Building Airplanes is Hard

Boeing recently announced another delay in the 787 program. Industry analysts looking through holes in the fence have been predicting it for a while.
Now a year behind and power has not been applied to the first airplane yet, scheduled for about 3 months ahead of first flight.

The initial timeline was pretty aggressive, by any standard. Certification was planned to be done in about half the time of the 777. The 777 was the first big airliner to be completely designed on computers - spread all over the globe. That was pretty big undertaking, and allowed a lot of issues to be discovered without building one out of plywood first. However, the construction was pretty standard for the time - in short: Aluminum. The flight control system was fly by wire (computer controlled) but they really didn't do a lot other than move the controls in a mostly conventional way (except pitch control, which did incorporate a C* law). Flight envelope protections were weak (intentionally so) and easy to override. You could still stall the airplane. There is a case to be made - and Boeing makes it - that this arrangement is desirable.

More than a decade later comes the 787 (after a flirt with "sonic cruiser" and concept ideas as 7e7). The 787 is architecturally new in many ways. Just to name a few:

• Composite structure (and the advantages that come from a stronger non-corroding airframe)
• More electric architecture (increasing the usage and generation of electricity many times over, and including flight controls, pressurization, anti-icing, brakes, engine start, as a start.)
• Extensive Computer control and networking
• Less use of bleed air (used only for engine anti-ice)
• Enhanced aerodynamics

In addition, Boeing took on a new manufacturing scheme where a huge percentage of the airplane is outsourced to other vendors (who, in some cases, then outsourced to other vendors).

Simply put, on the 787 virtually everything is new. It's a miracle they could do it at all - but they will. How could it not take a long time to work out all the issues, find the bugs, fix the bugs, and finally get it all right? There will be hick-ups along the way - how could there not be? But what will come out of it is an amazingly comfortable airplane to fly in, a great airplane to fly, and one that has made another generational leap in efficiency in so doing.

Too proud to learn the lessons of the competition?

In regards to the design of the 787 Dreamliner, Boeing did a lot of things right. There are many new innovations that will reduce crew workload and improve the safely and accuracy of the operation.
However, also having worked with Airbus products for many years there are a handful of items that Boeing should have picked up on that they did not. Many believe that Boeing feels because Airbus does it, that's reason enough not to. That would be foolish on Boeing's part, but it still may be true.

50 or more years ago, flight instruments were installed all over the cockpit in seemingly haphazard fashion - perhaps wherever they fit. Often the attitude indicator (called the artificial horizon then) was in the middle of the panel, not directly in front of the pilot (or anyone). The industry (and the FAA) finally came around and a standard arrangement of the six basic flight instruments was established. This remains the standard for "round dial" instruments to this day from Cessnas to 747s.
What we are seeing now with the advent of the "glass cockpit" instruments (instrument indications represented on computer displays - not hardware round-dial instruments) seems to be repeating history. Standardization is lacking - if not diverging. New private pilots must demonstrate an ability to use the equipment on the airplane they take their check rides in, because there is so much diversity among various equipment. Once, their operation was standard and intuitive. Now, it it neither. Has innovation brought confusion?

What's a Trend Vector?

A trend vector is a device, an arrow symbol, that shows the trend of airspeed or altitude over the next few seconds. It's available on the latest flight instruments. It predicts the future, at the current rate of change.

For instrumentation, it's a great advancement, as it allows the airspeed or altitude trend to be ascertained without having to watch the instrument for a few seconds.