UPDATE 1:10 PM 12/14: After consultation with various sources,
I've determined this rumor can be declared false. Thanks to all who
assisted in determining the veracity of this claim. I understand why
some might've been upset that I introduced this idea in a public forum,
but it helped to answer this question. Thanks, Jon.Yesteday, Boeing cited two causes to explain the latest 787 delay:
The new schedule reflects the impact of disruption caused by the recent Machinists' strike along with the requirement to replace certain fasteners in early production airplanes.I'm not one for rumors, but I feel as though the following comment left on the Seattle PI blog on December 12 deserves some attention:
Posted by unregistered user at 12/12/08 12:49 p.m.
The real reason for the delay is we've found that the carbon composite wings on the static test specimen is delaminating and therefore the flight test airplanes need NDT testing after ripping all the systems out. This is an elementary failure in structural design.
Perhaps this is a baseless claim, but it's worth noting, this is the 3rd time today I've heard the D-word (delaminating) as it relates to part of the 787 structure. The first time came prior to this comment on the Seattle PI blog and then again later this evening from another source.
If this claim of delamination is categorically false, then it should be laid to rest where it stands.It's been a long time since I've crowd-sourced information, but if there is an explanation about this delamination claim on ZY997 one way or another, please contact me at flightblogger (at) gmail (dot) com.
on December 13, 2008 9:05 AM | Reply
Jon,
When I read this, the most interesting part was the "we've found"
Was this deliberate or just a clever ploy to infer insider information.
Whatever, I share your views, it must be discredited or confirmed. Far to serious to ignore..
on December 13, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply
There was a rumor within at least one of the suppliers in this regard. The airframe in question is sitting out on the tarmac.
Ploy to watch rumor flow?
Only Boeing can make this type of information real. Except, we have seen insider info coming out earlier in this blog.
Have the leaks been plugged such that no one will venture to tell what is what?
on December 13, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply
I'm calling BS on this rumor for the simple
fact that if there was only validity to the rumor,
Airbus would've noted it in now infamous intel
brief.
I can't believe they'd miss something that big
on December 13, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply
SonOfSooner: You are aware that the Airbus doc is dated the 20th of October, right? The static test airplane (which appears to be the one in question) was rolled out well after that (afaik)
on December 14, 2008 1:53 AM | Reply
I thought that the (latest) fastener issue was found following the high-blow test and before any further testing had been done on the static test airframe. *If* the composite "is delaminating" then how would this happen without any further testing being carried out and further loads being placed on the structure?
on December 14, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply
Jon,
I have been a follower for some time and I find your insights into the industry refreshing, honest and thorough. It is therefore with great surprise and disappointment that I find you posting this 'article'. It is incredibly irresponsible to put this piece out there without a response from Boeing. Until you have a confirmation, it is a rumor, not fact.
You can do much better.
c|d
on December 14, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply
Seems you're swift at confirming good news for Boeing.
Can you put the same swiftness at work in confirming Boeing is violating an Airbus pattent in the way they put together their 787?
If true, AIrbus could theoretically stop the 787 assembly line by legal means!
on December 14, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply
False.
The wing skins are not made up of laminations of composite material.
on December 14, 2008 8:57 PM | Reply
''Can you put the same swiftness at work in confirming Boeing is violating an Airbus pattent in the way they put together their 787?''
What patent are you reffering to??? The A350 is not using the monolithic assembly process that boeing are using.
on December 15, 2008 4:47 AM | Reply
I seem to remember that the issue of Boeing infringing an Airbus (or EADS, to be more exact) patent was in relation to the fasteners. Ironic or what????
on December 15, 2008 5:00 AM | Reply
Mathew - The static test airframe was rolled into the test rig some time ago. You're thinking of the fatigue test airframe which was recently out in the open.
Designer - the wing skins are made up of a laminate of carbon fibre plies bound with an epoxy resin. Delamination is a term used in composite structure design to refer to separation of the plies.
On further reflection, maybe the poster of the rumour was refering to the wing skins arriving with delaminations from their production. This *should* be picked up in non-destructive inspection of the parts at the manufacturer, but this would be more of a manufacturing problem than a structural design problem. Some allowance is made in design and analysis for imperfections in the part such as delaminations or porosity.
on December 16, 2008 5:39 AM | Reply
Dear all,
I don't understand why some of you are critisising Jon for posting this rumor. He never said it was true, but factually stated it was a rumor from different sources. I was really hoping it was not true but Jon is a journalist and his job is to report,sometimes sensationally. He dared mention the unmentionable and should be commended for it.
On the other hand, there is an eerie silence from BCA regarding the matter which makes me shiver.
Keep it up Jon,
Regards.