Quote by Barit1:
But the "common knowledge" is that the T1000 engine that failed on 2 Aug was intended for a deliverable 787 (ship #9?). Why was this engine undergoing a development test, "well in excess of service conditions"? That doesn't seem a defensible practice.''
''Common knowledge''? I don't know where this rumour has come from, but that was a pure development engine and as such would never be put into service. There are only four R-R powered aircraft in the flight development programme.
The first 'customer' engine was only put on test 3 weeks ago.