Grounded Dreamliner rushed into production with tight deadlines
NEW YORK — The 787 Dreamliner was born in a moment of desperation.
It was 2003 and Boeing, the company that defined modern air travel, had just lost its title as the world’s largest plane manufacturer to European rival Airbus. Its CEO had resigned in a defence-contract scandal. And its stock had plunged to the lowest price in a decade.
Two years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, financially troubled airlines were reluctant to buy new planes. Boeing needed something revolutionary to win back customers.
Salvation had a code name: Yellowstone.
It was a plane that promised to be lighter and more technologically advanced than any other. Half of it would be built with new plastics instead of aluminum. The cabin would be more comfortable for passengers, and airlines could cut their fuel bills by 20 per cent.
But once production started, the gap between vision and reality quickly widened. The jet that was eventually dubbed the Dreamliner became plagued with manufacturing delays, cost overruns and sinking worker morale.
In interviews with the Associated Press, a dozen former Boeing engineers, designers and managers recounted the pressure to meet tight deadlines. Adding to the chaos was the company’s never-before-tried plan to build a plane from parts made around the globe.
Many question whether the rush contributed to a series of problems that led the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration last week to take the extraordinary step of grounding the 787. Other countries did the same.
Even before a single bolt was tightened, the Dreamliner was different. Global suppliers would develop, and then build, most of the parts in locations as far away as Germany, Japan and Sweden. Boeing’s own employees would manufacture just 35 per cent of the plane before assembling the final aircraft at its plant outside Seattle.
The Dreamliner was unlike anything else previously proposed. Half of its structure would be made of plastics reinforced with carbon fibre, a composite material that is both lighter and stronger than aluminum. In another first, the plane would rely on rechargeable lithium-ion batteries to start its auxiliary power unit, which provides power on the ground or if the main engines quit.
While other planes divert hot air from the engines through internal ducts to power some functions, the 787 uses electricity. Getting rid of those ducts is one thing that makes the plane lighter.
There were also benefits for passengers. The plane’s extra strength allowed for larger windows and a more comfortable cabin pressure. Because composites can’t corrode like aluminum, the humidity in the cabin could be as much as 16 per cent, double that of a typical aircraft. That meant fewer dry throats and stuffy noses.
Before a single aircraft was built, the plane was an instant hit, becoming the fastestselling new jet in history. Advance orders were placed for more than 800 planes. Boeing seemed to be on its way back.
Boeing had hoped, by the end of 2013, to double production of the Dreamliner to 10 planes a month. There are 799 unfilled orders for the plane.
Then, this month, all the progress came to a jarring halt.
The FAA’s order to stop flying the Dreamliner came after a battery fire aboard a 787 in Boston and another battery incident during a flight in Japan. It was the first time the FAA had grounded a whole fleet of planes since 1979, when it ordered the DC10 out of the sky following a series of fatal crashes.
Inspectors have focused on the plane’s lithium-ion batteries and its complicated electrical system, which were developed by subcontractors in Japan, France, Arizona and North Carolina.
Problems also popped up on other planes. There were fuel and oil leaks, a cracked cockpit window and a computer glitch that erroneously indicated a brake problem.
U.S. and Japanese investigators have yet to determine the cause of the problems, and the longer the 787 stays grounded, the more money Boeing must pay airlines in penalties.
“It’s been a very expensive process, and it’s not going to let up anytime soon,” said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with the Teal Group. “At this point, the aircraft still looks very promising. I don’t think anybody is talking about cancelling orders but people are nervous about the schedule.”