Page 59, whew! So much content!
Some weeks ago following the fin removal, I visited the aircraft and iscussed the repair with the on-site Boeing project manager. Though he was officially unable to disclose any details about the repair, he did not deny that the repair would take the form of a splice repair, and that it would be full, permanent repair, with the aircraft re-entering commercial service upon completion.
Though the fin was removed to improve aircraft stability, I have never seen such a heavily trestled aircraft in my whole career. When Boeing carry out an AOG repair it is nothing but impressive; a tented facility/factory manned by 60 Engineers & Composite Specialists, with the aircraft shrouded in an environmentally controlled enclosure. Good stuff!
Though details were not forthcoming, I got the impression that the damaged area would be removed, and replaced with an identical piece cut from an existing (or purposely made) aft fuselage section and spliced together. Note: Being a 'plastic' aircraft does mean it is necessarily 'glued together', and as such does not exclude the use of near conventional fasteners.
With regard to the LHR-LHR test flight on the 23rd, this is nothing unusual, especially given the circumstances and depth of work carried out.
Commenting on the earlier 'metal vs plastic' arguements; had this been a metal aircraft it would have been repaired months ago, using conventional methods.
It might also be worth dwelling on the fact that to achieve certification from the regulatory authorities prior to EIS, Boeing would have been required have in place a working Structural Repair Manaul (or equivalent) and been able demonstrate a AOG Repair Scheme support program.
Good to see it flying again, and the speculation put to bed!