Boeing 777X

[Arjen]

Boeing having second thought about automated assembly.

Boeing abandons its failed fuselage robots on the 777X, handing the job back to machinists

Boeing said Wednesday it is adopting a different approach that “has proven more reliable, requiring less work by hand and less rework, than what the robots were capable of.”

www.seattletimes.com

After enduring a manufacturing mess that spanned six years and cost millions of dollars as it implemented a large-scale robotic system for automated assembly of the 777 fuselage, Boeing has abandoned the robots and will go back to relying more on its human machinists.
Boeing said Wednesday it is reverting to an older approach that “has proven more reliable, requiring less work by hand and less rework, than what the robots were capable of.”

More at the link.

 

[DWG]

Seems like FAUB might have been better rendered AFLUB. Having to re-do rivet holes, each a potential weak spot, is not a good thing.

 

[Arjen]

Fuselage Upright Build Assembly Robots. There's an acronym for that.

 

[TomS]

Fuselage Upright Build Assembly Robots. There's an acronym for that.

To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer...

 

[DWG]

Fuselage Upright Build Assembly Robots. There's an acronym for that.

To err is human; to really foul things up requires a computer...

Behind every failed computer is a human going "nothing to do with me, guv".

 

[Foo Fighter]

You know, I wonder just how Boeing make so many fouled up decisions. Almost like they had help, or bribery at the highest level........

 

[dan_inbox]

You know, I wonder just how Boeing make so many fouled up decisions. Almost like they had help, or bribery at the highest level........

Or simply enough greed. Just Maybe.

 

[sferrin]

And this apply to every environment in fact.
How many time do we see enterprises or states going into trouble because the guys under the "boss" blindly say yes to any decisions . Not only for fear of being fired or punished, but for hope of a promotion.
That is how you see ignorants taking management places because the "boss" likes the obedient, then themselves appoint the most obedient.
It works until the system is hit by a big problem (mostly caused by accumulations of "yes" to stupid decisions made by ignorants) , and the system falls. Best example was Soviet Union.

I'd hate to work in that kind of environment. We don't have any problem saying, "the f--k you say?" albeit much more politely....most of the time.

 

[Grey Havoc]

The 777X program is increasingly being hit by fallout from the 737 Max mess.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Speak of the Devil:

Staff emails claim Boeing 777X ‘shares Max problem’

Boeing’s new flagship, the 777X, is threatened with similar safety failings to the US aerospace giant’s ill-fated 737 Max, according to internal emails.

www.telegraph.co.uk

(Registration may be required)

 

[bobbymike]

777X

 

[sferrin]

Wasn't it supposed to be today?

 

[Deino]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1220491128102744065

 

[Grey Havoc]

Boeing enjoys rare moment of brightness as massive 777X makes first flight

The first flight marks the beginning of a rigorous flight test program, which will be under intense scrutiny after criticism of the FAA following revelations about the 737 MAX certification.

www.seattletimes.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

Boeing's 777X jetliner successfully completes maiden flight

Boeing Co successfully staged the first flight of the world's largest twin-engined jetliner on Saturday in a respite from the crisis over its smallest model, the grounded 737 MAX.

www.reuters.com

 

[fredymac]

Hopefully exercising more attention to nitty gritty on this project.

Takeoff

Landing: you can see what looks like wing flexing back down around 42 thru 47 sec but not as pronounced as 787. Automatic wing fold once speed drops below 50Kts at 113 sec mark.

 

[galgot]

Is this the most crappy weather 1st flight ever ?
Beautiful plane.

 

[yasotay]

Boeing needed some good news.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Alas:

Boeing delays 777X deliveries again as it posts record annual loss (ft.com)

Boeing delayed the entry of its wide-body 777X jet into commercial service by another year and posted a record net loss of nearly $12bn for 2020, even as it began delivering the 737 Max to customers last month. The company will not start delivering the 777X — which can seat 384 passengers — to airlines until late 2023, and has taken a charge of $6.5bn to reflect the programme’s decreased productivity. Several other charges brought the total for the quarter up to $8.3bn. The aerospace manufacturer attributed the delay to diminished demand because of Covid-19 and customer requests to take planes later, as well as an updated assessment of how long it will take aviation regulators to certify the plane. “This schedule, and the associated financial impact, reflects a number of factors,” said chief executive David Calhoun. “We remain confident in the 777X.” The market’s demand for wide-body jets was already softening before the pandemic hit. The outbreak has further deflated the appeal of larger jets to airlines as passengers’ appetite for international travel has lagged behind their return to domestic flights. The 777X was supposed to enter commercial service in late 2020 before the company pushed that date out twice, most recently in July, to 2022. Previously, the delays were driven by problems with its General Electric engine. Boeing’s financial results also reflected continued fallout from the 737 Max — which crashed twice in five months, killing 346 people — even as it began re-entering commercial service. The US Federal Aviation Administration lifted its grounding order on the plane late last year, American Airlines added it back to its schedule in December, and Alaska Airlines took delivery of one of the jets this week. The company posted a fourth-quarter net loss of $8.4bn on revenue of $15.3bn, a 15 per cent drop in revenue compared with the same period a year earlier. The company’s full year net loss of $11.9bn on $58.2bn in revenue, a drop of 24 per cent compared with 2019, plummeted past 2019’s $636m loss. The 2019 net loss had been Boeing’s first annual loss in more than two decades. “2020 was a year of profound societal and global disruption which significantly constrained our industry,” Mr Calhoun said. “The deep impact of the pandemic on commercial air travel, coupled with the 737 Max grounding, challenged our results . . . Our balanced portfolio of diverse defence, space and services programmes continues to provide important stability as we lay the foundation for our recovery."

Lurching from crisis to crisis, Boeing delays 777X with demand hobbled

Boeing Co took a hefty $6.5 billion charge on its all-new 777X jetliner as it posted a record annual loss on Wednesday due to the coronavirus pandemic and the aftermath of a two-year safety crisis over its 737 MAX.

www.reuters.com

 

[aonestudio]

Citing a serious flight test incident and lack of design maturity, FAA slows Boeing 777X certification

The FAA has denied Boeing permission to move forward with a key step in certifying its forthcoming 777X jet. It cites a long litany of concerns, including a serious flight control incident on a December test flight.

www.seattletimes.com

 

[aonestudio]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_fssaiuFpU

 

[RavenOne]

Had the pleasure of seeing it fly last Sunday at Dubai Air Show so here are photos.

cheers

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

This past Saturday, the 777-9 flew into St. Louis on a non-stop flight from the Paris Air Show. Boeing employees are going to tour it today (Monday) and it will depart for Seattle sometime tomorrow. My son and I went up to catch its arrival - a few photos to share - first 3 are from me and the the others are from my son. We set up in two different locations for some variety. Last photo was from yesterday thru the fence.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

Caught the 777-9 departure today from St. Louis.... Mark

 

[bobbymike]

Emirates Orders Nearly 100 More Boeing Widebody Airplanes

Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Emirates announced today that the world's largest 777 operator has placed an order for 90 777X airplanes, including 55 777-9 and 35 777-8 jets. The new order, which increases...

boeing.mediaroom.com

 

[windcalm]

Boeing Outlines 777-9 Certification Test Plan | Aviation Week Network

Boeing has revealed initial details of how the long-delayed certification effort for its 777-9 will be structured, with WH003 set to play a leading role.

aviationweek.com

 

[windcalm]

Does anyone know this?

 

[sferrin]

Does anyone know this?

Looks like a bumper to keep them from hitting the tail on the runway during testing.

 

[Helicoprion]

Looks like a bumper to keep them from hitting the tail on the runway during testing.

Dead on, I’ve seen this on other Boeing planes during testing. They are also on production aircraft as inbuilt features. 737-800 737-900ER

 

[windcalm]

A350-1000 or 777-9? Part 4 - Leeham News and Analysis

Subscription required By Bjorn Fehrm May 2, 2024, © Leeham News: We are doing an article series comparing the capabilities of the Airbus A350-1000 and the Boeing 777-9. We looked at the development history of the aircraft and... Read More

leehamnews.com

 

[aonestudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1825648379239821562

View: https://x.com/theaircurrent/status/1825648379239821562

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-grounds-777x-test-fleet-failure-engine-mounting-structure-says-report-2024-08-19/

 

[aim9xray]

Wow, just wow. And the Stonecipher et al legacy stain continues, unbesmerched by excellence competence.

Shareholders, if you want to derive value from Boeing, look into clawbacks from Mr. Calhoun's compensation.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Pardon me, I know these are very old comments.

Since the Boeing 777X could be built at another site, could the skin of the fuselage be friction stirwelded in stead of rivetted? Couldn't that save a lot of weight and get better aerodynamics. And besides, the overlapjoints of the fuselage skins could be removed from the design, which i guess would all help the economics 1 to 3 %, because an aircraft normally flies slightly with a nose up attitude, so the edges at the bottom of the fuselage panels would increase the drag because of the airflow separation at the edges.

Not necessarily, and those ~1mm tall lap joints may instead provide some usable vortices.

Or they're deep enough in the boundary layer that they don't really cause significant drag. (I haven't done any studies at that level to know)

But the rivets make the structure weaker, because of the stressed holes which are drilled. And i´ve looked up methodes which do allow friction stir welding through multiple layers, you just need to find a way to fill the hole which is left at the end of the proces, but that wouldn´t be the biggest problem i guess.

The loss of strength is calculated for, and I'm not sure that FSW is viable with high end aviation alloys like 6061 or 7075. Both of which are hardened before final shaping and drilling. I don't like curving and cutting in T6 if I can avoid it, but I don't want to risk the welds cracking due to overhardening, either.

The story is that at the moment there are not enough technological advancements they could implement into a completely new aircraft which is worth the money and will give a profitable development. If you look to the Boeing 787 and A350 their composites are actually almost used as if the aircraft were aluminum aircraft. Furthermore at this moment an aluminum aircraft is cheaper and actually possibly lighter (thus more efficient) than a composite adversary. And such a big aircraft as the A380 will not be built soon since the market is not ready for it yet. And furthermore the A380 is a very heavy design because of it's oval shaped fuselage and its low aspect ratio wing -> the materials, manufacturing and geometry technologies are simply not advanced enough for such a big aircraft.
And I think the possibility for a new really big aircraft will not be that big, because of the airport restructuring costs (since there is no space at the current airports and a new place would place them too far away from the city centers, or we will need maglev trains or other high speed shuttles, since it otherwise would be interesting to use other means of transportation).

Here's where I think you're misunderstanding why the 747 and A380 are coming out of favor except with very few users.

Mentour Pilot on YT has a thing about the 747 and A380.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaKNmbLDS_w


Both 747 and A380 were designed around an assumption of hub-and-spokes airline operations. Different times for each, yes, but both designed around the assumption that short ranged planes would deliver passengers to a relatively small number of hub airports that would then dispatch long ranged planes to other hubs, then the passengers would transfer onto another short ranged plane to go to their final destination. Say, Denver to New York to Paris to Rome, changing planes every time.

But people really learned to hate changing planes. It never fails that you have to run to the terminal at the other end of the airport at Atlanta, for example (that's about 2 miles away), because your plane is half an hour late and you only have a 1hr layover...

So airlines learned that if they could get a plane with enough range to fly direct, they'd fill that plane. So carriers like Southwest would deliberately avoid most of the major hubs and then go to the smaller airports around them. So, direct from Boise to San Jose/Palo Alto, instead of Boise to Salt Lake City to San Francisco (and drive to Palo Alto). Or Denver to Rome direct, for the international version.

The other issue is that the 747 and A380 are only cost effective when they're operating full. If you cannot fill the plane reliably between those hubs, you're not going to make money on it.

Now, Emirates is making it work, generally, using Dubai as their major hub. But they're also in a pretty unique geographical position, able to keep the A380s pretty full when flying from Australia to Dubai or Asia to Dubai. Helps when they're also carrying people for the Hajj.

So true - I've long held the belief that any MBA should have to pass basic math and physics classes to get their degree.

Or at least write up blueprints and then have someone else make something from them.

Because I have a BBA and had to pass calculus and statistics in order to get it.

Is this the most crappy weather 1st flight ever ?
Beautiful plane.

It's Seattle. It rains something like 330 days out of the year there. The joke is that the rain festival is from January 1 through December 31.

 

[Kiltonge]

Both 747 and A380 were designed around an assumption of hub-and-spokes airline operations.

The vast, vast majority of big-twin operations are based on hub-and-spoke too. It's just the model that works for scheduled long-haul services. Boeing made a lot of PR noise about the 787 being designed for point-to-point, but in practice it just flies from hubs like its predecessors.

Inclusive-tour carriers can operate 787s/A330s seasonally from non-hub secondary airports, but that's because they have a year in which to build demand for the flights.

 

[WatcherZero]

Severed Thrust Link, two other aircraft in the test fleet had cracked Thrust Links.

https://simpleflying.com/boeing-777x-test-fleet-grounded-after-severed-thrust-link-cracks-found/

 

[Foo Fighter]

I refer the house to the statement I made a while ago. "Boeing, boeing, boing boing boing....".

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Pardon me, I know these are very old comments.


Not necessarily, and those ~1mm tall lap joints may instead provide some usable vortices.

Or they're deep enough in the boundary layer that they don't really cause significant drag. (I haven't done any studies at that level to know)



The loss of strength is calculated for, and I'm not sure that FSW is viable with high end aviation alloys like 6061 or 7075. Both of which are hardened before final shaping and drilling. I don't like curving and cutting in T6 if I can avoid it, but I don't want to risk the welds cracking due to overhardening, either.



Here's where I think you're misunderstanding why the 747 and A380 are coming out of favor except with very few users.

Mentour Pilot on YT has a thing about the 747 and A380.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaKNmbLDS_w


Both 747 and A380 were designed around an assumption of hub-and-spokes airline operations. Different times for each, yes, but both designed around the assumption that short ranged planes would deliver passengers to a relatively small number of hub airports that would then dispatch long ranged planes to other hubs, then the passengers would transfer onto another short ranged plane to go to their final destination. Say, Denver to New York to Paris to Rome, changing planes every time.

But people really learned to hate changing planes. It never fails that you have to run to the terminal at the other end of the airport at Atlanta, for example (that's about 2 miles away), because your plane is half an hour late and you only have a 1hr layover...

So airlines learned that if they could get a plane with enough range to fly direct, they'd fill that plane. So carriers like Southwest would deliberately avoid most of the major hubs and then go to the smaller airports around them. So, direct from Boise to San Jose/Palo Alto, instead of Boise to Salt Lake City to San Francisco (and drive to Palo Alto). Or Denver to Rome direct, for the international version.

The other issue is that the 747 and A380 are only cost effective when they're operating full. If you cannot fill the plane reliably between those hubs, you're not going to make money on it.

Now, Emirates is making it work, generally, using Dubai as their major hub. But they're also in a pretty unique geographical position, able to keep the A380s pretty full when flying from Australia to Dubai or Asia to Dubai. Helps when they're also carrying people for the Hajj.



Or at least write up blueprints and then have someone else make something from them.

Because I have a BBA and had to pass calculus and statistics in order to get it.




It's Seattle. It rains something like 330 days out of the year there. The joke is that the rain festival is from January 1 through December 31.

It's also the issue of all the related costs for having 4 engines instead of 2. Prior to ETOPS certified 2 engine aircraft, the rules and regulations pretty much demanded 3 or 4 engine aircraft for reliability reasons. FAA regulations also have everything to do with how composites are used - take look at the early history of the Beech Starship, Windecker Eagle and Lear Fan to see how the FAA was overly conservative with composite structures (primarily a lack of experience/understanding with the design/use of the materials) and required the design to be much like that for metal materials which took away most of the advantages of using composites.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[jstar]

Pardon me, I know these are very old comments.


Not necessarily, and those ~1mm tall lap joints may instead provide some usable vortices.

Or they're deep enough in the boundary layer that they don't really cause significant drag. (I haven't done any studies at that level to know)



The loss of strength is calculated for, and I'm not sure that FSW is viable with high end aviation alloys like 6061 or 7075. Both of which are hardened before final shaping and drilling. I don't like curving and cutting in T6 if I can avoid it, but I don't want to risk the welds cracking due to overhardening, either.



Here's where I think you're misunderstanding why the 747 and A380 are coming out of favor except with very few users.

Mentour Pilot on YT has a thing about the 747 and A380.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaKNmbLDS_w


Both 747 and A380 were designed around an assumption of hub-and-spokes airline operations. Different times for each, yes, but both designed around the assumption that short ranged planes would deliver passengers to a relatively small number of hub airports that would then dispatch long ranged planes to other hubs, then the passengers would transfer onto another short ranged plane to go to their final destination. Say, Denver to New York to Paris to Rome, changing planes every time.

But people really learned to hate changing planes. It never fails that you have to run to the terminal at the other end of the airport at Atlanta, for example (that's about 2 miles away), because your plane is half an hour late and you only have a 1hr layover...

So airlines learned that if they could get a plane with enough range to fly direct, they'd fill that plane. So carriers like Southwest would deliberately avoid most of the major hubs and then go to the smaller airports around them. So, direct from Boise to San Jose/Palo Alto, instead of Boise to Salt Lake City to San Francisco (and drive to Palo Alto). Or Denver to Rome direct, for the international version.

The other issue is that the 747 and A380 are only cost effective when they're operating full. If you cannot fill the plane reliably between those hubs, you're not going to make money on it.

Now, Emirates is making it work, generally, using Dubai as their major hub. But they're also in a pretty unique geographical position, able to keep the A380s pretty full when flying from Australia to Dubai or Asia to Dubai. Helps when they're also carrying people for the Hajj.



Or at least write up blueprints and then have someone else make something from them.

Because I have a BBA and had to pass calculus and statistics in order to get it.




It's Seattle. It rains something like 330 days out of the year there. The joke is that the rain festival is from January 1 through December 31.

I was in the Army at Ft. Lewis. We would joke that the inclement weather schedule went into effect when the sun came out.

 

[Moose]

Severed Thrust Link, two other aircraft in the test fleet had cracked Thrust Links.

https://simpleflying.com/boeing-777x-test-fleet-grounded-after-severed-thrust-link-cracks-found/

Sounds like someone messed up the metallurgy...badly.

 

[Arjen]

What exactly were the selection criteria for the members of Boeing's current Board of Directors? Or any of Boeing's Directors over the past two decades?

View: https://youtu.be/kdFnfcxhNnA?si=QE0GBB4rP7JxBOjT