>
> > 1) According to the story, the test articles involved were produced at
> > Boeing facilities rather than at the production facilities of the
> > subcontractors. That's why I put a question mark behind 'production'.
> > Are the sections in question only to be used for design certification?
>
> Design certification, validation of the manufacturing methods, and
> structural testing.
>
> > I don't see how it could be any kind of manufacturing certification,
not
> > being built in the parts' production facility.
>
> They could be. Boeing has the production certificate for the 787.
However,
> the production parts will come from the suppliers.
>
> > 2) Does anyone know who the eventual manufacturer of the particular
> > section in question will be?
>
> >From the re****ts, the failed section was one of the long (33') fuselage
> barrels that they were testing a new production tool/process with. The
> previous 8 were fine, so they're going back to that process.
>
> That part will, in production, be made by Kawasaki, Alenia, or Vought
> depending on which barrel it is.
Which was what I was wondering about. We really don't know who will be
responsible for this particular section, or how the subcontractors are
coming along in general.
Back when I was involved with aircraft certification, any testing done
with other than production parts, supplied from the production vendors,
had to be do***ented. When the production parts became available,
additional testing or analysis had to be done to demonstrate the that
these parts were functionally equivalent. Because of the additional
expense, every effort was made to get subcontractors' parts into the
certification process as soon as possible.
> There's a good summary of who does what here:
>
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002486348_787global11.html
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
staff curmudgeon.
|
