Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt

October 2008
Presented by
Burkhard DOMKE
Head of Engineering Intelligence Future Projects Office
Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt October 2008

787 Lessons Learnt 2.0 20. October 2008 46 pages
TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2
Acknowledgements
Felix Lutsch, EIXG 787 Overall Aircraft Design, Weight, and Performance Analysis Iain Morgan, EIXV Long Range Sector Manager Peter Brink, EIXDI Detailed Analysis of 787 Structural Design, Manufacturing and Supplier Facilities Matthias Heimerl, YDI Supplier Business Intelligence Louis Nobre and Norio Yamanouchi, Airbus Japan Local Supplier Information Joanne Potter, PAWT1 / TWA Production Status & Ramp-up Issues
AIRBUS DEUTSCHLAND GmbH. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document.
October 2008
Page 2
Overview
Design Issues Weight Issues Engine Issues Certification Issues Production Issues Travelled Work Lay-up Rates Ramp Up Schedule Issues
October 2008
Page 3
Design Issues - Summary

Wing Center wing box static test failure Lightning strike protection Wiring definition
Fuselage Lightning strike protection Body join across window concept Mid body section join assembly
Aft body join assembly (including pressure bulkhead) Aft body and APU tail cone join MLG doors Pi-Box seat rails Hybrid sine-wave floor beams Single-piece frames
October 2008
Page 4
Design Issues - Summary

HTP Center splice Additional spar Pylon Common pylon/nacelle Systems Power Electronics Cooling Brake control software Generators
Cabin Wireless IFE 16g seats Engines Fuel burn
October 2008
Page 5
Design Issues - Wing

Center Wing Box (Section 11) The center wing box failed assembly-level static testing. The Issue was attributed to an FEM calculation error and classified as minor by Boeing Boeing planned to implement a temporary fix for LN1 to LN6 and a permanent solution from LN7 onwards Japanese supplier sources deemed this a major issue with significant impact on production
Outboard Wing (Section 12) Issues with wiring definition and design changes due to lightning strike protection Engineering changes were interrupted by the center wing box issue
In April, Boeing announced a revised wing design incorporating significant weight savings from LN20* onwards A customer presentation indicates a post-EIS increase in MTOW from 219 to 227 tonnes from LN20 onwards. A Boeing source dated August 2008 advertised a revised airframe supporting this weight increase. This includes strengthening of the outboard wing, the center wing box, the wing leading edges, the MLG wheel well, and the center fuselage as well as enhancing manoeuvre load alleviation. Delivery of LN21 in 4Q 2009 leaves a tight schedule to achieve such a redesign and its incorporation into early production.
TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2 October 2008 Page 6
Design Issues Wing Fasteners / Lightning Strike

Fastener design changed to tapered sleeve bolt type late in design to prevent edge glow within fuel tanks (1) At the time, production lead-time of fasteners was ~60 weeks This lead to a limited availability of tailored-length fasteners Stacks of washers conceived as a workaround created problems with incorrect assembly (2) Solution infringes a BAE patent owned by Airbus
1 2
Design Issues - Fuselage
3
Body join S41/S43 and S46/S47 Initial concept ran the join right across the window (1) Concept altered after barrel mating demonstration Windows eliminated on LN1 (2)
No mitigation observed, not even on later models like the 787-10 (3) Affected passengers may not be happy!
1
Overview
October 2008
Page 9
787-8 Weight Evolution Charts

787_Evol_0908_EIXUG_PR0812577_v2
Pax 260 Seat count 250 SPP Range 8000
787-8 Positioning Evolution
Range [nm ] 8500
AI LR standard changed 3cl to 2cl ADS.K Ad.

240
7500
ADS.G
ADS.E
ADS.H
ADS.C
ADS.A
ADS.B
ADS.F
ADS.J
ADS.K
7000
230
ADS.(K++)
ADS.D
6500
6000 220 Dez 02 Mrz 03 Jun 03 Sep 03 Dez 03 Mrz 04 Jun 04 Sep 04 Dez 04 Mrz 05 Jun 05 Sep 05 Dez 05 Mrz 06 Jun 06 Sep 06 Dez 06 Mrz 07 Jun 07 Sep 07 Dez 07 Mrz 08 Jun 08 Sep 08
Program launch
MZFW [t] 165

787-8 Design Weights Evolution
MTOW[t] 230 225 220 215 210 205
MZFW 160 MTOW
155
150
Firm Configuration
September 2005 Firm Configuration (3 month delay)
ATO
October 2008
Page 10
787-8 Weight Evolution Charts

787_Evol_0908_EIXUG_PR0812577_v2
MWE [t] 102 98.9 98 95.4 94 90 ADS A
MWE [t] 8
787-8 AI MWE Evolution

101.2 100.0 98.9 96.5 96.5
95.4
94.6
94.4
95.5
92.8
ADS B
ADS C
ADS D
ADS E
ADS F
ADS G
ADS H
ADS J
ADS K
ADS K Ad.
Post EIS
787-8 AI MWE vs ADS Rev.F (firm configuration)

6
5.7 4.5 3.4 3.4
4 2
1.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.9 -1.1 Ref.

ADS F ADS G
1.0
-2.6
-2 -4 ADS A ADS B ADS C ADS D ADS E ADS H ADS J ADS K ADS K Ad. Post EIS
September 2005 Firm Configuration

Weight Evolution tables

787_Evol_0908_EIXUG_PR0812577_v2
787-8
Design. 7E7-300 7E7 base 7E7-8 Key Date Jan 03 Jul 03 Nov 03 Mrz 04 Jun 04 Nov 04 Mrz 05 Okt 05 Mai 06 Aug 06 Dez 06 Jul 07 Apr 08 Aug 08 Status ADS A ADS B ADS C ADS D ADS E ADS F ADS G ADS H ADS J ADS K ADS K Ad. Post EIS Pax 245 228 223 221 221 251 255 252 252 248 248 248 248 248 Standard 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR MTOW 214.6 202.9 205.3 216.6 216.6 215.9 215.9 215.9 217.7 217.7 219.5 219.5 219.5 227.9 MZFW 153.8 147.4 149.7 154.2 154.2 154.2 154.2 154.2 154.2 154.2 156.5 156.5 156.5 161.0 MWE 96.1 89.7 92.8 95.4 95.4 94.6 94.4 95.5 96.5 96.5 98.9 98.9 100.0 101.2 DMWE 0.6 -5.7 -2.6 -0.1 -0.1 -0.9 -1.1 0.0 1.0 1.0 3.4 3.4 4.5 5.7 Range 7490 7500 7650 8420 8420 6884 6723 6547 6680 6750 6590 6490 6370 6890 Comments initial configuration information extensive compsites, more electric (no bleed), sakurai hili, cap.reduced span increase, longer nose/tail, reduced LG-length, growth revised TE, conv. hili multifunct, revised tail, growth tracing skipped span inc., changed nose/tail/HTP/VTP, D3 derated, AI rules changed inc. fuse/cabin length, inc. VTP, revised wing ref area VTP increased, new aft galley arrangement untraceable MWE increase, recovery growth no changes untraceable MWE increase, partial recovery growth no weight changes, untraced performance reduction untraceable MWE increase growth
787-8
787-9
Design. Key Date 7E7-400 Jan 03 7E7 stretch Jul 03 Nov 03 7E7-9 Mrz 04 Jun 04 Nov 04 Mrz 05 787-9 Okt 05 Mai 06 Aug 06 Dez 06 Jul 07 Apr 08
Status
ADS A ADS B ADS C ADS D ADS E ADS F ADS G ADS H ADS J ADS K ADS K Ad.
Pax 294 277 276 273 273 286 290 286 286 284 284 284 284
Standard 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 3cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR 2cl LR
MTOW 221.1 219.8 230.0 230.0 230.0 230.7 230.7 244.9 244.9 244.9 244.9 244.9 247.2
MZFW 171.0 163.8 167.8 167.8 167.8 169.6 170.6 174.2 176.9 176.9 179.2 179.2 181.4
MWE 98.5 93.8 98.5 98.5 98.5 98.8 99.3 102.9 103.9 103.9 106.4 106.4 108.4
DMWE -4.4 -9.1 -4.4 -4.4 -4.4 -4.1 -3.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 3.5 3.5 5.5
Range 6735 7500 7950 7970 7970 6727 6494 7261 7170 7200 6940 6870 6810
Comments initial configuration information extensive compsites, more electric (no bleed), sakurai hili, cap.reduced span increase, longer nose/tail, reduced LG-length, growth revised TE, conv. hili multifunct, revised tail tracing skipped span increase, changed nose/tail/HTP/VTP, AI rules changed inc. fuse/cabin length, inc. VTP, revised wing ref area span inc., revised MLG, VTP increased, new aft galley arrangement, growth untraceable MWE increase no changes untraceable MWE increase no weight changes despite span increase!, untraced performance reduction traced ADS K span increase MWE impact, growth
October 2008
Page 12
Weight Growth Areas

200804BCA_787_Program_Update__787-9_weight_Spec_K+
4,300
3,250 2,900
2,100
1,900
1,850
1,800
1,100 950 900 21050 lbs
October 2008
Page 13
Weight Saving Opportunities April 2008

Confirmed Boeing Source Aug 2008
1690 lbs
3921 lbs
October 2008
Page 14
Overview
October 2008
Page 15
Engine Issues
General Electric GEnx Achieved certification of GEnx-1B in March 2008 Rumoured to have missed SFC target by 2-3% Supplemental type certificate expected in March/April 2009, coinciding with estimate by FAA source that certification flight testing may start as late as March/April and another rumour that initial flight testing might switch to GEnx engines
Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 Achieved certification in August 2007 Rumoured to have missed book SFC by 3-4%
Rumoured to need a revised LPT with broader chord blades, which would entail a redesign of the turbine casing. As the casing is a long lead item, the revised engine might not be available in time for certification flight testing
Quick engine change Original concept advertised an engine could be swapped in 1 hour. While this is technically feasible, the requirement remains a question. Boeing now estimates the time for an engine swap to be 3.75 days, with the ultimate objective being 6 hours for a quick engine change (QEC)
Certification Issues - Summary

FAA Special Conditions Interaction of Systems and Structures, Electronic Flight Control System-Control Surface Awareness, High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) Protection, Limit Engine Torque Loads for Sudden Engine Stoppage, and Design Roll Maneuver Requirement (NM362 No. 25354SC) Systems and Data Networks Security - Isolation or Protection From Unauthorized Passenger Domain Systems Access (NM364 25356-SC) Systems and Data Networks Security - Protection of Airplane Systems and Data Networks from Unauthorized External Access (NM365 25357SC) Crashworthiness (NM368 25362SC) Composite Wing and Fuel Tank Structure Fire Protection (NM366 25348SC) Tire Debris Penetration of Fuel Tank Structure (NM367 25363SC) Reinforced Flight Deck Bulkhead (NM372 25355SC)
Composite Fuselage In-flight Fire/Flammability Resistance (NM373 25360SC) Lithium-Ion battery Installation (NM375 25359SC) Operation Without Normal Electrical Power (NM378 No. 250711SC) Seats With Non-traditional, Large, Non-Metallic Panels (NM384 25370SC)
Other FAA reported concerns: Compressed schedule and phased approach Heat dissipation through composite skins
October 2008
Page 17
Overview
October 2008
Page 18
Production Issues - Summary

Parts Shortages Fastener Shortage Travelled Work Conformity and Quality Assurance Issues Configuration Control Shop Floor Control Late Definition Engineering Changes Production Ramp-up Issues
October 2008
Page 19
Production Issues Travelled Work

Parts shortages - Insufficient supply of frames, clips, brackets, and floor beams. Root cause are NDI/QA cycle time not supporting production rate demand Lack of qualified NDI/QA personnel and equipment at Tier-2 and 3 suppliers Deferral of NDI testing from Tier-2 and -3 suppliers to Tier-1 partners to expedite preassembly Further deferral of NDI and assembly work from Tier-1 to FAL to rush major assembly Large number of defects detected at FAL level. Removal and replacement of defect parts incurring damage and repair Repeated NDI/QA testing at FAL level due to all of the above
Fastener shortages, primarily affecting but not limited to Mitsubishi. Root causes are Late change to sleeved fastener design for lightning strike protection Alcoa unable to meet demand in time Unbalance in fastener inventory across supply chain To tackle the parts shortages Boeing has now taken a consolidated approach to inventory management across the supply chain.
October 2008
Page 20
Production Issues Travelled Work

Documentation Production records on deferred work were found to be incomplete or lost in transfer resulting in a loss of configuration control Assembly work was found to be completed incorrectly only after assemblies reached the FAL. Root causes are Oversight not adequate for the high level of outsourcing in assembly and integration Qualification of low-wage, trained-on-the-job workers that had no previous aerospace experience Significant amount of change engineering work Inadequate supplier capabilities in design, e.g. Vought had no engineering department when selected Oversight not adequate for the high level of outsourcing in detailed design Weight growth and subsequent weight saving changes Producibility improvements Late Definition Boeing admitted responsibility for a shortfall in wiring shipments Late specification indicated by supplier as root cause
October 2008
Page 21
Production Issues LN1

LN1 entered FAL 15th May 2007 Delivery to Everett rushed for Potemkin roll-out on July 8th Vought S47/S48 rear fuselage structure 16% complete, systems integration 0% S41/S43 sagged out of shape in transit due incomplete frame and floor beam installation (no tolerance issues) Aft body join S47/S48 could not be completed before delivery, redesign underway Aft body join S48/S48 (APU cone) unknown issue, redesign underway Center body joins S11/S44/S45/S46 redesign for improved producibility underway Replacement of temporary fasteners hampered by lack of documentation
35 part numbers still missing by July 2008 LN1 primary structure still not complete by end of August 2008 after 15 months in FAL Completion now planned for October 6th
October 2008
Page 22

LN2 entered FAL 15th February 2008 LN2 structure arrived 50% more complete than LN1 Spirit S41 nose section structure 95% complete Center fuselage assembled by Global Aeronautica contained partial wiring, flight test equipment, ducting, systems and insulation in the forward section S43 (Kawasaki) and center wing section S11 (Fuji), but significantly less in sections S44 and S46 (Alenia) Vought aft body S47/S48 structure 93%, but devoid of systems and installations on delivery* MHI wings delivered with temporary fasteners and parts missing
* Corroborating source believed to be Vought internal (Design News, 1st March 2008)
Ship 2 went to Seattle 2 months late from last schedule change Several 1000 parts short and no insulation, wrong hardware, no system components, full of FOD and unworked discrepancies generated by Vought Stringer wrinkles and delamination going undetected by Vought quality No inventory control oversight and accountability Inability to attract competent technicians to the facility Novice student inspectors, no competent management organization in-house Ships 3, 4, 5, and 6 all have more defects than the fatigue model
October 2008
Page 23
Production Issues - LN3

LN3 entered FAL 2nd May 2008 Structure arrived 65% more complete than LN1 Spirit S41 structure completion level on delivery 98% Systems completion level on delivery 37% Structural work on fuselage mid-section continued through August
October 2008
Page 24
Production Issues LN4, LN5

LN4 entered FAL 6th August 2008 Delivery delayed 5 weeks due to damage sustained in production at Global Aeronautica Incorrectly installed fasteners, non-compliance by temp worker Ad-hoc FAA inspection highlighted FOD issues and workers bringing in their own tools Spirit S41 structure 100% complete Center fuselage systems installation targeted to be 50% complete on delivery Vought aft body section S47/S48 structure 98% complete, systems 87% complete, including THSA as well as potable and waste water tanks
LN5 was to enter FAL 31st August 2008 DELAYED Center fuselage was undergoing assembly and systems integration at Global Aeronautica. Completion of the wiring approximately 30-40% with major structures fairly complete. Center fuselage systems installation targeted to be 75% complete on delivery Aft body section S47/S48 in the final systems installation at Vought. Due to arrive with 96% of systems installed. Wing ship set delivered on 23rd August with high level of completion but still some wiring outstanding. Alenia horizontal stabilizer and the first Spirit GEnx-compatible pylons delivered

LN8 LN8 mid fuselage to be first fully-stuffed assembly delivered by Global Aeronautica
October 2008
Page 26
Production Issues Material Lay-down Rate

According to Spirit, composite material lay-down rates are far below projections The initial goal was 100 lbs/hr with a single-head machine Production started at 8-9 lbs/hour Efficiency gradually increased to 19 lbs/hour The rate is expected to increase to 30 lbs per hour once a new dual-head machine on order arrives. The rate of 100 lbs/hour now is a mid-term goal.
The following chart has been reproduced from a video of a Boeing lecture held by Al Miller, Boeing Director ,787 Technology Integration, at the University of Washington in November 2007
The Boeing chart is indexed to the 1980 technology level in material lay-down rates. It can be established that a rate of 0.5 lbs per hour was achieved by manual lay-down at that timeframe. Matching the result with the Spirit figures as above seems to indicate that the current production rate is less than a third of the targeted initial rate and almost one order of magnitude below the forecast for recurring production. This will have a significant impact on tooling and facility investment in order to support the targeted ramp-up in production figures
October 2008
Page 27
787 Material Lay-down Rates Projected

1
Demonstrated
October 2008
Page 28
787 Material Lay-down Rates - Actual

500 400 300 200 Airbus Assumption: 1980 ~ 0,5 lbs/hour
500
200
Had a lofty goal of 100 lbs/hr Wont achieve that with LN1
Material Laydown Rate
100
(lbs/hour)
50 40 30 20 10 5
Demonstrated
19 lbs/hr
Multi-head 30 lbs/hr
8-9 lbs/hr
Actual Rates Source: Spirit
October 2008
Page 29
Production Ramp-up Schedule

Original objective was a fast production ramp-up to achieve a rate of 10 aircraft per month in 2010 In April 2008, the objective of rate 10 was pushed out by 2 years to 2012, with a more gradual ramp-up in deliveries in the first two years to mitigate the risk of having to rework early aircraft Boeing announced that due to the delay in first flight by 14 months and the slower ramp up deliveries would be delayed by 20 month on average One airline was advised by Boeing that the production ramp-up would be patterned after what was achieved with the 777 program. This would mean that only a rate of 7 would be achieved in 2012 In fact, Boeing guidance implies that first delivery is delayed by 16 months, from May 2008 to September 2009. Moreover, announcements by various customers indicate accumulated delays of up to 36 months (JAL) with the average in excess of 27 months (ILFC). This matches the 777 ramp-up scenario.
Despite this and the additional delays incurred since April 2008, launch customer ANA announced in September 2008 that they agreed with Boeing that first delivery is to happen in August 2009.
October 2008
Page 30
Production 787 Ramp-up Schedule

Boeing 787 Production Guidance Boeing 787 Production Guidance Boeing 787 Production Guidance Boeing 787 Delivery Guidance EIXDI Production Estimate Supplier A) 787 Production Rates Supplier B) 787 Delivery Rate Study Lehman Brothers 787 Deliveries Estimate Sep 08 Apr 08 Feb 07 May 03
2007 1,6
8 8
2008 2,9
35 43
2009 5,8
69 112
2010 7,0
84 196
2011 7,0
84 280
2012 7,0
84 364
2013
2014
2015
2016
Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Explicit BCA Communication Implicit Aggregate Output Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Explicit BCA Communication Implicit Aggregate Output Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Explicit BCA Communication Implicit Aggregate Output Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Explicit BCA Communication Implicit Aggregate Deliveries
Oct 05
1,6
8 8
2,9
35 43
5,8
69 112
7,3
87 199
10,1
121 320
10,3
124 444
Sales success driving ever more aggressive schedule

10,3
124 608
1,6
8 8
2,9
35 43
5,9
71 114
10,2
122 236
10,3
124 360
10,3
124 484
10,3
124 732
10,3
124 856
10,3
124 980
0 0
0 0
2,1 25 25 2 24 24
1,8 21 21
5,8 69 94 3 36 60
3,3 40 61
8,6 103 197 5 60 120

4,8 58 119
10,0 120 317 7 84 204

8,3 99 218
10,0 120 437 8 96 300

9,4 113 331
9 108 408
10,7 128 459
10 120 528
10,9 131 590 11,4 137 727
Assumed Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Implicit Annual Production Implicit Aggregate Production Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months 787 Production Rates Implicit Aggregate Production Output Implicit Monthly Delivery Rate at 12 months Annual Deliveries to Airlines Implicit Aggregate Deliveries Implicit Monthly Production Rate at 12 months Annual Production Rate Annual Production Rate
3Q/08
2Q/08
0,0 0
Jul 08
2,0 23 23 2,1 25 25
2,9 35 58 5,4 65 90
5,3 63 121 7,6 91 181
9,3 112 233 9,3 111 292
9,4 113 346 9,6 115 407
9,3 111 457
10,8 129 586
Supplier A, B figures believed to be close to actual Boeing production plan EIXDI estimate matching 777 ramp-up profile with further rate increase required to support current sales activities for 2020 slots Key supplier has committed to a peak rate of 7 per month, but negotiations for a higher rate have failed.
October 2008
Page 31
Production Ramp-up Preparation Status

Boeing Second FAL encouraged by customers, but real bottleneck is supply chain
Alenia, Hawker de Havilland Investing in second autoclave and further equipment to support production ramp-up.
Kawasaki Investing in new factory and production equipment
Spirit, Vought, Global Aeronautica No investment in facilities or equipment, preparing for more gradual ramp-up Spirit unilaterally shut down the production of CFRP fuselage barrels in January 2008. Production was slated to restart in 3Q 2008
October 2008
Page 32
Production Ramp-up Preparation Status

MHI Committed only to rate of 7 per month, facility sized for rate 10. Any plan to increase to rate 10 put on hold due to differences with Boeing over financing MHI did have preliminary order for additional tooling which was cancelled No intention to invest in production beyond rate 10 MHI working on wing shipset LN7, no problems in process reported
San Antonio First 20 aircraft to be refurbished and modified in San Antonio, TX

Site is on seven year lease, what for?
October 2008
Page 33
Overview
October 2008
Page 34
Production Schedule Issues

Pre-planned product improvement Original 787-8 Block upgrades LN7 first customer airplane LN100 block entry point for family improvements as spin-off from 787-9 design Added complexity from engineering changes LN7 block entry point for first block of weight saving items LN7 block entry point for permanent center wing box fixes LN20 block entry point for significant wing empty weight saving LN20 block entry point for max takeoff weight increase and strengthened structure (might also conceal a major impact of the center wing issue) Added complexity from schedule slips 787-9 design on hold pending availability of 787-8 ground and flight test data Ground and flight loads data essential to calibrate FEM models Aero and engine performance essential to determine need for additional weight savings Conundrum: Either wait for 787-9 design spin-offs to limit number of low-value wave one aircraft or ramp up fast to recover delay in deliveries to customers
October 2008
Page 35
787-9 Engineering Changes - April 2008

October 2008
Page 36
787-9 Engineering Changes - August 2008
October 2008
Page 37
787 Program Schedule August 2007

LN100 Block Upgrade 2007 Prod Sched
October 2008
Page 38
787 Program Schedule April 2008

LN100 Block Upgrade April 2008 Prod Schedule
October 2008
Page 39
Overview
October 2008
Page 40
Backup
October 2008
Page 41
787 Body Section Overview

Moveable Trailing Edge (HdH) Vertical Fin (Boeing-Fredrickson) Center Fuselage (Alenia) Forward Fuselage (Spirit)
41 46 48 47
Wing-to-Body Fairing (Boeing-Winnipeg)
44
43
Forward Fuselage (KHI) Center Wing Box (FHI) Main Landing Gear Wheel Well (KHI) Leading Edge (Spirit) Wing Box (MHI)
45 11
Horizontal Stabilizer (Alenia) Aft Fuselage (Vought)
Fixed Trailing Edge (KHI) Wing Tips (KAL-ASD)
October 2008
Page 42
787-8 design weight improvements
October 2008
Page 43
787-9 Evolution Charts

787_Evol_0908_EIXUG_PR0812577_v2
Pax 300 295 290 285 Seat count
787-9 Positioning Evolution
Range [nm ] 8500
ADS.K Ad.
SPP Range
8000
AI LR standard changed 3cl to 2cl
7500
ADS.B
ADS.C
ADS.A
ADS.E
ADS.F
ADS.G
ADS.J
280 275
ADS.H
7000
ADS.D
ADS.K
6500
Program launch
MZFW [t] 185

787-9 Design Weights Evolution
MTOW[t] 250 245 240 235 230 225
180
MZFW
175
170
165 220 160 215 Dez 02 Mrz 03 Jun 03 Sep 03 Dez 03 Mrz 04 Jun 04 Sep 04 Dez 04 Mrz 05 Jun 05 Sep 05 Dez 05 Mrz 06 Jun 06 Sep 06 Dez 06 Mrz 07 Jun 07 Sep 07 Dez 07 Mrz 08 Jun 08 Sep 08
ATO
MTOW
October 2008
Page 44
787-9 Evolution Charts

787_Evol_0908_EIXUG_PR0812577_v2
MWE [t] 110 106.4 106 102.9 102 98.5 98 ADS A
MWE [t] 8 6
787-9 AI MWE Evolution

108.4 106.4
103.9
103.9
98.5 ADS B
98.5 ADS C
98.8 ADS D
99.3
ADS E
ADS F
ADS G
ADS H
ADS J
ADS K
ADS K Ad.
787-9 AI MWE vs ADS Rev.F 3.5 1.0 Ref. 1.0

ADS H ADS J ADS K
5.5 3.5
4 2 0 ADS A -2 -4 ADS B ADS C ADS D ADS E ADS F ADS G
ADS K Ad.
-4.4
-6
-4.4
-4.4
-4.1
-3.6
October 2008
Page 45
This document and all information contained herein is the sole property of AIRBUS S.A.S. No intellectual property rights are granted by the delivery of this document or the disclosure of its content. This document shall not be reproduced or disclosed to a third party without the express written consent of AIRBUS S.A.S. This document and its content shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied. The statements made herein do not constitute an offer. They are based on the mentioned assumptions and are expressed in good faith. Where the supporting grounds for these statements are not shown, AIRBUS S.A.S. will be pleased to explain the basis thereof.
October 2008
Page 46

Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

October 2008

Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt October 2008

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Design Issues - Summary

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Design Issues - Summary

Cabin Wireless IFE 16g seats Engines Fuel burn

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Design Issues - Wing

Design Issues Wing Fasteners / Lightning Strike

Design Issues - Fuselage

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

787-8 Weight Evolution Charts

787-8 Positioning Evolution

Range [nm ] 8500

AI LR standard changed 3cl to 2cl ADS.K Ad.

MZFW [t] 165

787-8 Design Weights Evolution

MTOW[t] 230 225 220 215 210 205

MZFW 160 MTOW

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

787-8 Weight Evolution Charts

787-8 AI MWE Evolution

787-8 AI MWE vs ADS Rev.F (firm configuration)

5.7 4.5 3.4 3.4

1.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.9 -1.1 Ref.

September 2005 Firm Configuration

Weight Evolution tables

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Weight Growth Areas

1,100 950 900 21050 lbs

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Weight Saving Opportunities April 2008

Confirmed Boeing Source Aug 2008

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Certification Issues - Summary

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues - Summary

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues Travelled Work

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues Travelled Work

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues LN1

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues LN2

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues - LN3

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues LN4, LN5

Production Issues LN6

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

Production Issues Material Lay-down Rate

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2

787 Material Lay-down Rates Projected

TI - Boeing 787 Lessons Learnt - EIXDI - Ref. PR0813399 - Issue 2