The launch of Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was delayed for more than three years due to various quality issues. The aircraft was revolutionary in many ways, including being made entirely of composites (carbon fiber components) instead of aluminium so as to reduce weight, which helped in reducing energy consumption by 20% (Tang & Zimmerman, 2009). The aircraft also replaced hydraulic and pneumatic systems with electrical systems. In April 2004, ANA (All Nippon Airways) was chosen the aircraft’s launch customer. First flight of the aircraft was planned for autumn 2007. The first Boeing 787 Dreamliner was unveiled on July 8, 2007 at Everett assembly factory of Boeing. At that time, over 600 orders had already been received (Carrillo, et al., 2015). According to the initial plan, the aircraft was to start commercial service in May 2008. However, there was a series of problems that delayed the launch of the aircraft for over three years, which also caused the project to exceed budget by billions of dollars. This paper presents some of the quality issues that faced Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner in gestation.
Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner faced numerous pre-launch quality issues. Some of them are as follows:
These problems were announced on September 5, 2007, the day Boeing had planned for first flight. It caused the first flight to be delayed for three months. The software of Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was new and its development was outsourced. The supplier could not deliver it on planned date. The technology used to develop the software had not been proven or used before and the supplier experienced numerous unprecedented problems that delayed delivery. At the same time, fabrication of fasteners was outsourced and the supplier also failed to deliver the required number as planned (The Telegraph, 2013). This was due to unavoidable production challenges that the supplier faced. It seems that Boeing was not tracking the progress of most suppliers and only knew about these problems when it was already too late. The company resolved these problems by waiting for the suppliers to deliver the required components, enhancing their tracking and maintaining effective communication with suppliers. These issues can be linked to process approach, improvement and relationship management.
A typical plane has more than 2 million parts. Boeing sourced most of the Dreamliner’s parts from different contractors. Cabin lighting was sourced from Germany, wing tips from Korea, cargo doors from Sweden, fuselage from Italy, landing gear from France and escape slides from New Jersey (Rushe, 2013). This kind of extensive outsourcing creates quality problems because each country has different design standards and certification procedures. Even though each contractor may produce the exact components that were ordered, some of the components are very complex and may not integrate perfectly. Most of the deliveries were delayed, causing the company to delay first flight by three months. This issue can be linked to process approach and relationship management. The company resolved this problem by fixing some of the problems by themselves and also enhancing communication with its suppliers.
On November 4, 2008, fasteners on the aircraft were found to have been incorrectly installed resulting to reschedule of first flight. At first, delivery of the fasteners had been delayed and now a new problem was discovered. The aircraft could not be flown with the wrongly installed fasteners. The problem was resolved by calling the supplier to install the fasteners correctly, in collaboration with Boeing’s engineers and technicians. This issue can be linked to the quality management principle of process approach.
This is also a quality issue because it affected all production and assembly activities of Boeing. By the time the staffs were striking, Boeing was behind schedule and therefore put immense pressure on workers. Staffs were working overtime, they were fatigued and this created room for making errors. Some staffs also complained about decisions that were being made by Boeing managers, which compromised the quality of final products being made. Some of those who raised concerns were fired. This issue can be linked to the quality management principles of customer focus, leadership and engagement of people.
Boeing outsourced 60% of the design and manufacturing of Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner by contracting with over 50 suppliers (Design News, 2009). The suppliers were from within and outside the U.S. (Denning, 2013). Some of the designers did not collaborate effectively with others in order to create coordinated designs. The supplier of side body of the aircraft made some structural design errors and delivered a body that did not meet the desired functional and safety requirements (Paur, 2009). This problem was resolved by redesigning and reinforcing the weak body section. The issue can be linked to quality management principle of engagement of people and process approach.
The Italian supplier of horizontal stabilizers had serious problems attaining the quality standards that were required by Boeing for the components. The stabilizers were made from carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP), a new material in the industry (Schwartz & Busby, 2014). Boeing’s supplier quality team discovered flaws in the parts, disapproved the supplier and ordered them to stop working on the horizontal stabilizers. However, Boeing managers later wrote a letter ordering the company to continue manufacturing the parts and deliver them as per schedule. In June 2010, problems were found in test aircraft’s horizontal stabilizers. Boeing resolved this problem by inspecting and repairing all aircrafts. The company also stopped outsourcing the horizontal stabilizers and brought their production back in house. This issue can be linked to customer focus and process approach.
The Trent 1000 engine suffered blowout during ground testing of the aircraft at Rolls-Royce facility on August 2, 2010. The engine failed due to some defects and flaws during manufacturing process. Boeing did not have its engineers to undertake full-time inspection of manufacturing processes that were ongoing at the supplier’s facility otherwise such defects and flaws could have been identified and rectified earlier (Gates, 2013). This problem was resolved by the supplier being called up to fix the engine defects and flaws and produce an efficient and error-free engine. This issue can be linked to the quality management principle of process approach and relationship management.
During a test flight above Texas on November 9, 2010, Boeing 787 Dreamliner made emergency landing due to electrical fire resulting to suspension of flight testing. The electrical systems were new and had replaced hydraulic and pneumatic systems. The supplier of the electrical systems had made mistakes in production. Boeing resolved the problem by recalling the supplier to rectify the problem under strict supervision of its engineers. This issue can be linked to quality management principles of process approach and improvement.
In-flight fire causes problems with software and electrical updates
After all these issues, the first Boeing 787 Dreamliner was finally delivered to ANA on September 25, 2011, more than three years behind planned schedule. The first commercial flight of the aircraft took place on October 26, 2011, more than three years behind planned schedule
Conclusions:
The launch of a new product, especially in the manufacturing industry, is prone to numerous challenges because of the different interdisciplinary parties that are involved in the development and manufacturing processes of that product. The troubled start of Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner cannot be overemphasized and it received extensive press coverage all over the world. Some of the problems are largely attributed to the extensive outsourcing campaigns that the company undertook (Mayerowitz, 2013). However, most of the pre-launch quality issues that affected Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner could have been avoided or managed if the company adopted the seven ISO 9001:2015 quality management principles. Since the company was starting to create a truly new product, it would have been better to ensure that all design and development processes were completely integrated. This would have prevented most of the design and quality problems that were encountered in gestation. The too cozy relationship between Boeing and government regulators may also be blamed for the pre-launch problems experienced by the Dreamliner. The regulators are likely to have failed to stick to the strict standards and rules during inspection and certification of the aircraft or pressurized to approve the Dreamliner. This issue can be linked to the quality management principle of relationship management where parties have to act professionally, remain ethical and establish professional relationships when performing their duties.
References:
Carrillo, A., Harville, L., Portilla, D. & O’Rourke, J., 2015. The Boeing Company: The Grounding of the 787 Dreamliner. Journal of Organizational Behavior Education, Volume 8, pp. 1-31.
Denning, S., 2013. What went wrong at Boeing. Strategy & Leadership, 41(3), pp. 36-41.
Design News, 2009. What’s Causing Huge Delays for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner?. [Online]
Available at: https://www.designnews.com/materials-assembly/whats-causing-huge-delays-boeing-787-dreamliner/62172041838334
[Accessed 21 August 2018].
Gates, D., 2013. Boeing 787’s problems blamed on outsourcing, lack of oversight. [Online]
Available at: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-787rsquos-problems-blamed-on-outsourcing-lack-of-oversight/
[Accessed 21 August 2018].
Mayerowitz, S., 2013. What Went Wrong with Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/national-international/NATL-From-the-Start-Dreamliner-Jet-Program-Was-Rushed–188336221.html
[Accessed 21 August 2018].
Paur, J., 2009. A Nightmare Delay for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. [Online]
Available at: https://www.wired.com/2009/07/787-dreamliner-delay/
[Accessed 21 August 2018].
Rushe, D., 2013. Why Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner was a Nightmare Waiting to Happen. [Online]
Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jan/18/boeing-787-dreamliner-grounded
[Accessed 20 August 2018].
Schwartz, L. & Busby, J., 2014. The 787 Dreamliner: Will It be a Dream or Nightmare for Boeing Co.?. Journal of Case Research in Business and Economics, Volume 5, pp. 1-20.
Tang, C. & Zimmerman, J., 2009. Managing New Product Development and Supply Chain Risks: The Boeing 787 Case. International Journal of Supply Chain Forum, 10(2), pp. 1-14.
The Telegraph, 2013. Boeing 787 Dreamliner: a timeline of problems. [Online]
Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/Boeing-787-Dreamliner-a-timeline-of-problems/
[Accessed 20 August 2018].
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download