With Boeing's revised intermediate gauntlet testing approaching rapidly, potentially as early as today or tomorrow, down from last week's two week estimate, the airframer has offered some clarity about the source of its confidence for its compressed pre-flight testing.The change is the result of two methodological reevaluations in the approach the company had taken on its road to flying the 787 for the first time.
Boeing says the testing changes stem from:
1. Evaluating what testing can be done concurrently and;
2. Establishing what is a true requirement prior to first flight.
The result, says 787 program vice president and general manager Scott Fancher, is a significantly reduced final gauntlet, originally set for eight days, and an expanded intermediate gauntlet, now running seven days.
"We've actually pulled that to the left," says Fancher of the intermediate gauntlet on May 21st. "Because quite frankly the systems are mature and ready to take it earlier from where we originally planned."
Fancher describes the intermediate gauntlet as much more expansive than the factory gauntlet run last month:
"Here we will operate the aircraft on engines seven days, 24/7 with aircrew on the flight deck simulating ground and flight environments, not just nominal flight profiles but a wide range of off-nominals as well, demonstrating the full robustness and gaining confidence in the robustness of the aircraft."Boeing declined to specify what testing was being done concurrently, or whether or not it would be conducted amongst groups of systems, or tasks within systems, but the company has found a significant time savings on the road to first flight.
For the "true" requirements prior to first flight, Boeing also declined to elaborate if these were tasks that had no bearing on the aircraft achieving its experimental airworthiness certificate, which is the regulatory stamp of approval before being allowed to fly, making the reshuffling more feasible.
Overall, Boeing's move of ground tests to the flight testing phase appears to point towards opting to add as much extra margin to the front-end of the 8.5 month flight test campaign by completing first flight as early as possible in June.
Boeing adds:
The testing that has been done, is being done and will be done on the 787 in laboratories and onboard the airplane before it takes flight is more exhaustive than any program in our history.
Each of these tests gives us more and more confidence in the airplane. Our commitment to the safety of every flight - from the first to the last - is unwavering and we will not embark on first flight without having assured ourselves and the regulatory agency that we are ready."
In other 787 news, Spirit Aerosystems loaded up the Dreamlifter yesterday and delivered the first production forward fuselage for ZA100, the first aircraft set for delivery next year to ANA. The Global Aeronautica integrated center fuselage is the last major structural section left to deliver.
on May 27, 2009 6:08 PM | Reply
Jon,
Continued thanks for staying on top of this story which appears to be very positive and encouraging.
With so many delays in the past there is alot of skepticism, but the news out of Boeing is reinforcing of the effort that is going into this stage of testing and the high standards of safety that are being mandated.
There seems to be alot of confidence expressed...not hubris...but well earned confidence in a plane, a methodology and an outcome. Most of us are wishing them well and success in the near approaching test flight.
on May 27, 2009 7:09 PM | Reply
Great news Jon ... sounds like there is a possibility that first flight may take place closer to the middle of the month as opposed to the end. I'm planning on being there and the sooner I can find out the better ... keep up the great work!
on May 27, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply
Jon- Let us know when they relight the engines or if they have already begun that phase. I am still thinking the morning of June 12th is a great day to fly.
on May 27, 2009 7:53 PM | Reply
Trapperpk ... June 12th would be an interesting date, because the LAST Boeing airliner to fly make a test flight was on that VERY day in 1994 ... the Triple-7 took off exactly 15 years ago on that day ... PLUS it's my wife's birthday!!!
on May 27, 2009 8:45 PM | Reply
Was something missing from this sentence Jon?? :
"For the "true" requirements prior to first flight, Boeing also declined to elaborate if these were tasks that "
on May 27, 2009 9:22 PM | Reply
Yep, accidentally had an edit not make it through on that sentence. Just combined the two paragraphs as was originally intended. Sorry about that. All fixed now.
Jon
on May 28, 2009 12:37 AM | Reply
It should be great if she's flying during the Paris Airshow ;-)
on May 28, 2009 2:22 AM | Reply
Jon, if you overlay the information that LN2 is to fly 20 days after LN1 with the F/T schedule you got at the Boeing media day in April, you'll get the calendar - which was left out by Boeing - back into the picture. Using the first delivery of ZA100 milestone at the end of Feb 2010 as an anchor for the timeline, you'll see that first flight has to happen very early in June to make the whole 8 1/2 month scheme work out.
With that background, the re-arranging of the pre-flight test schedule turns into a bare necessity.
on May 28, 2009 2:47 AM | Reply
Jon, this service you are providing us is trully appreciated. This is the first time that we're able to follow the development of a new aircraft this closely and with so much up to the minute detail.
Question!
Would all the test aircraft have to go through these gauntlet tests before receiving experimental flight status?
Thought...
The feeling I'm now having about the 787 changed from; they're rushing too much -opening windows for posible desaster...
to; They really did take their time to plan and exicute what is going to be a very successful and comprehensive first flight.
on May 28, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply
Of course, everyone knows this, but a reminder is not out of line, considering the tone of some in the 'rah rah' crowd's comments.
Everything being done prior to flight is 'simulating' (Boeing's own words) what is expected. So, hubris or not, the idea is to be complete in the preparation. Which closure, by the way, is more provisional than not given the way that the world works as it drives us crazy with unknowns.
At some point, the 'real' comes into play. Getting ready for that is something that the company has done many times, hence it can enumerate fairly coherently what it knows (actually, thinks that it knows) needs to be done. That is what we all expect from practice and experience.
Expecting razzle-dazzle is something left to ex post facto views, Hollywood, and history. It's probably both fortunate (and not so) that the visibility has been elevated. The main difference now is that Boeing is not controlling, as much, what the public sees.
Now, having said all that, the reminder is that the set of unknowns is larger this time around than in recent cases (which were piggy-backing upon the same methods and materials, so to speak, with the 777 being the culmination of that chain), UNLESS one believes strongly in the analytic technologies being applied. Any who might think that those belief issues are not still open (and it's more involved than what we're seeing with just this program) have compactified, perhaps, where it's not yet warranted.
Who knows? That's why testing in the real world of physics is still, and probably will be for some time, the focus for anything beyond the trivial (or closely such).
So, lessons will be learned all around. Even that set may (will?) turn out different from what many might suppose at this time.
on May 28, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply
'Methodological re-evaluations in the approach' sounds like that 1990s' MBA jargon 'business process re-engineering' and simply means 'do it differently' - yes?
And "Our commitment to the safety of every flight - from the first to the last - is unwavering and we will not embark on first flight without having assured ourselves and the regulatory agency that we are ready" surely means "We'll go when the Feds say so..."?
I think we should be told.