Boeing’s ‘Dream’liner crashes again
The crash of Air India Ahmedabad-London flight puts the spotlight back on the troubled legacy of Boeing’s Dreamliner
Hyderabad: The crash of the 787-8 Dreamliner, the first since the aircraft made its debut in 2011, near Ahmedabad has once again raised questions about Boeing’s so-called ‘state-of-the-art’ aircraft.
The 787 Dreamliner, a wide-body, twin-engine jet airliner, was designed to revolutionise long-haul travel with its lightweight composite materials (carbon fibre-reinforced polymer, making it lighter and more fuel-efficient) and cutting-edge technology.
Also Read
However, in the last few years, the ‘innovations’ have pushed the American multinational company into turbulent times. Compared to its larger siblings — the 787-9 787-10—the 787-8 has a seating capacity of around 242 passengers in a two-class layout, while the 787-9 seats approximately 296 and the 787-10 about 318.
There are more than 1,100 787s in service. Airlines which use the aircraft include American Airlines, British Airways, Japan Airlines, Qatar Airways, Air India, United Airlines, and Ethiopian Airlines. Air India operates about 30 Dreamliners
Starting Trouble
The aircraft, initially planned to enter service in 2008, was delayed multiple times, and its first commercial flight could take wings only in 2011. The reasons attributed were the manufacturing process and the integration of new materials (like carbon fibre-composites), which required extensive testing and troubleshooting, according to reports.
Moreover, outsourcing of parts to suppliers worldwide led to quality control issues, such as gaps in the fuselage, misaligned components, and faulty electrical wiring.
In January 2013, the 787 faced a major crisis when lithium-ion batteries in the aircraft began overheating, leading to fires. Two such incidents were reported in quick succession. One on a Japan Airlines 787, and the other on an All Nippon Airways (ANA) 787 , resulting in the temporary grounding of the entire fleet of Dreamliners worldwide.
The 787s remained grounded for more than three months as Boeing redesigned the battery, charger and containment system. After extensive testing, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) cleared the Dreamliner to fly again in April 2013, and airlines resumed operations.
But again in July that year, a fire on the Ethiopian Airlines Dreamliner led to the closure of London’s Heathrow Airport for nearly 90 minutes. The Emergency Locator Transmitter near the back of the plane had caught fire, UK investigators said.
Meanwhile, the cost of production skyrocketed with the 787 programmes ballooning to over $30 billion.
The problems seem to be never-ending for the Arlington, Virginia-based company. Last year, during a March flight by Chile-based Latam Airlines, the captain’s seat moved forward and hit a switch that disconnected the autopilot system. The plane, flying from Australia to New Zealand, rapidly dropped about 400 feet (120 metres) before the co-pilot regained control, causing injuries to many passengers.
Whistleblowers
During the production of the 787, a former employee of Boeing’s South Carolina plant alleged that the company was overlooking safety standards to meet production deadlines. Another whistleblower raised concerns over the design and testing of the battery, while some even claimed that Boeing had pressured FAA inspectors to approve design changes quickly, without adequate testing.
Following the incident involving Latam Airlines, the FAA published a final rule requiring airlines to inspect inlets around ducts in engine anti-ice systems on 787s for signs of heat damage. The agency proposed the rule after a report of damage to “multiple” engine inlets caused by missing or “degraded” seals around the ducts.
Boeing’s reputation had taken a beating when two of its 737 Max planes crashed within five months of each other, claiming the lives of 346 passengers and crew. A 737 Max flown by Ethiopian Airlines aircraft crashed shortly after take-off in March, 2019, following Indonesia’s Lion Air flight crash in October 2018. That had led to then chief executive Dennis Muilenburg being fired.
With inputs from Agencies
