MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
Join Date: May 2008
Location: denmark
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
=Loose rivets;10525526]Just noticed this:-
Just imagine showing Ada a few pictures of the future ..
<Link to Quora question about aviation flight-safety critical software>
Just imagine showing Ada a few pictures of the future ..
<Link to Quora question about aviation flight-safety critical software>
Both tools generate a simple subset of C.
The projects I have been involved in used:
- SCADE / absint
- TMS470 Lock-stepped CPU
- TTEthernet https://www.tttech.com/wp-content/up...ule_Core_2.pdf
Safety critical software generally need a deterministic CPU's with Lock-stepping, either with two CPU's or a Lock-steeped CPU.
For higher safety levels things like operating systems, unbound loops, and run-time memory allocation is not allowed.
Basically IO's are handled via. small interrupt routines, and the rest of the control runs in one large control loop with a constant fixed scan rate.
This makes it possible to ensure Worst Case Execution time is fulfilled even if an event occur that makes all states change in the same scan.
For this a tool absint https://www.absint.com/ can be used to analyse the binary object code to calculate the number of clock cycles the CPU need to execute the worst case program flow.
This is why I'm baffled that Boeing have released software for flight that could be 'overloaded'.
https://projekter.aau.dk/projekter/f...os_Ganitis.pdf
There are still aircraft out there which use the 1.44mb floppy disc to update the FMS database. FMS computing speed is often less than stellar, with even simple calculations taking forever in today's terms. I sometimes need to tell younger copilots to slow down their inputs as the aircraft's processing power can't keep up with the iPhone generation of new pilots.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I have made up from the sparse information available is that the problem is probably the redundancy path in the Zilog CPU if the 286 is faulted.
So I would assume it is task scheduling and synchronization in the the secondary ("even less powerfull") CPU. I'd be curious when this was tested the last time before the FAA inspection.
So I would assume it is task scheduling and synchronization in the the secondary ("even less powerfull") CPU. I'd be curious when this was tested the last time before the FAA inspection.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: denmark
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No direct knowledge, but I think part of what they are struggling with on the MAX is that the system where MCAS is resident was never designed to be flight critical - I'm guessing it was Design Assurance Level (DAL C) - now since it's understood MCAS is flight critical, they're having to re-certify it as DAL A. That's a big, time consuming deal, and they are finding some unexpected items that have been there all along (without causing problems) but need to be corrected to make it DAL A.
The questions is what solution they are aiming for.
1) DAL C'ish solution where the aircraft can be brought under control after a runaway. (e.g. via.a new alternate trim motor)
2) DAL A solution that prevents runaway.
Solution 1 might not require MCAS to be more reliable than it is today (Failure rate DAL C 1E-5 hour)
The questions is what architectural changes are needed to upgrade to DAL A?
Are the FCC A/B hardware up to the spec, or do it need to be upgraded?
The Stabilizer Trim Electrical Actuator can also fail (In Stuck, or runaway mode).
So there need to be two Trim Actuators.
The runaway failure mode in the actuators is just as dangerous as the commands issued from MCAS running in the FCC A/B.
So the runaway detection need to be DAL A also, either by including this in the trim motor controls, or in the FCC's
And the 'relay logic' for manual trim and cutout also need to be changed, or completely removed and have trim stab switches wired to the FCC's instead.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I have made up from the sparse information available is that the problem is probably the redundancy path in the Zilog CPU if the 286 is faulted.
So I would assume it is task scheduling and synchronization in the the secondary ("even less powerfull") CPU. /unbenannt_49f0aaa335450e671767832c21a8cd16738a8b50.jpg
So I would assume it is task scheduling and synchronization in the the secondary ("even less powerfull") CPU. /unbenannt_49f0aaa335450e671767832c21a8cd16738a8b50.jpg
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since when? - would be also a question to ask.
Some difficulty in following the digital discussions, but is the cure entirely in Boeing hands.
Boeing must be involved with the overall specification and hold certification responsibility, but the ‘box of digits’ is probably made elsewhere.
If the problems are in the FGC, then who make this - Collins ?
To what extent will changes affect other high integrity functions - AP, Cat 3, etc. The digital processing and software has to be revalidated to the latest standards, but what further proof could be required is approving operational aspects ?
Boeing must be involved with the overall specification and hold certification responsibility, but the ‘box of digits’ is probably made elsewhere.
If the problems are in the FGC, then who make this - Collins ?
To what extent will changes affect other high integrity functions - AP, Cat 3, etc. The digital processing and software has to be revalidated to the latest standards, but what further proof could be required is approving operational aspects ?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uncertainty over exactly how a system may respond to new instructions/operations not envisaged by the original developers could take a long time to untangle.
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is why I'm baffled that Boeing have released software for flight that could be 'overloaded'.
How old are some of the ac flying that use the latest version of the software?
When was the last time anyone saw the FMS hardware replaced? The software has to work on all variants applied, no matter the year, make/model, but the FMS date. Does the stick update every 777 or only certain FMS models???
Does the latest ac fly on a V1.0 or V14? ( or whatever V is the most recent?)
Remember how good some of the version updates have been?
Last edited by Smythe; 24th Jul 2019 at 00:38.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What version is the FMS software up to by now? What version of the hardware uses the latest version of the software?
How old are some of the ac flying that use the latest version of the software?
When was the last time anyone saw the FMS hardware replaced? The software has to work on all variants applied, no matter the year, make/model, but the FMS date. Does the stick update every 777 or only certain FMS models???
Does the latest ac fly on a V1.0 or V14? ( or whatever V is the most recent?)
Remember how good some of the version updates have been?
How old are some of the ac flying that use the latest version of the software?
When was the last time anyone saw the FMS hardware replaced? The software has to work on all variants applied, no matter the year, make/model, but the FMS date. Does the stick update every 777 or only certain FMS models???
Does the latest ac fly on a V1.0 or V14? ( or whatever V is the most recent?)
Remember how good some of the version updates have been?
This article is a good background to how the situation with the MAX came about.
https://blog.thetravelinsider.info/2...e-project.html
https://blog.thetravelinsider.info/2...e-project.html
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AP
https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...billion-in-2q/
Boeing posts loss of nearly $3 billion in 2Q
July 24, 2019 at 5:12 am Updated July 24, 2019 at 9:49 am
By DAVID KOENIG
The Associated Press
DALLAS (AP) — Boeing reported a second quarter loss of nearly $3 billion as it absorbed the financial damage caused by the grounding of its 737 Max airliner after two deadly crashes.
The giant aircraft maker said Wednesday that revenue plunged 35% from a year earlier, as it was unable to deliver any new Max jets.
Boeing removed much of the suspense from earnings day when it announced last week that it would take a $4.9 billion after-tax charge for the Max and expected the troubled plane to return to service in the fourth quarter.
That charge was calculated from Boeing’s estimate of the cost of compensating airlines for lost use of their Max planes for several months. It did not include Boeing’s potential liability from dozens of lawsuits filed by relatives of the 346 passengers who died in the crashes.
Boeing’s statement Wednesday offered no new guidance about the Max or the company’s profit expectations for the rest of the year. Investors were likely more focused on commentary that management might provide during a conference call that was scheduled for later in the morning.
The Chicago-based company, which builds planes in Washington state and South Carolina, said it lost $2.94 billion in the quarter, compared with a profit of $2.20 billion a year earlier. It reported an adjusted loss of $5.82 per share.
Revenue tumbled to $15.75 billion from $24.26 billion a year earlier.
The huge charge for the Max caused the quarterly numbers to mean less than usual. Some analysts excluded the charge from their forecast of earnings per share, while others did not, making it difficult if not impossible to judge whether Boeing met, beat or fell short of Wall Street expectations.
Boeing is working to complete changes in flight-control software on the 737 Max that was implicated in the fatal crashes. The company said it is testing the final software changes that it will submit to the Federal Aviation Administration for approval.
In a statement, Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg said, “This is a defining moment for Boeing,” and that the company was focused on safely returning the Max to service.
Some relatives of passengers who died in the crashes — one off the coast of Indonesia in October, the other in Ethiopia in March — have urged Boeing and regulators to scrap the plane. They argue that the flight-control software is a bandage meant to cover a plane that was more prone to aerodynamic stalls because of the larger size and forward position of its engines compared to previous Boeing 737 models.
Among those calling for ditching the plane are longtime consumer crusader Ralph Nader, whose grandniece died in the Ethiopia crash, and Paul Njoroge, a Canadian who told a congressional panel this month about losing his wife, three children and mother-in-law on the same flight.
Even after the second crash, those in the airline industry, including CEOs and pilots, have never wavered in their absolute certainty that the plane will fly again. It has taken far longer than most expected, however, for Boeing to produce a fix for the flight-control system that activated when it should not have on the two flights that crashed.
“There is some frustration, but the general sense I get from the membership is they don’t want anything rushed either,” said Eric Ferguson, new president of the American Airlines pilots’ union. “We will get that airplane back in the air when the time comes, not any sooner.”
Separately, Boeing on Wednesday announced that the first flight of its 777X jumbo jet will be delayed until next year instead of late this year because of problems with the General Electric engines. Boeing still aims to deliver the first planes to airlines in late 2020.
In trading shortly before the opening bell, Boeing shares were down $3.51, or nearly 1%, to $369.56.
Boeing Co. stock has lagged the broader market since the first crash and a halting, much-delayed process of fixing the flight software.
Since the first crash in late October, Boeing shares had gained 4% through Tuesday’s closing price, compared with a 13% rise in the S&P 500 index. The gap has widened since an Ethiopian Airlines Max crashed in March — Boeing shares have fallen nearly 12%, while the S&P has gained nearly 10%.
___
July 24, 2019 at 5:12 am Updated July 24, 2019 at 9:49 am
By DAVID KOENIG
The Associated Press
DALLAS (AP) — Boeing reported a second quarter loss of nearly $3 billion as it absorbed the financial damage caused by the grounding of its 737 Max airliner after two deadly crashes.
The giant aircraft maker said Wednesday that revenue plunged 35% from a year earlier, as it was unable to deliver any new Max jets.
Boeing removed much of the suspense from earnings day when it announced last week that it would take a $4.9 billion after-tax charge for the Max and expected the troubled plane to return to service in the fourth quarter.
That charge was calculated from Boeing’s estimate of the cost of compensating airlines for lost use of their Max planes for several months. It did not include Boeing’s potential liability from dozens of lawsuits filed by relatives of the 346 passengers who died in the crashes.
Boeing’s statement Wednesday offered no new guidance about the Max or the company’s profit expectations for the rest of the year. Investors were likely more focused on commentary that management might provide during a conference call that was scheduled for later in the morning.
The Chicago-based company, which builds planes in Washington state and South Carolina, said it lost $2.94 billion in the quarter, compared with a profit of $2.20 billion a year earlier. It reported an adjusted loss of $5.82 per share.
Revenue tumbled to $15.75 billion from $24.26 billion a year earlier.
The huge charge for the Max caused the quarterly numbers to mean less than usual. Some analysts excluded the charge from their forecast of earnings per share, while others did not, making it difficult if not impossible to judge whether Boeing met, beat or fell short of Wall Street expectations.
Boeing is working to complete changes in flight-control software on the 737 Max that was implicated in the fatal crashes. The company said it is testing the final software changes that it will submit to the Federal Aviation Administration for approval.
In a statement, Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg said, “This is a defining moment for Boeing,” and that the company was focused on safely returning the Max to service.
Some relatives of passengers who died in the crashes — one off the coast of Indonesia in October, the other in Ethiopia in March — have urged Boeing and regulators to scrap the plane. They argue that the flight-control software is a bandage meant to cover a plane that was more prone to aerodynamic stalls because of the larger size and forward position of its engines compared to previous Boeing 737 models.
Among those calling for ditching the plane are longtime consumer crusader Ralph Nader, whose grandniece died in the Ethiopia crash, and Paul Njoroge, a Canadian who told a congressional panel this month about losing his wife, three children and mother-in-law on the same flight.
Even after the second crash, those in the airline industry, including CEOs and pilots, have never wavered in their absolute certainty that the plane will fly again. It has taken far longer than most expected, however, for Boeing to produce a fix for the flight-control system that activated when it should not have on the two flights that crashed.
“There is some frustration, but the general sense I get from the membership is they don’t want anything rushed either,” said Eric Ferguson, new president of the American Airlines pilots’ union. “We will get that airplane back in the air when the time comes, not any sooner.”
Separately, Boeing on Wednesday announced that the first flight of its 777X jumbo jet will be delayed until next year instead of late this year because of problems with the General Electric engines. Boeing still aims to deliver the first planes to airlines in late 2020.
In trading shortly before the opening bell, Boeing shares were down $3.51, or nearly 1%, to $369.56.
Boeing Co. stock has lagged the broader market since the first crash and a halting, much-delayed process of fixing the flight software.
Since the first crash in late October, Boeing shares had gained 4% through Tuesday’s closing price, compared with a 13% rise in the S&P 500 index. The gap has widened since an Ethiopian Airlines Max crashed in March — Boeing shares have fallen nearly 12%, while the S&P has gained nearly 10%.
___
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing says it might have to shut down 737 Max production
The news just keeps growing more dismal for B. So far, the stock hasn't been hammered, despite having lost close to $6 per share in the second quarter.
More
New York (CNN Business) Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg warned investors Wednesday that the company might need to further slow or temporarily halt its 737 Max production.
Boeing has continued to build the 737 Max, its bestselling jet, although at a slower pace. The plane has been grounded since mid-March because of two fatal crashes that killed more than 300 people.
Boeing hopes to get approval for the plane to fly again sometime early in the fourth quarter. Muilenburg said any further delays in approval to fly the 737 Max again could jeopardize its production. A further slowdown or temporary shutdown of 737 Max production is "not something we want to do, but an alternative that we have to prepare for," Muilenburg told investors on a conference call. He said the company needs to prepare for that "to make sure we've covered all scenarios."
Boeing has continued to build the 737 Max, its bestselling jet, although at a slower pace. The plane has been grounded since mid-March because of two fatal crashes that killed more than 300 people.
Boeing hopes to get approval for the plane to fly again sometime early in the fourth quarter. Muilenburg said any further delays in approval to fly the 737 Max again could jeopardize its production. A further slowdown or temporary shutdown of 737 Max production is "not something we want to do, but an alternative that we have to prepare for," Muilenburg told investors on a conference call. He said the company needs to prepare for that "to make sure we've covered all scenarios."
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...on-production/
Boeing says 737 MAX crisis could temporarily shut down Renton production
July 24, 2019 at 10:51 am Updated July 24, 2019 at 11:21 am)
By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter
Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg said Wednesday that though the company’s “best estimate” is that the 737 MAX will return to service in October, a slip in that optimistic timeline could mean the Renton 737 production line would be temporarily shut down.
“That’s not something we want to do, but something we have to prepare for,” he said on the second-quarter earnings teleconference call with analysts and the press.
Such a drastic step would mean temporary layoffs at the plant, which currently employs more than 10,000 people.
“A temporary shutdown could be more efficient than a sustained lower production rate,” Muilenburg said. “That’s what we are thinking our way through.”
Wednesday’s call also included worrying news for Boeing’s Everett factory: The new 777X that rolled out of the factory in March will not fly until next year because of delays in fixing a problem with the plane’s GE-9X engine.
Though Boeing says it hopes to deliver the 777X to its first customer by the end of 2020, that’s a very tight and optimistic timeline for a flight test schedule. Until then, Boeing will need to line up new orders for the freighter version of the current 777 model if it’s to maintain the current low 777 delivery rate of 3.5 jets per month.
Following the grounding of the 737 MAX, forced by two crashes of the aircraft that killed 346 people, Boeing cut production in Renton from 52 jets per month to 42 per month to reduce the number of parked airplanes stacking up.
Even so, it maintained the workforce level as it was, hopeful of a quick resolution to the MAX crisis so that the assembly lines could soon ramp back up again.
But clearance for the MAX to fly again from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other overseas regulators has slipped out over the past months. Approval of Boeing’s software fix for the flight control system implicated in the two crashes — the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — is taking much longer than anticipated.
And last month, FAA pilots flying a MAX simulator test found a new issue separate from MCAS when a microprocessor in the jet’s flight computer was shown to have a possible failure that could also lead to the airplane’s nose being pushed down uncommanded by the pilot. Boeing is working on a separate software fix for that, and because it’s flight critical software it cannot be rushed.
On the possibility of shuttering Renton, Muilenburg said that lowering the production rate to some lower figure than 42 jets per month “presents some challenges to our supply chain and synchronization of our workforce and how you would consider ramping back up later.”
He said that top management is doing daily scenario assessments of the timing of the MCAS and microprocessor software updates, the status of regulatory approval from the FAA and foreign aviation authorities, and the rate at which the airlines could take delivery of the planes once clearance is given, along with the stability of the 737 supply chain and of the Renton assembly lines.
Everything else depends on that first step: approval to fly again, which the FAA will determine with other regulators.
“We have to go through a multi-regulator approval process,” said Muilenburg, “It’s a complex process.”
Given the significant uncertainty in the timeline, he said, Boeing’s “best estimate” is that it will submit its final software updates and a new system safety analysis for certification purposes in September. That will be followed by an FAA flight test. Boeing then hopes for clearance from the FAA and other regulators in October.
Muilenburg conceded that the period from the FAA test flight to final confirmation of all the flight test data and analysis “is typically a process that’s measured in a number of weeks.” So achieving all that in just a month or so would clearly be the best possible outcome, and may be overly optimistic.
For Boeing, cutting a jet production rate — or worse, shutting down the line — is a much harder and riskier step than ramping up production.
Severely reducing production would mean layoffs not only at Boeing but at suppliers, big and small. Small suppliers who lay off workers may simply lose them as they take jobs elsewhere in the current healthy economy. That could present a serious barrier to quickly ramping up again.
Muilenburg said “there’s no one specific trigger” that would lead to the shutdown of Renton.
“We are going to continually look at this,” he said. “That includes a very close focus on our workforce.”
“We place incredible value on our teammates there, ” he said. “We are working every dimension we can to preserve that workforce and maintain that learning for future production system ramp-up.”
Meanwhile, the 777X program has slipped out further than anticipated.
When news of the GE-9X engine delay broke at the Paris Air Show in June, it was a shock that the jet might not have its first flight until the fall. Now that’s pushed out into next year.
The problem was discovered during the final phase of engine certification testing in May, when GE found excessive wear on small stationary vanes on the perimeter of the engine core that together with the engine’s spinning turbine blades direct and compress the incoming air flow from the big fan at the front. It’s now designing, testing and certifying more robust vanes.
The impact on Boeing is, first, a potential delay in delivering the 777X. Despite the delay to first flight, Boeing is sticking to its projection of delivering the plane next year, which assumes flight test can be completed and certification approved in less than a year.
That’s a rosy projection. On the 737 MAX program, for example, the plane entered commercial service 16 months after first flight.
“The delay in 777X will put pressure on the entry into service,” Muilenburg conceded on Wednesday’s call.
A second impact is that even if the first 777X can be delivered next year, the delay in first flight certainly means there will be fewer 777X deliveries in 2020 than previously anticipated. That means Boeing will have to build more current-model 777s just to maintain the already low 777 production rate in Everett that’s delivering 3.5 jets per month.
Muilenburg said the company is hopeful of selling more 777 freighters to bridge the gap that’s opening wider with the 777X delay.
Dominic Gates: 206-464-2963 or [email protected]; on Twitter: @dominicgates.
July 24, 2019 at 10:51 am Updated July 24, 2019 at 11:21 am)
By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter
Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg said Wednesday that though the company’s “best estimate” is that the 737 MAX will return to service in October, a slip in that optimistic timeline could mean the Renton 737 production line would be temporarily shut down.
“That’s not something we want to do, but something we have to prepare for,” he said on the second-quarter earnings teleconference call with analysts and the press.
Such a drastic step would mean temporary layoffs at the plant, which currently employs more than 10,000 people.
“A temporary shutdown could be more efficient than a sustained lower production rate,” Muilenburg said. “That’s what we are thinking our way through.”
Wednesday’s call also included worrying news for Boeing’s Everett factory: The new 777X that rolled out of the factory in March will not fly until next year because of delays in fixing a problem with the plane’s GE-9X engine.
Though Boeing says it hopes to deliver the 777X to its first customer by the end of 2020, that’s a very tight and optimistic timeline for a flight test schedule. Until then, Boeing will need to line up new orders for the freighter version of the current 777 model if it’s to maintain the current low 777 delivery rate of 3.5 jets per month.
Following the grounding of the 737 MAX, forced by two crashes of the aircraft that killed 346 people, Boeing cut production in Renton from 52 jets per month to 42 per month to reduce the number of parked airplanes stacking up.
Even so, it maintained the workforce level as it was, hopeful of a quick resolution to the MAX crisis so that the assembly lines could soon ramp back up again.
But clearance for the MAX to fly again from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other overseas regulators has slipped out over the past months. Approval of Boeing’s software fix for the flight control system implicated in the two crashes — the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — is taking much longer than anticipated.
And last month, FAA pilots flying a MAX simulator test found a new issue separate from MCAS when a microprocessor in the jet’s flight computer was shown to have a possible failure that could also lead to the airplane’s nose being pushed down uncommanded by the pilot. Boeing is working on a separate software fix for that, and because it’s flight critical software it cannot be rushed.
On the possibility of shuttering Renton, Muilenburg said that lowering the production rate to some lower figure than 42 jets per month “presents some challenges to our supply chain and synchronization of our workforce and how you would consider ramping back up later.”
He said that top management is doing daily scenario assessments of the timing of the MCAS and microprocessor software updates, the status of regulatory approval from the FAA and foreign aviation authorities, and the rate at which the airlines could take delivery of the planes once clearance is given, along with the stability of the 737 supply chain and of the Renton assembly lines.
Everything else depends on that first step: approval to fly again, which the FAA will determine with other regulators.
“We have to go through a multi-regulator approval process,” said Muilenburg, “It’s a complex process.”
Given the significant uncertainty in the timeline, he said, Boeing’s “best estimate” is that it will submit its final software updates and a new system safety analysis for certification purposes in September. That will be followed by an FAA flight test. Boeing then hopes for clearance from the FAA and other regulators in October.
Muilenburg conceded that the period from the FAA test flight to final confirmation of all the flight test data and analysis “is typically a process that’s measured in a number of weeks.” So achieving all that in just a month or so would clearly be the best possible outcome, and may be overly optimistic.
For Boeing, cutting a jet production rate — or worse, shutting down the line — is a much harder and riskier step than ramping up production.
Severely reducing production would mean layoffs not only at Boeing but at suppliers, big and small. Small suppliers who lay off workers may simply lose them as they take jobs elsewhere in the current healthy economy. That could present a serious barrier to quickly ramping up again.
Muilenburg said “there’s no one specific trigger” that would lead to the shutdown of Renton.
“We are going to continually look at this,” he said. “That includes a very close focus on our workforce.”
“We place incredible value on our teammates there, ” he said. “We are working every dimension we can to preserve that workforce and maintain that learning for future production system ramp-up.”
Meanwhile, the 777X program has slipped out further than anticipated.
When news of the GE-9X engine delay broke at the Paris Air Show in June, it was a shock that the jet might not have its first flight until the fall. Now that’s pushed out into next year.
The problem was discovered during the final phase of engine certification testing in May, when GE found excessive wear on small stationary vanes on the perimeter of the engine core that together with the engine’s spinning turbine blades direct and compress the incoming air flow from the big fan at the front. It’s now designing, testing and certifying more robust vanes.
The impact on Boeing is, first, a potential delay in delivering the 777X. Despite the delay to first flight, Boeing is sticking to its projection of delivering the plane next year, which assumes flight test can be completed and certification approved in less than a year.
That’s a rosy projection. On the 737 MAX program, for example, the plane entered commercial service 16 months after first flight.
“The delay in 777X will put pressure on the entry into service,” Muilenburg conceded on Wednesday’s call.
A second impact is that even if the first 777X can be delivered next year, the delay in first flight certainly means there will be fewer 777X deliveries in 2020 than previously anticipated. That means Boeing will have to build more current-model 777s just to maintain the already low 777 production rate in Everett that’s delivering 3.5 jets per month.
Muilenburg said the company is hopeful of selling more 777 freighters to bridge the gap that’s opening wider with the 777X delay.
Dominic Gates: 206-464-2963 or [email protected]; on Twitter: @dominicgates.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boein...180853801.html
