Skip to content

OM in the News: The Challenge of Fixing a Boeing 787

August 6, 2013

ethiopian airDesigning a new product such as the Boeing 787 is a huge undertaking, as discussed in Chapter 5, “The Design of Services and Goods.” The thin plastic skin on the 787 Dreamliner, writes The New York Times (July 30, 2013),  “is an engineering marvel, a mix of carbon fibers and epoxy molded into large barrel-shaped sections that are then baked at up to 350 degrees in giant ovens.” But while airlines love how this lightweight concoction saves fuel, the recent fire on a Ethiopian Air 787 in London provides the first test of how much more difficult and costly it will be to repair serious damage than on older aluminum planes.  Each day a jet remains grounded costs an airline tens of thousands of dollars.

The cause of the fire, a pinched wire on an emergency transmitter, was fairly mundane. But the high temperatures weakened the supports in a 10-foot stretch at the top of the rear fuselage and seared the paint on the top of the skin, causing the most extensive damage yet to one of the new 787s. Boeing will have to cut out the damaged areas and bolt a large patch, made of overlapping panels of composite materials, onto the plane. It will also need to install new composite supports and shore up the structural integrity of the plane. If the damage were more extreme, Boeing could remove the entire 23-foot-long barrel containing most of the jet’s rear fuselage and snap in another one.

The use of composite materials on planes has grown steadily over the last 4 decades. Only 1% of the weight of Boeing’s 747 jumbo jet came from composite parts when it was introduced in 1969. That increased to 11% by 1995 on the 777, which has an all-composite tail section. Composites now account for half of the 787’s weight, which, together with more efficient engines, cut fuel consumption by 20%.

Discussion questions:

1. What design issues did Boeing face in creating this plane? (Refer to the Global Company Profile that opens Chapter 2).

2. Why did Boeing make extensive use of composites?

Advertisements
2 Comments leave one →
  1. August 6, 2013 3:46 am

    Is “design for repair” part of the product development process for this plane?

  2. August 6, 2013 5:27 am

    Sometimes designers not only don’t consider repair in their design, but they conspire against it. Back in high school, my friend had a new Chevy S10 pickup. There was a problem in the door, and we were trying to remove a panel to fix it. We even bought special torx screwdrivers to fit the screws, but try as we might, the screws would not turn. After many attempts, we looked closer, and realized that the screws were fake! They were cosmetic screws molded into the plastic, to give the illusion that the panel could be removed, when in fact it could not.

    We hated that truck.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Supply Chain Management Research

Andreas Wieland’s supply chain management blog for academics and managers

better operations

Thoughts on continuous improvement: from TPS to XPS

%d bloggers like this: