Boeing 2012 results; and comments on 787

BOeing released its 2012 financial results, provided guidance for 2013 and talked about the 787 issues in its press release here.

The webcast is at 10:30 ET and the launching page is here.

“Our first order of business for 2013 is to resolve the battery issue on the 787 and return the airplanes safely to service with our customers.  At the same time, we remain focused on our ongoing priorities of profitable ramp up in commercial airplane production, successful execution of our development programs, and continued growth in core, adjacent and international defense and space markets,” CEO Jim McNerney said in the release.

On January 16, 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an airworthiness directive that resulted in all in-service 787s temporarily ceasing operations.  The company is committed to working with the FAA and other applicable regulatory authorities to return aircraft to service with the full confidence of customers and the traveling public.  While production continues on the 787, the company is suspending deliveries until clearance is granted by the FAA, Boeing stated.

Boeing knew of battery issues: NY Times; ~150 failures–Seattle Times

See this story in the New York Times.

The Seattle Times reports that there have been nearly 150 battery failures.

The Wall Street Journal has this article (subscription required).

What’s the cost of the 787 grounding? See this analysis.

The Harvard Business School has this analysis.

The Seattle Times has this report about Cessna using a different on-board system than Boeing to protect against ion battery fires.

Odds and Ends: Aviation author opines about Boeing; 787 grounding timeline; remaking AA

Aviation Author and Boeing: Clive Irving, who wrote a book about the Boeing 747 and who is a prolific aviation writer, has a long piece about his experiences with Boeing over several decades. This thing-piece laments the changes to Boeing that occurred since the 1997 merger with McDonnell Douglas. It’s interesting perspective.

787 Grounding Timeline: A professor with MIT suggested the Boeing 787 could be grounded for a year. A 787 operator we spoke with says, “that’s bullshit.” Although the operator is as much in the dark as anyone else as to the cause of the JAL fire and the ANA smoking battery, his belief is that the airplanes could return to service as early as sometime next month. But he doesn’t really know.

Returning the 787 to service may be a bit of a problem for the FAA. It won’t do so until it is 1,000% assured the airplane is safe. We shuddered at the statement. We’re old enough to remember the disastrous 1972 presidential campaign of Sen. George McGovern (D-SD) against Richard Nixon. McGovern picked Missouri Sen. Thomas Eagleton as his VP. Within days, it was revealed that Eagleton had suffered depression and underwent electroshock treatment.

McGovern said he was 1,000% in support of Eagleton. Days later, he dumped Eagleton and replaced him with Sargent Shriver. McGovern lost in a landslide.

Tell us how anything can be viewed as “1,000%” safe, or “1,000%” anything. We spoke with an engineer for a supplier on the 787, who told us that in engineering terms, they calculate the odds of something happening in some gobbledygook (to us) of something like one in 10th to the minus ninth power, or some such thing we haven’t a clue what it means–except that the odds against something happening are pretty darn long.

(If the preceding paragraph seems muddled, welcome to the club.)

Having stated that the 787 won’t be returned to service until the FAA is 1,000% sure it’s safe, how, then, can this silly thing be fulfilled? The answer, of course, is that it can’t, but the hyperbolic statement was made. Boeing, according to our information, is working on (and proposed) a series of interim steps to return the airplane to service, including inspections and checklists. Initially, we’re told, the FAA rejected this. Can Boeing come up with something acceptable? This remains to be seen. But more to the point, has the FAA painted itself into a corner?

Well, is this a government operation or is the Pope Catholic, or what? While we think that after the back-to-back battery incidents putting the 787 on the ground was prudent, we hope scientific reasoning rather than face-saving actions prevail going forward.

Remaking American Airlines: We’ve seen the new livery for American (and nobody we’ve talked to likes the tail). American said it is also doing new uniforms. As we review the news for Odds and Ends, we saw a headline, “American Airlines to Outfit Flight Attendants with Designer Uniforms.” There was a thumbnail photo to the left, too small for detail but clearly this was no F/A uniform we’d ever seen before. Holy cow, we thought. Then we enlarged it:

Read more

Airbus examines lithium battery safety, fire suppression

Note: The NTSB Sunday said it still doesn’t know what caused the lithium ion battery to catch fire on the JAL Boeing 787.

Japan has shifted focus to a monitoring system, not the battery. The battery charger has been cleared by the NTSB.

Japan eased safety standards ahead of service, according to a news report.

********************************************************************

Airbus officials are trying to keep a low profile during the focus on Boeing’s 787 lithium ion battery problems, but since the A350 XWB will also have this battery type, Airbus gets pulled into the story whether it wants to or not.

Airbus officials are concerned whatever the US Federal Aviation Administration decides is ultimately necessary for Boeing to fix the lithium ion problems and restore the 787 to service, it might have a knock-on effect to certifying the A350.

There are several issues: fire prevention; fire suppression; battery safety; risks and so on.

Although Airbus responded to some questions at its annual press conference, and has selectively talked about the Boeing situation since, it’s declined useful comment on some specific questions, notably about fire suppression.

Read more

A Boeing Classic airliner and the good ol’ days of flying

We’re taking a break from the near-saturation coverage of the Boeing 787 that began when we stepped off our airplane in Amsterdam Jan. 16 (GMT) to find the ANA incident lighting up our BlackBerry.

Boeing 314 replica at the Foynes museum.

We’re going to talk about another Boeing airliner, a classic airplane of which there were only 12 built and whose useful life was cut short by a World War: the 314, the famed Pan Am Flying Boat Clipper.

As Classic as the 314 Clipper became in aviation history, Boeing’s website is remarkably brief about it. Wikipedia isn’t much more effusive. But the airliner nonetheless evokes fascination. All 12 314s were destroyed or scrapped, yet there have been a couple of attempts to find a couple of the destroyed models–sunk in the Atlantic or Pacific–to recover and restore them. Here’s one such effort announced in 2005. This newsletter contains a wealth of history.

In addition to the usual histories and enthusiast books written about the 314, fiction writer Ken Follett penned one largely set on a westbound trans-Atlantic flight on the Clipper. Follett weaves fact with fiction and this war-time mystery is no different. While we found the book somewhat slow-reading, the descriptions of the challenges facing ocean flying in a slow, pre-war aircraft certainly give you plenty of understanding of what flying was like then.

But we weren’t satisfied with Follett’s description. And we knew how and where we could be. And when we went to Dublin on our recent trip, we make special plans to drive across lower Ireland to Foynes, three hours to the west, the port of entry and exit for Pan Am’s trans-Atlantic flying boat service. Here is the Foynes Flying Boat Museum, where there is a full size replica of the 314 fuselage, triple-tail plane and part of a wing.

B314 Tail

Read more

Odds and Ends: MIT–787 grounding to 2014; that’s speculation at this stage

MIT on 787 Grounding: MIT says the Boeing 787 might be grounded until 2014, according to this article in Forbes.

But we caution against drawing conclusions. At this point, the MIT guy is giving his best judgment but the NTSB hasn’t determined the cause of the JAL fire, nor what the failures of the related systems may or may not have been.

Updates today: The New York Times has this story and Fox News has this one.

Mystery Photo #9

Our eagle-eye readers are sure to get this one. What airplane is this?

EngineCloseUp

UWE got it correct. It’s the Boeing 314 replica at the Foynes Flying Boat Museum.

B314 Yankee Clipper_2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We were there last week on our European trip, including a stop in Dublin. Foynes is a three hour drive west.

Odds and Ends: NTSB on 787 Certification; SPEEA countdown

NTSB on 787 Certification: There were a number of small but important news items to come out of the press briefing Thursday from the National Transportation Safety Board were several references to examining the certification involving the batteries of the Boeing 787.

The Federal Aviation Administration previously announced a full 787 program review about the design, production and systems.We’ve already opined about whether the FAA, Boeing and the suppliers can objectively review their own work.

Congress has already said it will hold hearings, a move for which we hold general disdain.

In our coverage yesterday, we had this paraphrased statement by the NTSB chairman:

We are looking at certification standards, whether they were adhered to and whether they were appropriate. What we have seen in these two events do not comport with any design to protect against the battery events. Those systems did not work as intended. We need to understand why.

But we welcome the NTSB certification review. The independent NTSB, staffed by professional investigators, is far more able to assess the work of the FAA and Boeing than is Congress.

There have been many articles that suggest the entire 787 process was a “rush.” Certainly the original time frame–four years from launch to supposed EIS–was unrealistic. But with nearly four years of delays, we’d be hard-pressed to say the program was “rushed.”

There are those who say Boeing believes the grounding was unwarranted. Gordon Bethune, a former Boeing executive and former CEO of Continental Airlines, was blunt in his view that the FAA over-reacted.

We disagree.

Read more

Live coverage NTSB 787 briefing

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is holding a press briefing at 230 pm (ET) today. We’ll have a running synopsis of it right here.

Deborah Hersman, Chair of NTSB

  • Expectation in aviation is never experience a fire on an aircraft. In two weeks time saw two battery events and groundings.
  • Significance of these events can’t be overstated.
  • Been working since Jan. 7 to understand what happened and why
  • Lithium ion battery experienced thermal runaway, short circuits and a fire.
  • Still trying to find out why.
  • 10:49 to 12:15 fire fighters fought the JAL blaze.
  • Fire confined to an area within 20 inches on the battery.
  • The batteries are unique to the Boeing 787.
  • Read more

NTSB briefing on 787 today

The National Transportation Board will have a briefing today at 2:30 ET. In advance of the briefing, NTSB issued this terse statement:

The following factual information has been developed about the battery: It consists of eight cells of 3.7 volts each. All eight cells had varying degrees of thermal damage. Six of eight cells have been CT scanned and have been disassembled to expose their electrodes. All electrode windings in the battery are in the process of being photo-documented and are undergoing microscopic examination. In the coming days, the remaining two cells will undergo the same examination. Additional information will be provided tomorrow.

Meanwhile, The Seattle Times has this story about the battery system.

The Wall Street Journal has this story about Boeing’s innovation for the 787.