months of 787s coming off the final assembly lines in Everett and Charleston at a rate of 5/month.  This means Boeing would add another 20 787s that will be stored around the two final assembly locations.  Additionally, I believe that Boeing will also have finished 2 787s that are currently undergoing change incorporation at the Everett Modification Center (EMC).  This means that Boeing will have a backlog of about 45 787s waiting to be delivered.  The 45 would be split 34 Dreamliners at Everett and 11 at Charleston.  This number will create a storage challenge for Boeing at both locations.  Some of these airplanes have had flight tests (5 airplanes) but would need further tests in light of the enhanced battery protection measures that Boeing will install.  If Boeing is to attempt to deliver more than 60 787s, they would have to deliver 10/month for the second half of the year. 

Also what is unclear is how this will affect Boeing's plan to test and certify the 787-9 the first of which should be ready for flight by late August to early September.  Additionally, it is unknown how all this affect Boeing's efforts to certify the 787 for ETOPS 330 though I would expect that the FAA will have additional conditions that Boeing will have to meet in order to allow the 330 minute limit for the 787s. Air New Zealand, the first 787-9 customer needs to have the aircraft certified for ETOPS 330 by the time it takes delivery.

 

Boeing presents battery solution to FAA, FAA says no flights until they are satisfied

Boeing 787 program managers lead by BCA Chief met with FAA leaders lead by FAA Chief Mike Huerta to listen to Boeing's plan to fix the battery issues in order to return the 787 to flight status.

News reports say that this is not an interim fix but a permanent fix to mitigate problems that may arise if there was another short circuit and thermal runaway in the cells of the battery.

Boeing proposed changes includes (according to media reports):

1) A fire proof case to house the the eight cells of the battery to contain any smoke and fire from the rest of the electrical and electronics in the two E/E Bays

2) Venting of any smoke and gases out of the aircraft through pipes installed in the new case.  This is to ensure that smoke does not get into the cockpit or the cabin

3) Wider spacing between the the eight individual cells and ceramic partitions between the cells

4) Enhanced and improve monitoring of the cells with information presented to the pilots throughout all phases of flight on each of the battery cells.

5) New battery monitoring procedure to be performed by the pilots before, during and after each flight.

Boeing says that they have had made good progress on addressing the battery issues and that today's meeting was "productive" (whatever that means). but the blunt statement by the FAA tells it all:

Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari, FAA Administrator Michael P. Huerta and other FAA officials met with senior executives from The Boeing Company today to discuss the status of ongoing work to address 787 battery issues. The FAA is reviewing a Boeing proposal and will analyze it closely. The safety of the flying public is our top priority and we won't allow the 787 to return to commercial service until we're confident that any proposed solution has addressed the battery failure risks.

The FAA is certainly not going to give Boeing a pass on this and given that the NTSB still has not determined the root cause of the short circuiting, the FAA is going to look over their proposal and more than likely have additional conditions and tests that Boeing will have to carry out. 

A good thing is that Boeing has been in constant contact with the FAA about the investigation and their plans but it is still the FAA's decision whether to accept Boeing's plan and allow them to test and certify the fixes.

According to the reports that have been circulating for the past couple of days, Boeing is planning to get the testing, certification and fixes implemented so that the world wide fleet of 787s can resume flying by around late March to April.

So while the FAA is drawing a hardline (as evidenced by their statement today) they will undoubtedly take into account a couple of things:

1) Root cause of the short circuiting has not been determined and may not ever be known
2) The batteries, until January, did not exhibit any short circuiting and thermal runaway issues.
3) There is a substantial economic loss both a t the carriers that have the aircraft and at Boeing

Given the above, the FAA will probably move to allow Boeing to test and certify the fixes but I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing and GS Yuasa, the maker of the lithium ion battery look to make changes to the design to enhance the safe operation of the cells.

What Boeing is proposing are preventative measures to stop a battery issue from getting out of control.  Without a root cause they cannot address the design of the battery that would prevent a recurrence of the short circuiting and thermal runaway.  This is probably the best option that Boeing currently has and is probably also the most aggressive option.

I do believe that Boeing will be able to return the aircraft to revenue flights but it will not be until late April to mid May before that happens. In the meantime, Everett will add on at least 10 more 787s while Charleston will add 2 to 3 787s to those waiting to be delivered.  I think the FAA will come back with a response to Boeing's proposal fairly quickly (within the next one week).

In some good news, the JTSB (Japanese Transport Safety Board) has discovered what caused the the fuel spillage from a JAL 787 on January 9th at Logan International.  It was small piece of FOD (foreign object debris) that prevented the closure of a valve.  During a test on the same aircraft later in January, there was another fuel leak.  The second one was attributable to a micro switch that was painted in a protective coating.  The painting had left behind a small piece of hair from the brush causing the the switch to lock.  Boeing is going to make sure that the micro switches are not painted in the protective coating again.

Updated 787 firing order to L/N 160

I have updated my 787 tracking spreadsheet to reflect the firing order from L/N 131 to L/N 160.

A couple of interesting things stand out. All three flight test 787-9s will be assembled on the Everett surge line in 40-24 and during the final assembly of these 3 test flight aircraft, no other 787s for customers will be assembled.  This is not too surprising as Boeing needs to retire risk associated with assembling the newest version of the 787 and doesn't want to run the chance of unforeseen issues with assembly of the 787-9 to hold up assembling the 787-8 for customers.

Another interesting item is the increasing number of airframes being built at Boeing Charleston. The current monthly assembly rate is 1/month but with this firing order Boeing is looking to go to 1.5/month.

Back to the 787-9, the list also shows ZB197 (LN 146) a 787-9 going to ANA.  Why Boeing is building this aircraft for ANA before Air New Zealand, which is to take the first 787-9, is a mystery.

There are some notable airlines whose first 787s are on this list including: Air Canada (ZA610, LN 160), Kenya Airways (ZA655, LN 157) and Norwegian Air Shuttle will be getting its first non-leased 787 (ZA650, LN 136).

There are a couple of airplanes being leased from ILFC but I don't have the customers yet.  The Boeing customer codes is ABD (Air Berlin perhaps) and KBL (absolutely no idea who this is).

There is also one 787 whose identity is completely unknown and I'm working to try and figure out who the customer is for ZA778 (LN 149).

In this batch of 30 aircraft here is the breakdown:

5 for ANA
1 for Air Canada
1 for Air India
1 for China Southern Airlines
2 for Hainan Airlines
4 for ILFC (various customers)
2 for JAL
1 for Kenya Airways
1 for Norwegian Air Shuttle
3 for Qatar Airways
2 for QANTAS (Jet Star)
1 for Royal Brunei Airlines
1 for Thomson
2 for Boeing (2 787-9 for flight test)
2 for United Airlines
1 unidentified

All this would be meaningless if there isn't any progress on the 787 lithium ion battery issue.  In an article in the Seattle Times, reporter Dominic Gates reported that Boeing is prepared to propose a short term interim fix to the FAA for the battery which encompasses a titanium or steel enclosure for the battery with high pressure venting for gas and electrolytes which would be released in the case of the thermal runaway.  Also included is enhanced monitoring. 

All this would allow (if the FAA approved) for Boeing and its partners to completely redesign and re-certify a new lithium ion battery for use on the 787.  However, it seems that the FAA is going to prolong this and will grill Boeing very hard on this interim measure.  Boeing is aiming to get the 787s flying again by end of May as they will need time to refine the short term fix, test it and certify it for airline use.  The FAA will have a lot to say about what kind of test results they want to see from Boeing.

ZA005 start lithium ion test flights but resumption of 787 revenue flights still a big question mark

As Boeing's GEnx powered 787 initiated test flights to gather data on the operating environment of the aircraft's lithium ion batteries many questions still are circulating not the least which is when will the FAA allow the 787s to resume revenue flights by the world's airlines.

Here's a rundown of the latest news:

Lithium Ion Battery Investigation

The NTSB, in preliminary report, has narrowed down the origin of the fire to cell 6 (of 8) in the battery in the aft E/E bay of ZA183 (LN 84, JA829J).  The thermal runaway ("an uncontrolled chemical reaction at high temperatures") was caused by several short circuits in cell 6 which propagated to the adjacent cells (primarily cells 5, 7, and 8).  Cells 1 through 4 were also damaged but as you can see from the picture above, they weren't damaged as badly as the cells.  The root cause of the short circuiting has yet to be determined but the NTSB is looking at various factors in the search of the root cause.  These factors include design, certification and manufacturing processes of the lithium ion battery. They did rule out external short circuiting as well as any external damage that caused the cell to short circuit.  Investigators will look at battery charging as well as as any other external factors that may have had affected the cell thus the NTSB has a long way to go.

Already though the NTSB is looking at the certification of the battery by the FAA charging that this battery should not have been certified under the special conditions that were set forth.  Additionally, Boeing had predicted, based on their testing, that a smoke event from the lithium ion batteries would occur once in 10,000,000 flight hours.  However, 2 smoke events have occurred in less than 100,000 flight hours across the worldwide 787 fleet.  Thus NTSB Chairperson said that "the failure rate was higher than predicted as part of the certification process and the possibility that a short circuit in a single cell could propagate to adjacent cells and result in smoke and fire must be reconsidered."  Additionally, the NTSB said "During the 787 certification process, Boeing studied possible failures that could occur within the battery. Those assessments included the likelihood of particular types of failures occurring, as well as the effects they could have on the battery. In tests to validate these assessments, Boeing found no evidence of cell-to-cell propagation or fire, both of which occurred in the JAL event."

In other words, the certification process by the FAA and Boeing for the lithium ion batteries is severely flawed and if these batteries are to be used on the 787 then the FAA and Boeing needs to reconsider how these batteries are to be tested along with containment and monitoring along different failure modes because the fire did show cell to cell propagation whereas Boeing testing (and FAA sign off) did not show that it would occur. 

The NTSB will release an interim report in about 4 weeks but it is not known if they would have found the root cause of the battery incident in Boston. Lastly, it'll be interesting to note if the JTSB would find a similar short circuiting cell from the ANA (ZA102, LN 9, JA804A) battery.  Thus far both batteries have shown signs of thermal runaway and short circuiting though the ANA battery did not catch fire.  Still there was significant high temperature damage to that battery.

Here is the press release from the NTSB on Thursday:

NTSB identifies origin of JAL Boeing 787 battery fire; design, certification and manufacturing processes come under scrutiny

February 7, 2013

WASHINGTON - At a news conference today, NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman identified the origin of the Jan. 7 battery fire that occurred on a Japan Airlines 787 parked at Boston Logan Airport, and said that a focus of the investigation will be on the design and certification requirements of the battery system.

"U.S. airlines carry about two million people through the skies safely every day, which has been achieved in large part through design redundancy and layers of defense," said Hersman. "Our task now is to see if enough - and appropriate - layers of defense and adequate checks were built into the design, certification and manufacturing of this battery."

After an exhaustive examination of the JAL lithium-ion battery, which was comprised of eight individual cells, investigators determined that the majority of evidence from the flight data recorder and both thermal and mechanical damage pointed to an initiating event in a single cell. That cell showed multiple signs of short circuiting, leading to a thermal runaway condition, which then cascaded to other cells. Charred battery components indicated that the temperature inside the battery case exceeded 500 degrees Fahrenheit.

As investigators work to find the cause of the initiating short circuit, they ruled out both mechanical impact damage to the battery and external short circuiting. It was determined that signs of deformation and electrical arcing on the battery case occurred as a result of the battery malfunction and were not related to its cause.

Chairman Hersman said that potential causes of the initiating short circuit currently being evaluated include battery charging, the design and construction of the battery, and the possibility of defects introduced during the manufacturing process.

During the 787 certification process, Boeing studied possible failures that could occur within the battery. Those assessments included the likelihood of particular types of failures occurring, as well as the effects they could have on the battery. In tests to validate these assessments, Boeing found no evidence of cell-to-cell propagation or fire, both of which occurred in the JAL event.

The NTSB learned that as part of the risk assessment Boeing conducted during the certification process, it determined that the likelihood of a smoke emission event from a 787 battery would occur less than once in every 10 million flight hours. Noting that there have been two critical battery events on the 787 fleet with fewer than 100,000 flight hours, Hersman said that "the failure rate was higher than predicted as part of the certification process and the possibility that a short circuit in a single cell could propagate to adjacent cells and result in smoke and fire must be reconsidered."

As the investigation continues, which will include testing on some of the batteries that had been replaced after being in service in the 787 fleet, the NTSB will continue to share its findings in real time with the FAA, Boeing, the Japan Transport Safety Board, and the French investigative agency, the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses.

"The decision to return the fleet to flight will be made by the FAA, which underscores the importance of cooperation and coordination between our agencies," Hersman said.

She also announced that the NTSB would release an interim report of factual findings within 30 days.

Additional information, including a video of the today's media briefing, the PowerPoint presentation, the FAA's Special Conditions for the B-787 battery system, and related documents, can be accessed at http://go.usa.gov/4K4J.

The NTSB will provide additional factual updates as developments warrant. To be alerted to any updates or developments, follow the NTSB on Twitter at www.twitter.com/ntsb.

Resumption of 787 flights

Last Wednesday the FAA gave approval to Boeing to conduct a one off ferry flight of a 787 for China Southern Airlines 787, ZA382 (LN 43, B-2727) that was stuck in Ft. Worth, Texas for painting when the grounding occurred in mid January.  The ferry flight was from Ft. Worth to Everett and had a number of restrictions placed on it to ensure the safety of the flight crew on board.  The aircraft flew to Everett on Thursday and landed among a media circus gathered at Paine Field that evening.  Later that night , the FAA gave approval to Boeing's request to conduct flight tests using ZA005 (LN 5, N787FT) for the purposes of gather data on the lithium ion batteries while in flight.  Boeing will be looking to record data on moisture, vibrations and other environmental factors which may have contributed to the short circuiting of the cell.  Additionally, Boeing is hoping to conduct test on possible containment and venting systems as well as a more robust battery monitoring system to mitigate the risks of another lithium ion battery thermal event.  It is known that Boeing is working on a plan to submit per the FAA's emergency airworthiness directive that forced the 787 grounding. It is rumored that Boeing wold like to have this temporary solution on the customer airplanes and re certify them by the end of March though that may be very optimistic.  Boeing would have to convince the FAA on the soundness of their approach (which is being characterized as interim).  Additionally Boeing can forget, for now, on obtaining ETOPS 330 for the 787 based on the the battery issue as well as the other issues that has caused the FAA to imitate the 787 program review in early January. 

There maybe some one off 787 flights to reposition 787s that are stranded away from the their home bases (like the Polish LOT 787 in Chicago).  I don't have any data on the 787s that are stranded.  Air India conducted several ferry flights from Delhi to Mumbai of their 787s.  In my opinion, I believe the 787s can see a return to flights status around the April to May time frame.  The FAA is not going to rush them back to the air but they won't be 1000% safe as Ray LaHood promises that they will be.

Battery Plan

As mentioned earlier, Boeing is drawing up a plan to return the 787s to flight and to resume deliveries.  The FAA emergency airworthiness directive states "Before further flight, operators of U.S.-registered, Boeing 787 aircraft must demonstrate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the batteries are safe.
The FAA will work with the manufacturer and carriers to develop a corrective action plan to allow the U.S. 787 fleet to resume operations as quickly and safely as possible."

This leaves a lot of leeway for Boeing to introduce a new battery protocol that would encompass monitoring, containment and venting in to the 787s fleet.  However, given the seriousness of the problem, this plan is being viewed as more of a temporary step with a view that Boeing may have to completely redesign and re certify (under more presumably stringent conditions) the lithium ion batteries.  The redesign and recertification may take up to a year to complete.  Boeing is reiterating that they will continue to use the lithium ion batteries.

Production and Flight Testing

Currently between North Charleston and Everett, Boeing has 19 787s that are complete and need to finish the typical Boeing/customer flight and ground test program that occurs prior to delivery.  There are 15 787s at Everett that are complete and 4 at Boeing Charleston.  Boeing is adding about 1 airplane per week to that total as production is continuing full tilt at both final assembly sites not including 787s coming from the EMC.  At this rate Boeing can double the number (to about 40) of 787s parked at both Charleston and Everett by the end of May if there isn't progress on the battery issue and a restart of deliveries.  Boeing is planning to deliver at least 9 re-worked 787s in 2013 along with about 55 or more non re-worked airplanes in 2013.   Some customers have already been alerted that near term deliveries will be delayed but I believe that the delays may extended into the summer due to the grounding.  If there is an extended grounding, Boeing may free up room around Everett by conducting the B-1 flights of 747s, 777s, and 767s from Everett but have them land at Boeing Field to finish the testing and delivery process.  This way spots can open up at Everett for more 787s that have to be parked.  Additionally there is room at the tower ramp, Runway 11/29 and the south ramp area at Everett.  On a brighter note, Boeing was able to finalize the order for 42 787s with American Airlines this past week.  That firm order will comprise of 20 787-8 and 22 787-9 plus 58 options which would encompass all 787 derivatives.  The first one is to be delivered in November 2014...about 21 months from now.

Bankruptcy Judge OK's AMR's Purchase of 787

A Federal Bankruptcy judge approved of AMR's revised contracts for aircraft purchases today.  This now clears the way for the airline to finalize the 787 contract with Boeing.  The revised contract now pushes deliveries of the first 787s to November of 2014 and splits to order of 42 aircraft roughly in half: 20 787-8 and 22 787-9.  AMR also has 58 options on the 787 but there is no word on when those options expire.

In other news, the JTSB is now saying that the lithium-ion battery on the ANA 787 was not overcharged and had, in fact, seen its voltage drop to almost zero according to the flight data recorders.  This is similar to the JAL 787 incident except there wasn't a fire.  The JTSB is now going to be looking at other components that may have contributed to the incident similar to what the NTSB is doing.

787 battery investigation continuing but not sure when Dreamliners will fly again.

As the NTSB and the Japan Transport Safety Board (JTSB) conduct separate but loosely coordinated investigations into the two 787 battery incident's, there is still uncertainty about when the 787s will return to the skies.

The NTSB announced on January 20th that the battery on the JAL 787 in Boston did not exceed the 32 volts it was designed to handle.  This statement seems to indicate that the NTSB does not consider the lithium-ion battery the culprit in the JAL fire and is looking at other components of the battery system including the charger.  The JTSB investigators have suggested that the issue on the ANA 787 was due to the battery being over-charged. 

Here's the text of the NTSB's latest statement:

NTSB Provides Third Investigative Update on Boeing 787 Battery Fire in Boston

January 20

WASHINGTON - The National Transportation Safety Board today released a third update on its investigation into the Jan. 7 fire aboard a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 at Logan International Airport in Boston.

The lithium-ion battery that powered the auxiliary power unit has been examined in the NTSB Materials Laboratory in Washington. The battery was x-rayed and CT scans were generated of the assembled battery. The investigative team has disassembled the APU battery into its eight individual cells for detailed examination and documentation. Three of the cells were selected for more detailed radiographic examination to view the interior of the cells prior to their disassembly. These cells are in the process now of being disassembled and the cell's internal components are being examined and documented.

Investigators have also examined several other components removed from the airplane, including wire bundles and battery management circuit boards. The team has developed test plans for the various components removed from the aircraft, including the battery management unit (for the APU battery), the APU controller, the battery charger and the start power unit. On Tuesday, the group will convene in Arizona to test and examine the battery charger and download nonvolatile memory from the APU controller. Several other components have been sent for download or examination to Boeing's facility in Seattle and manufacturer's facilities in Japan.

Finally, examination of the flight recorder data from the JAL B-787 airplane indicate that the APU battery did not exceed its designed voltage of 32 volts.

In accordance with international investigative treaties, the Japan Transport Safety Board and French Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la sécurité de l'aviation civile have appointed accredited representatives to this investigation. Similarly, the NTSB has assigned an accredited representative to assist with the JTSB's investigation of the Jan. 15 battery incident involving an All Nippon Airways B-787. Both investigations remain ongoing.

Further investigative updates on the JAL B-787 incident will be issued as events warrant. To be alerted to any updates or developments, please follow the NTSB on Twitter at www.twitter.com/ntsb.

This may indicated that the battery system on the 787 may suffer from not one but two different issues and may pose a difficult challenge for Boeing to get the airplanes flying again.

Boeing is pushing to get the airplanes back in the sky and have indicated to customers that they have a plan in work to present to the FAA.  Given that the investigation in Japan and the US have not concluded the root cause of either incident nor has the FAA signed off on any corrective measures, one has to deduce that the Boeing plan is more of a temporary preventative measure which would entail frequent checks of the battery system rather than any permanent fix or redesign of the battery system.

Despite all the publicity surrounding the battery issue, Boeing's 787 customers see no changes in the delivery plans despite Boeing's hold on deliveries. Norwegian says they still expect their first 787 to be delivered in April (on lease from ILFC) according to information provided to them by Boeing.  Meanwhile Boeing continues 787 production with another 787 entering final assembly on January 23.  The Everett and Charleston flightlines will be filling up quickly and Boeing maybe hard-pressed to clear that backlog when they have the green light to fly the 787 again but it will all depend on what the NTSB and the FAA have to say at the end.

I anticpate some good news for the 787 program tomorrow.  A bankruptcy judge in New York is expected to have a hearing on the restructured (renegotiated) aircraft purchase contracts that American Airlines will present.  I think it may be approved tomorrow and if so then Boeing can add 42 787s (20 787-8 and 22 787-9) to their backlog by the end of this week.

FAA temporarily ground US-based 787s, foreign based 787s to follow suit

The FAA, this evening, ordered a temporary grounding of US-based 787s due to the continuing Lithium Ion battery issues.  The precipitating event was the leakage of the battery's caustic electrolytes in the forward E/E bay of ZA102 (LN 9, JA804A) during the flight in Japan yesterday.  According to Dominic Gates, in an article posted this evening, battery fluid sprayed out to distance of 12 feet away from the battery.   The electrolytes are flammable and could have easily started a fire in the lower bay.  Some of the spray was vented overboard through an outflow valve. The FAA had issues an emergency airworthiness directive requiring the grounding and inspection of all US-based 787s.  Typically other countries follow the FAA or EASA lead when they issue such directives and it is expected that other aviation regulators in the countries that fly the 787s will also ground the aircraft and follow the FAA's lead on the next actions.  The other countries include Ethiopia, Japan, India, Qatar, Chile and Poland. Japan, Poland, Qatar and Chile has already announced the grounding of the 787s under their authority and I do expect that Chile and India will follow very soon.

Here is the text of the FAA statement:

As a result of an in-flight, Boeing 787 battery incident earlier today in Japan, the FAA will issue an emergency airworthiness directive (AD) to address a potential battery fire risk in the 787 and require operators to temporarily cease operations.  Before further flight, operators of U.S.-registered, Boeing 787 aircraft must demonstrate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the batteries are safe.    

The FAA will work with the manufacturer and carriers to develop a corrective action plan to allow the U.S. 787 fleet to resume operations as quickly and safely as possible.

The in-flight Japanese battery incident followed an earlier 787 battery incident that occurred on the ground in Boston on January 7, 2013. The AD is prompted by this second incident involving a lithium ion battery.  The battery failures resulted in release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage, and smoke on two Model 787 airplanes.  The root cause of these failures is currently under investigation.  These conditions, if not corrected, could result in damage to critical systems and structures, and the potential for fire in the electrical compartment.

Last Friday, the FAA announced a comprehensive review of the 787’s critical systems with the possibility of further action pending new data and information.  In addition to the continuing review of the aircraft’s design, manufacture and assembly, the agency also will validate that 787 batteries and the battery system on the aircraft are in compliance with the special condition the agency issued as part of the aircraft’s certification.

United Airlines is currently the only U.S. airline operating the 787, with six airplanes in service. When the FAA issues an airworthiness directive, it also alerts the international aviation community to the action so other civil aviation authorities can take parallel action to cover the fleets operating in their own countries.

Here is the text of Boeing's statement:

Boeing Chairman, President and CEO Jim McNerney issued the following statement today after the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an emergency airworthiness directive that requires U.S. 787 operators to temporarily cease operations and recommends other regulatory agencies to follow suit:
"The safety of passengers and crew members who fly aboard Boeing airplanes is our highest priority.
"Boeing is committed to supporting the FAA and finding answers as quickly as possible. The company is working around the clock with its customers and the various regulatory and investigative authorities. We will make available the entire resources of The Boeing Company to assist.
"We are confident the 787 is safe and we stand behind its overall integrity. We will be taking every necessary step in the coming days to assure our customers and the traveling public of the 787's safety and to return the airplanes to service.
"Boeing deeply regrets the impact that recent events have had on the operating schedules of our customers and the inconvenience to them and their passengers."

Thus the FAA is requiring the operators to prove to the FAA that the batteries are safe to operate on their flights. I expect that other aviation regulatory agencies will require the same of the 787 operators registered in their own countries.

It is not known how long the 787s will be out of service but as a point of reference, the FAA grounded the DC-10 in 1979 after a horrific crash of an American Airlines DC-10 in Chicago.  Those airplanes were grounded for a month.  The seriousness of this battery issue is not fully understood at this time but it may not last as long as a month. 

The maker of the battery, GS Yuasa of Japan is under a lot of pressure to figure out what is happening with their batteries.  Everything will be examined including the manufacturing of the cells themselves as well as potential flaws in the design.  Solutions may include switching to a different type of battery, perhaps Ni-Cads but I'm not sure if that is feasible.

In terms of production, I don't believe that Boeing will stop production and assembly of the 787 though they will not be able to carry out any test flights until they are cleared to do so by the FAA.  The ramps at Everett and Charleston will fill up if the emergency AD lasts more than a month.  What is not known is how this will affect the planned ramp up of the 787s later this year.

One area that may see an effect is the on going labor negotiations between Boeing management and SPEEA.  Already SPEEA has flowated the idea of extending the already expired contract. According the the proposal from SPEEA's web site, they propose to roll the items to which both sides have agreed to into the existing contract and extending the current contract another four years.  Boeing may be advised to take this offer as they can ill aford a strike at this juncture.  Here's the text from SPEEA's web site:

With the desire to focus all attention on solving the emergent issues with the 787, 
the SPEEA Professional and Technical Negotiation Teams today (Jan. 16) the union representing engineers and technical workers today (Jan. 16) proposed incorporating areas of agreement from ongoing negotiations into existing contracts and extending our Boeing contracts for another four years.

This “best and final” offer by SPEEA, IFPTE Local 2001, was presented as negotiations with Boeing resumed at 1 p.m. with the assistance of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) at the SeaTac Hilton. 

SPEEA’s unprecedented offer would free Boeing and 23,000 engineers and technical workers from protracted and increasingly contentious negotiations that appear headed for a strike. It also allows the company and our technical workforce to focus on 
reaffirming confidence and proving the 787 
is the reliable and safe product employees know it to be. Completing negotiations also helps Boeing stay focused on supporting customers, engineering the 767 tanker, 737 MAX, increasing 737 and 777 production rates and the other products needed for our national defense.

“These negotiations have been going on for more than a year,” said Tom McCarty, SPEEA president and Professional Team member. “At this point, we should move forward with the items upon which we can agree, and leave the status quo in place for the remaining items.”

In addition to the proposed contract extension, SPEEA requested that Boeing continue to meet under the auspices of FMCS mediation to tackle the difficult issues that have proven so divisive in these negotiations.

“Our hope is that we can work collaboratively to find solutions in a data-rich environment outside of the constraints of the collective bargaining process” said Ryan Rule, Professional Team member. 

In making the proposal, SPEEA agreed to accept Boeing’s funding mechanism for the Ed Wells Partnership training program.  The status quo proposal continues to offset company medical costs through annual deductible increases based on salary growth.  To put to rest the pension issue, a major point of contention, SPEEA proposes to accept the same pension proposal that Boeing negotiated with the International Association of Machinists (IAM District 751). Finally, the contract extension offer is made with the understanding Boeing recognizes same-sex survivor pension benefits pursuant to Washington state law. 

“With our contracts put to rest, we can all roll up our sleeves and work the issues facing the 787 and Boeing,” said Sandy Hastings, Technical Team member. “SPEEA members know this is a great airplane, and we are eager to prove this to our customers, the flying public and the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration).”

SPEEA and Boeing started meeting in April to negotiate new contracts for 15,550 engineers and 7,400 technical workers. In October, engineers rejected Boeing’s initial offer by 95.5 percent. Technical workers rejected the company’s offer by 97 percent.  Existing contracts expired Nov. 25. Since resuming talks Jan. 9 after a month-long FMCS-imposed recess, members increased preparations for a possible strike. A 40-day strike in 2000 by SPEEA stopped deliveries and caused major factory and service bottlenecks at Boeing plants around the country.

The issues facing the 787 are extremely serious but they can be overcome.  The biggest hit will be to the 787s reputation and reliability.  Boeing will need to focus 110% of its talent and resources on fixing these issues and demonstrating that the 787 is a safe aircraft not just to their customers but to the traveling public.  I do hope that the FAA initiated review will get to the bottom of these problems and find solutions to them.  In the meantime, I'll continue to track the production of the 787 but I don't expect to see flights for another few weeks.

ANA 787 makes emergency landing after smoke appears in cabin.

UPDATE 2: Report now that Japan Airlines is temporarily grounding all 787s as well.

UPDATE: ANA has told the local Japanese media NHK that they are grounding all 17 787s for inspection.  The report of smoke is as of yet unconfirmed but the aicraft is questions is ZA102 (LN 9, JA804A) which was delivered on January 14, 2012 (exactly a year ago) and first flew on January 19, 2011.

Reports are coming out of Japan of another 787 incident this time there was smoke in cabin while the aircraft was in flight and lead to an emergency landing in Takamatsu in Western Japan.  The passengers evacuated via deployed emergency slides.  There is an unconfirmed report that cockpit indicators showed a battery failure. It is unknown which aircraft it was or when it was delivered.

There is a further unconfirmed report that ANA has ordered all 787 grounded for emergency inspections.  I'll update this story as more information becomes known.

American and Boeing closer to finalizing 787/737MAX deals

In a proposal revealed by Flightglobal's Stephen Trimble, AMR has proposed to finalize the 787 and 737MAX deals (both currently a purchase agreement) by the end of the month with some modifications.  With regards to the 787 there are two modifications:

1) Of the 42 787s that AMR intends to order, 20 will be for the 787-8 and 22 for the 787-9.  Previously AMR was going to order 42 787-9.
2) The first scheduled delivery of the 787-9 will be restored to the original 2014 time (November 2014).  The delivery time frame had slipped to beyond 2014 due to the production issues at Boeing.

This is just a proposal that AMR has to approval from the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District in New York.  The hearing is  to take place on January 23 and if the court (and creditors) gives its approval.  The firm order can be placed before the end of January for 42 787s and 100 737MAX.  Other changes to the purchase agreements includes a lower price on the737MAX and adding 60 737MAX options.  AMR will also have 58 787 options. that will be part of the contract.

AMR wold have to have negotiated the terms of the final contract with Boeing before filing the motion the the bankruptcy court and having the contract firmed before the end of the month so it does seem that Boeing is on board with AMR.

FAA to carry out detailed review of 787 electrical system,Boeing to continue to produce, assemble and deliver Dreamliners during review

The FAA and Boeing announced that the government will carry out a detailed review of the design, manufacture, and assembly of the electrical and power distribution systems abroad the 787.

Boeing has told me that this review does not affect the production, assembly and delivery of the 787s nor does it ground the 787s currently in service. Boeing did conduct a ferry flight of one 787 to Charleston after being painted in Ft. Worth and had planned to do a first flight of another 787 today (put off to tomorrow probably). Thus Boeing continues with operations as usual and the operators continue to fly the aircraft. today ANA did initiate service between San Jose and Tokyo using the 787. However, this action will delay the efforts of Boeing to certify the aircraft for ETOPS 330.

Possible results from the review can include:

1) redesign of components
2) changes in manufacturing processes and improved quality control
3) nothing

The last option is unlikely to happen and it is all but certain that there will changes coming. The question is what are the nature of the changes and what affect will it have on production and delivery as well as the program's bottom line which is already in the red?

Both Boeing, the DOT and the FAA went to great pains to reiterate during the announcement today that the aircraft is safe and reliable but observers do question that assessment given that the FAA is conducting the review in light of the electrical issues and the battery fire that the in service 787s have experienced to date. I do believe that at the end of the day there will be changes that could add to the cost of production of the 787 and may add delays to the planned ramp up to 10/month.

There is no timetable for the conclusion of the review and Michael Huerta did say that the length and any changes that the FAA will require will be dependent on the data that the agency collects and analyzes from Boeing and the suppliers.

A source told me that he feel that the investigation will either validate the design or find issues which they will fix and he welcomes the investigation. It is a serious enough issue to look into but he also thinks that the FAA won't find anything that won't require anything more than tweaks or adjustments to quality control and should not be a show stopper. He isn't losing sleep over the investigation.

In the meantime the battery fire on ZA183 and the fuel leak on her sister ship the following day has generated such a media frenzy that new outlets are now reporting on issues such as cracked windshields,and oil leaks. These are issues that occur on airplanes all over the world and are more of a nuisance than a public safety issue. The media jumped on every little squawk that occurred since the fire. My feelings is that the media has decided to make newsworthy, simple issues that occur everyday on airplanes around the world simply because they were bored and needed to sell papers. There is simply no need to to repot a cracked wind shield or a simple oil leak for any other reason except to jump on the bandwagon with those how are shrilling that the 787 is an unsafe airplane when in reality it is not.

At the end of the day the FAA will make recommendations for manufacturing, quality control, and/or design tweaks to make the electrical system safer and more reliable.

2nd JAL 787 suffers another incident, NTSB releases 787 fire preliminary findings

Another eventful day for Boeing and the 787.  In a surreal twist from yesterday's events, another JAL 787 in Boston experienced a fuel leak mishap as it was taxiing to the departure runaway for the return flight to Tokyo.  According to news reports, the aircraft leaked about 40 gallons of fuel by the time it returned to the terminal.  Maintenance crews inspected the aircraft and JAL 007 then departed at around 4pm for Tokyo after a delay of 4 hours.

The aircraft from yesterday's incident (ZA183) is still in Boston as the NTSB assigned two more investigators to team looking into the event from yesterday.  The team said that the lithium ion battery fire did cause extensive damage in the battery pack area and the damage was confined to no more than 20 inches away from the source.  These batteries are used to start the APU.  Boeing in a separate statement that this incident is not related to the other electrical issues that the 787 has faced.

However, Jon Ostrower reported that United Airlines, while inspecting the lithium ion batteries in one of their 787s, found that the wiring to the batteries were incorrectly connected.  This does not mean that the same condition existed in ZA183 or caused the fire but it may it disturbing nonetheless and would be looked into as a possible cause of the fire by the NTSB.  The battery fire may be a design issue with the battery, a one off manufacturing flaw, or incorrect installation or maintenance of the battery among the many root causes that the investigators have to examine. Despite the two incidents in two days, 787s are still in use by customers around the world and Boeing flew ZA430 (LN 73, B-2728) flew a function check flight. Though Boeing is still working with Chinese regulators to certify the 787 for use by that country's airlines.  China Southern is still expecting it's first 787 in March though it is unknown if the fire will set back those plans.

Japan Airlines 787 suffers fire in aft electrical bay

The most recently delivered 787 to Japan Airlines (ZA183, L/N 84, JA829J delivered on Dec. 20, 2012) suffered a small but intense fire in the aircraft's aft electrical bay less than a half an hour after landing at Boston's Logan International Airport. The aircraft had its first flight on Dec. 7, 2012 and conducted 3 test flights after completing final assembly in Everett. The passengers and crew had already deplaned by the time a maintenance worker smelled smoke in the cabin. Mass port and Boston FD responded to the fire to find smoke in the bay and had the fire under control a short time later.

Initial reports indicate that a battery exploded but it unclear if that happened because of the fire or was the cause of the fire. The NTSB has dispatched a team of investigators to Boston to determine the cause. Reports also indicate that there was a minor injury to one firefighter. Jon Ostrower reports in the Wall Street Journal that the fire may have been exacerbated by damage to the LiON battery by a fire ax.

The aft electrical bay has been a source of problems for the 787 since a fire on ZA002 a little over two years ago forced an emergency landing in Laredo, Tx and set back deliveries by 6 months. In the last few months, there has been an increasing number of in service 787s experiencing electrical issues, some in the aft electrical bay. The airlines that have reported electrical issues include United, Air India, Qatar and LAN. Today's fire is by far the most serious of the problems. One cannot ascribe these issues to teething problems as it now seems that the problems may be far more serious than initially thought but hat determination must await the NTSB report.

It is unclear what affect this fire will have on production, testing and delivery of new 787s from Everett and Charleston though ZA512 for ANA did fly not 1 but 2 test flights today well after the fire had occurred. I do suspect Boeing will continue production and testing while the investigation is on going unless the FAA orders a grounding.

787 Looking Back and Looking Forward: Part 2, 2013 Look Ahead

Now that Boeing has put to bed a very successful 2012 which includes regaining the title as the top commercial aircraft producer (thanks in part to the 787 deliveries that exceeded forecast), what is in store for the Dreamliner program in 2013?

There are several milestones for the 787 program coming up in the year.  Among those are:

787-9/787-10
Assembly and 1st flight of the first 787-9.  Assembly should start around early June and I anticipate that aircraft will be out about 1 month later to begin gauntlet testing in the run up for first flight in late summer or early fall. I expect Boeing to have 3 airplanes flying the certification testing and will be refurbished and delivered to customers after the planned 6 month test flight program is concluded.  Boeing is still aiming for first delivery to Air New Zealand in mid 2014.

Launch of the 787-10 variant with significant orders from major Boeing customers which may include British Airways, Qatar Airways and others.

Production and Delivery
Boeing had executed extremely well on its plan to increase 787 production from 1.5/month to 5/month at the end of the year.  Boeing's plan for production in 2013 was laid out in a conference call to investors. The plan is for Boeing to maintain the current 5/month rate through the middle of 2013 (end of June, perhaps) at which point they will break rate and go to 7/month and finally break rate again in late 2013 to the final 10/month rate.

How many can Boeing build in 2013 and how many they can deliver are two different numbers.  There is a lag between the break in rate and when the first aircraft assembled at the new rate is delivered.  Thus it is a couple of months before the increase in production rate translates to an increase in the delivery rate. 

Production Forecast:
Thus for the production rate Boeing would see a build rate of 30 787s for the first 6 months of 2013 (5/month for 6 months), followed by a build rate of 35 787s for the following 5 months (7/month for 5 months). Followed by a build rate in December of 10/month. Therefore, this total indicates that Boeing is capable of assembling a total of 75 787s during 2013.

Delivery Forecast:
I am going to attempt to quantify Boeing deliveries for 2013 but I have to make certain assumptions:

1) Boeing will produce at a rate of 5/month through June, 2013 then break to 7/month starting in July, 2013 and maintain that through November 2013.  In December 2013 Boeing will move to 10/month.  This is based on currently available information.

2) I'm assuming that there would be 9 week lag between the break from 5/month to 7/month, therefore the first 787 to deliver at 7/month would be in September, 2013.  Even though there is a break in production rate in December to 10/month this rate won't translate to a 10/month delivery rate until 2014.

3) The numbers don't account for production of 787-9s for testing purposes.  I am only looking at deliveries of 787s to customers in 2013.

4) As a point of reference, the first 787 for Royal Brunei Airlines is expected to be delivered around September 1, 2013 according to the airline.  I am assuming that September will be the first month of 7 Dreamliner deliveries from the final assembly lines.

5) Since I don't have the firing order for L/N 131 and beyond I am assuming the following deliver rates for the remainder: 4 aircraft in September and 7 each in the last three months of 2013.  This is a total of 25.  L/N 128 to L/N 130 will assumed to be delivered in September as well for a total of 7 aircraft delivered in that month.

6) Boeing will deliver 12 787s that will undergo change incorporation but this number may grow to 15.  As of January 1, 2013, Boeing has 26 787s that are under going or will under go change incorporation in preparation for delivery to customers.  This includes the last three test 787-8 (L/N 4 to L/N 6 with the last one already well into the change incorporation cycle.

7) I am assuming that all 787s earmarked for the Chinese carriers thus far will be delivered in 2013 (deliveries to start in March). I am also assuming that L/N 6 and L/N 17 will deliver but the customers are unknown at this time.  L/N 17 was originally earmarked for Royal Air Maroc but will be delivered to another 787 customer instead.

Given these assumption let's break up the deliveries between aircraft coming straight off the final assembly line and those that still require re-work through the Everett Modification Center or in San Antonio.

I am projecting that Boeing can deliver 76 787s from all three final assembly lines during 2013. As a point of reference, the first 787 for Royal Brunei Airlines should enter final assembly around late July and deliver about 2 months later in very early September.  I am projecting that from September to December that the delivery rate will be 7/month.

For the rework airplanes, I am projecting 12 787s that are going through the EMC and San Antonio (ZA006) will be delivered in 2013 but Boeing may be able to squeeze 3 more (ZA230, ZA231, and ZA115) if the modification process becomes more efficient.  Boeing is now going to work on 787s that need more time at the EMC due to all the re-work that has to be performed. The tables below summarizes my projections:






Disclaimer
While I try to be as accurate as I can the projections are my opinion and actual delivery numbers more likely differ from my estimate.  There are unforseen issues that can crop upo similar to the issues that held up deliveries to Air India, Qatar Airways and the Chinese carriers.  Additionally, labor strife may once again become a hinderance to deliveries this year if the engineers of SPEEA go on strike.  Word is that a strike may be authorized in Februrary.  Boeing and SPEEA are to go back to the Federal Mediator on January 9th to try and come to an agreement.  If one isn't forth coming then the strike will severely slow down production of all Boeing jetliners as well as significantly slow down the testing and certification of the 787-9.  Boeing can make up some work by using managment engineers but it won't be enough to fill the void. The other issue is the need to manage the production rate increases carefully.  2012 showed that Boeign can do this but they were very measured in their approach last year.  In 2013 Boeing will be more aggresive with the 787 rate increase (two rate jumps from 5 to 7 and then from 7 to 10) and any issues can mean serious trouble not unlike the production snafus in the late 1990s.

Boeing ended 2012 on an excellent note by regaining it's former position as the top commercial aircraft producer (thanks to the 46 787 deliveries).  Boeing is poised to continue that dominance but there will be issues that Boeing will need to resolve if 2013 is to be more successful in 787 deliveries than 2012.  We'll see how it tuens out.

787 Looking Back and Looking Forward: Part 1, 2012 Year in Review

2012 787 Year in Review

2012 was a year highs and lows for the 787 program.  While Boeing executed very well on it plan to increase production and work through the back log of airplanes sitting around Everett waiting to be modified and delivered, the program was bedeviled by teething problems while in customer service. 

The Bad
These problems were magnified by the media spotlight that this airplane had to contend with since 2007.  Every new squawk that appeared was magnified by the media despite the benign nature of most of these issues.  The most notable was the diversion of a scheduled United 787 flight from Houston to Newark, NJ.  The aircraft landed in New Orleans without incident as the pilot noticed irregular indications on the cockpit displays related to the electrical system.  United stated that the issue was traced to a starter generator supplied by Hamilton Sundstrand.

The Good
Despite all this many customers reported that they were very happy with the performance of the aircraft.  Air India was able to turn a money losing route (Delhi to Frankfurt) into a profitable one. ANA itself reported that the aircraft was more fuel efficient than they had expected.  As Boeing works out the excess weight of the aircraft in subsequent block numbers and GE & Rolls Royce brings their respective engines closer to promised fuel burn specs the 787-8 will only get better.

During 2012 Boeing had delivered 46 787s to 8 different customers.  7 of these customers received their first 787s this year.  The airlines that Boeing delivered these aircraft to represented every continent on the world except Antarctica (still waiting for Penguin Air to order, I guess).  Of the 46 airplanes delivered, 31 airplanes had to under go some amount of change incorporation through the Everett Modification Center while 15 were delivered straight from the the final assembly lines at Everett and Charleston. Over all Boeing has delivered 49 787s since deliveries began in September 2011.

I was expecting Boeing to deliver 50 787s this year and they fell short of this number quite narrowly by 4 airframes.  This is attributable to the failure of the Chinese and Air India to take delivery of 787s that are ready for service.

On the 787-9 development front, Boeing, at last report, had completed over 90% of the detailed engineering design work for this variant of the aircraft (this was accomplished back in September, 2012) and work started on the first major fuselage assemblies in the last couple of months.  Boeing is reporting that the aircraft is meeting weight expectations and does expect that they will deliver and aircraft that will come in well under the contractual weight made to customers.

Boeing has seemed to have executed well on its plan for 2012.  They had estimated that they would deliver between 35 and 43 787s in the year and they exceeded that delivery plan. 2013 will be a crucial year in terms of the production and delivery ramp up as well as the start of testing on Boeing newest 787 variant. However there are looming problems that can derail those plans in a significant way. These will be explored in the 787 2013 year look ahead.

Boeing delivers 6 787s in one day, exceed their 2012 high end estimate

Boeing gave a Christmas gift (an early one at that) to its shareholders by delivering 6 787s to 6 current operators of the aircraft.  Boeing delviered one each to ANA, Air India, Japan Airlines, LOT Polish Airlines, Qatar Airways and United Airlines. 

So far only one has flown away (Air India from Charleston) but the other 5 should leave over the next couple of days.  The following aircraft were delivered today:

ANA - ZA510 (LN 59, JA817A)
Air India - ZA239 (LN 60, VT-ANK)
Japan Airlines - ZA183 (LN 84, JA829J)
LOT Polish Airlines - ZA271 (LN 78, SP-LRB)
Qatar Airways - ZA462 (LN 62, A7-BCK)
United Airlines - ZA287 (LN 52, N27903)

To date Boeing has delivered 46 787s overall, 43 in 2012 and 8 in December, 2012.  They may not be done as there is a possiblity they can deliver 1 or 2 more this month but more test flights would have to carried out by both Boeing and customer pilots of Air India would have to be prepared to accept one or even two more 787s that are waiting for them in Charleston.

787 production update

As we approach the Holiday week, Boeing will be going into a slow down mode as is the custom around this time of the year.  There have been moves of late which I'll highlight here.

Boeing has moved out ZA274 (LN 88, SP-LRE) for LOT and ZA184 (LN 89, JA830J) for Japan Airlines.  They moved ZA513 (LN97, JA819A) for ANA into the body-wing join in 40-24 to start final assembly.  This is the last aircraft that will start final assembly in 2012. I expect it to be delivered sometime around middle to late February 2013.

Boeing also moved ZA232 (LN 28, VT-ANC) to the EMC to begin the change incorporation process for this airframe prior to delivery to Air India sometime next year.

I have also updated the tables to reflect the firing order for airplanes 116 to 130. The highlight of this list is ZB001 (LN126) which is the first 787-9 to go into final assembly.

There are a couple of things that caught my attention when I saw the list.  Boeing is assembling this aircraft on the 40-24 surge line and not on the main assembly line in 40-26.  Second, Boeing has diverted the final assembly of the 787-8s from 40-24 and is concentrating the production of customer aircraft in 40-26 and 88-03 in Charleston.  This is obviously in case they run into issues during final assembly of the first 787-9 that there aren't any bottlenecks in 787-8 production.  They are leaving themselves enough margin, it seems, to address issues with assembling the 787-9.  There will be a 3 airframe margin in front of the ZB001 and at least a 4 frame margin behind the aircraft as it makes it way through the final assembly stations in 40-24.

I don't have any information on follow on 787-9 frames just as yet but Boeing is believed to be planning for a 3 aircraft test fleet for the 787-9 with the test program lasting about 6 months.  I roughly estimate that ZB001 should enter the final assembly building around June 13, 2013.  Boeing has said the aircraft will start final assembly during the summer.  Since this is a brand new variant, I am assuming at least 6 weeks for final assembly and another 6 weeks for ground testing before first flight.  This would mean that this airplane can be flying around the middle of September, 2013.

On the firing order nothing stands out though we do get to see the first 787 for JetStar going through final assembly as well as the first 2 787s for Royal Brunei Airlines.  The Royal Brunei Order is listed as unidentified on Boeing's Order and Delivery website but they did order  787-8s with Trent-100 engines.  The airlines says that they are expecting to take delivery of the 1st 787 in early September 2013. This list as it stands now would cover deliveries through early September, 2013.

787 testing picking up as deliveries continue

787 flight activity picked up this week as the weather cleared long enough for Boeing to send up another 787 on its 1st flight.  Yesterday There were 4 787 flights including the B-1 flight for ZA285 (LN 45, N27901) for United Airlines.  There was supposed to be another test flight of ZA238 (LN 54, VT-ANJ but it didn't occur.

As Boeing aggressively ramps up flight tests this month deliveries are also starting to take shape. This evening, Boeing delivered United's 4th 787 (ZA289, LN 55, N45905).  According to a press report by Bloomberg, Qatar is expecting to take delivery of two 787s on Dec.19th. I also expect Boeing to further deliveries of 787s to ANA (2), United (1)and JAL (1).  Wild card deliveries can be made to Air India (2) and possibly China Southern (that airplane still has to make its 2nd test flight).

Now all this continues despite the recent spat of glitches that the 787 has experienced.  The most notable one is the issue with the starter generator supplied by Hamilton Sundstrand.  A second 787, ZA460 (LN 57, A7-BCA) experienced the fault and landed while being delivered to Doha from Victorville.  The generator is being swapped out and the aircraft should enter service soon but the issue is troubling.  Akbar (U-Turn Al) Al-Baker again vociferously complained about the teething problems of the 787 to the media (after the first revenue flight of Qatar's 787 to London) but Qatar is still planning to take delivery of 2 787 next week.  Still Boeing along with Hamilton Sundstrand and the FAA are looking into the issues.  Jon Ostrower of the Wall Street Journal reported that 2 other 787s are affected...one other delivered 787 that belongs to United and an undelivered 787 for Qatar (one of the two that are to be delivered next week). The FAA said the issue doesn't appear to be safety of flight issue and aside for Air India reporting unspecified "electrical problems" no other 787 customers have come forth with electrical probles as of late.  Dominic Gates of the Seattle Times also has an article on the 787 electrical issue.

On the production front, expect things to slow down as Boeing enters its traditional Holiday break.  One aircraft (ZA513, LN 97, JA819A) for ANA will be loaded into the final assembly line and that will be the last until after New Year.

As of today, Boeing has delviered a total of 40 787 to 8 customers worldwide.  They've delivered 37 in 2012 and have to potential to deliver anywhere from 6 to 8 more airplanes this month.

Charleston still building 787s but not rolling them out

With Boeing's North Charleston plant building a 787 once every month, there is an expectation that we would be seeing more airplanes on the ramp at Charleston.  However it has been more than a month since Boeing rolled out an airplane from building 88-03.

The planes being worked on (currently) at this plant are earmarked for Air India and two of the three Chinese customers (Hainan and China Southern).  Given the issues surrounding these customers, it is not anticipated that deliveries will be made anytime soon or if they are delivered, it would be a glacially slow pace.  787 assembly at Charleston is completed in four position, just like the 787 line in Everett. It is my belief that Boeing is going to take its time rolling these airplanes out of the Charleston factory and will use the extra positions within the assembly hall to store a couple of airplanes. There are 8 flightline spots at Charleston so there isn't a lack of room.  The only reason to keep them inside to to ensure all assembly tasks are completed and to protect the airplanes from the elements.

I've listed LN 76 as stored but its location is inside building 88-03 in Charleston.

Projected 787 Delivery Dates for December; AMR in a position to finalize their 787-9 order?

With many of the 787s that are in pre-delivery having gone through their first (B-1) flights. I am going to take a moment and speculate on delivery dates for these airplanes.  These are my own assumptions assuming that these aircraft will have to fly the minimal number of acceptance flights.  For now I'm assuming that these planes will deliver between 21 and 24 days after each B-1 flight though there are exceptions (as in Air India, Chinese carriers, and LOT).  This also assumes that there aren't any issues that would need to be corrected and re-tested in subsequent test flights prior to delivery.

Here's my projected delivery dates for this month:

ZA289 (LN 55, N45905) United Airlines - 12/12/12 - 12/15/12
ZA462 (LN 62, A7-BCK) Qatar Airways - 12/15/12 - 12/18/12
ZA464 (LN 82, A7-BCC) Qatar Airways - 12/24/12 - 12/27/12
ZA510 (LN 59, JA817A) ANA - 12/26/12 - 12/29/12
ZA512 (LN 83, JA818A) ANA - 12/27/12 - 12/30/12
ZA287 (LN 52, N27903) United Airlines - 12/28/12 - 12/31/12
ZA183 (LN 84, JA829J) JAL - 12/28/12 - 12/31/12

Again this is my own speculation but it's based on previous and recent deliveries of the 787.  These dates are always in flux and can change easily so I trust the reader will not hold me responsible if all the actual delivery dates turn out to be something totally different. 

Lastly, these numbers could change as Boeing can deliver 787s to Air India (2), China Southern (1) and even LOT Polish (1).  Boeing is making a huge effort to try and delivery these aircraft within the next 24 days and the way we can accurately tell is the flight activity of each of these airplanes over the next 2-3 weeks.

Lastly, the pilots union at American Airlines has ratified the new labor agreement with AMR today. This could be significant for 787-9 order that AA intends to finalize with Boeing as the order is dependent on AMR agreeing to a new contract with their pilots.  Now this was all before AMR entered Chapter 11 so the bankruptcy judge and AMR's creditors may have something to say about this order and whether it can proceed.  Additionally, a report emerged this evening that US Airways had submitted a bid for American in November.  What effect an AMR-US Airways merger would have on the MoU for the 42 787-9 American intends to finalize is unclear though US Airways does have an outstanding order for 18 A350-800 and 4 A350-900 by Airbus.  Boeing can deliver the 787-9 to American starting in 2014 (theoretically) which is much earlier than US Airways can get either variant of the A350 that they have ordered.  Also a combined company may be opened to operating a mixed Boeing-Airbus fleet as with Delta/Northwest and United/Continental.  A US Airways/American tie up would retain the American name.

Boeing conducts 6 new 787 first flights in one week.

UPDATE (6:38PM): Looks like Boeing has delivered LAN's 3rd 787 today.  Flightware shows a 787 delivery flight leaving Everett at 5:10PM local time for Santiago, Chile.

Boeing is quickening the pace of flying production 787s on their first flight.  Starting on Dec. 1, Boeing has sent up 6 different 787s for their first flight, otherwise known as the B-1 flight.  It appears that Boeing is aggressively trying to ramp up deliveries of these airplanes before the end of the year.  In addition to these 6 airplanes making their first flight, several others have had follow on test flights either by Boeing or customer pilots on several other 787s.

The planes that flew were as follows:

12/1/12
ZA271 (LN 78, SP-LRB) for LOT Polish Airlines

12/3/12
ZA464 (LN 82, A7-BCC) for Qatar Airways

12/4/12
ZA510 (LN 59, JA817J) for ANA

12/6/12
ZA512 (LN 83, JA818A) for ANA

12/7/12
ZA287 (LN 52, N27903) for United Airlines
ZA183 (LN 84, JA829J) for Japan Airlines

Obviously not all of these will be delivered this month, most notably ZA271 but I do still believe Boeing can deliver 8 787s this month possibly going to 10 if Air India sorts out its financial mess.

Given this pace, I can see Boeing delivering a couple airplanes next week but the bulk of deliveries should come around the week of December 17th.  The plan would be for Boeing to fly more test flights next week in preparation for delivery the following week (week of Dec. 17th). Boeing will be mostly closed during the week of Christmas but not fully shut down so we can certainly still see a couple of deliveries during the week of Dec. 24th depending on customer availability and needs.

I have made changes to the notes of some of the airplanes in the table.  Notably I am tracking the number of tests flights that each airplane takes during pre-delivery. After delivery I note which order it was delivered to that particular customer (i.e. ANA #1 meaning the first airplane delivered to ANA, etc.).