The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is an American wide-body jet airliner developed and manufactured by Boeing Commercial Airplanes. After dropping its unconventional Sonic Cruiser project, Boeing announced the conventional 7E7 on January 29, 2003, which focused largely on efficiency. The program was launched on April 26, 2004, with an order for 50 aircraft from All Nippon Airways (ANA), targeting a 2008 introduction. On July 8, 2007, a prototype 787 was rolled out without major operating systems, and then the aircraft experienced multiple delays until its maiden flight on December 15, 2009. Type certification was received in August 2011 and the first 787-8 was delivered in September 2011 before entering commercial service on October 26, 2011, with ANA.

At launch, Boeing targeted the 787 with 20% less fuel burn than replaced aircraft like the Boeing 767, carrying 200 to 300 passengers on point-to-point routes up to 8,500 nautical miles [nmi] (15,700 km; 9,800 mi), a shift from hub-and-spoke travel. The twinjet is powered by General Electric GEnx or Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 high-bypass turbofans. It is the first airliner with an airframe primarily made of composite materials and makes extensive use of electrical systems. Externally, it is recognizable by its four-window cockpit, raked wingtips, and noise-reducing chevrons on its engine nacelles. Development and production rely increasingly on subcontractors around the world, with final assembly at Boeing South Carolina in North Charleston, after being assembled in the Boeing Everett Factory in Washington until March 2021.

The initial 186-foot-long (57 m) 787-8 typically seats 242 passengers over a range of 7,355 nmi (13,621 km; 8,464 mi), with a 502,500 lb (227.9 t) MTOW compared to 560,000 lb (250 t) for later variants. The stretched 787-9, 206 ft (63 m) long, can fly 7,635 nmi (14,140 km; 8,786 mi) with 290 passengers; it entered service on August 7, 2014, with ANA. The further stretched 787-10, 224 ft (68 m) long, seating 330 over 6,430 nmi (11,910 km; 7,400 mi), entered service with Singapore Airlines on April 3, 2018.

Early 787 operations encountered several problems caused mainly by its lithium-ion batteries, which culminated in fires onboard some aircraft. In January 2013, the U.S. FAA grounded all 787s until it approved the revised battery design in April 2013. Significant quality control issues from 2019 onwards caused a production slowdown and, from January 2021 until August 2022, an almost total cessation of deliveries. Due to ballooning production costs, Boeing has spent $32 billion on the program; estimates for the number of aircraft sales needed to break even vary between 1,300 and 2,000. As of November 2023, the 787 program has booked a total of 1,843 orders and made 1,099 deliveries while recording zero fatalities and no hull losses.

Development
Background
During the late 1990s, Boeing considered replacement aircraft programs due to slowing sales of the 767 and 747-400. Two new aircraft were proposed. The 747X would have lengthened the 747-400 and improved efficiency, and the Sonic Cruiser would have achieved 15% higher speeds (approximately Mach 0.98) while burning fuel at the same rate as the 767.[2] Market interest for the 747X was tepid; however, several major American airlines, including Continental Airlines, showed initial enthusiasm for the Sonic Cruiser, although concerns about the operating cost were also expressed.[3] The global airline market was disrupted by the 9/11 attacks and increased petroleum prices, making airlines more interested in efficiency than speed. The worst-affected airlines, those in the United States, had been considered the most likely customers of the Sonic Cruiser; thus the Sonic Cruiser was officially canceled on December 20, 2002. On January 29, 2003, Boeing announced an alternative product, the 7E7, using Sonic Cruiser technology in a more conventional configuration.[4][5] The emphasis on a smaller midsize twinjet rather than a large 747-size aircraft represented a shift from the hub-and-spoke theory toward the point-to-point theory,[6] in response to analysis of focus groups.[7]

Randy Baseler, Boeing Commercial Airplanes VP Marketing stated that airport congestion comes from large numbers of regional jets and small single-aisles, flying to destinations where a 550-seat Airbus A380 would be too large; to reduce the number of departures, smaller airplanes can increase by 20% in size and airline hubs can be avoided with point-to-point transit.[8]

In 2003, a recent addition to the Boeing board of directors, James McNerney (who would become Boeing's Chairman and CEO in 2005), supported the need for a new aircraft to regain market share from Airbus. The directors on Boeing's board, Harry Stonecipher (Boeing's President and CEO) and John McDonnell issued an ultimatum to "develop the plane for less than 40 percent of what the 777 had cost to develop 13 years earlier, and build each plane out of the gate for less than 60 percent of the 777's unit costs in 2003", and approved a development budget estimated at US$7 billion as Boeing management claimed that they would "require subcontractors to foot the majority of costs". Boeing Commercial Airplanes president Alan Mulally, who had previously served as general manager of the 777 programs contrasted the difference in the approval process by the board between the 777 and 787 saying "In the old days, you would go to the board and ask for X amount of money, and they'd counter with Y amount of money, and then you'd settle on a number, and that's what you'd use to develop the plane. These days, you go to the board, and they say, 'Here's the budget for this airplane, and we'll be taking this piece of it off the top, and you get what's left; don't f--- up.'"[9]

The Dreamliner logo
The Dreamliner name was announced in July 2003. This logo is painted on many 787s.
The replacement for the Sonic Cruiser project was named "7E7"[10] (with a development code name of "Y2"). Technology from the Sonic Cruiser and 7E7 was to be used as part of Boeing's project to replace its entire airliner product line, an endeavor called the Yellowstone Project (of which the 7E7 became the first stage).[11] Early concept images of the 7E7 included rakish cockpit windows, a dropped nose, and a distinctive "shark-fin" tail.[12] The "E" was said to stand for various things, such as "efficiency" or "environmentally friendly"; however, in the end, Boeing said that it merely stood for "Eight".[4] In July 2003, a public naming competition was held for the 7E7, for which out of 500,000 votes cast online the winning title was Dreamliner.[13] Other names included eLiner, Global Cruiser, and Stratoclimber.[14][15]

Boeing 787 in launch customer All Nippon Airways' blue and white livery
All Nippon Airways launched the 787 program with an order for 50 aircraft in 2004.
On April 26, 2004, Japanese airline All Nippon Airways (ANA) became the launch customer for the 787, announcing a firm order for 50 aircraft with deliveries to begin in late 2008.[16] The ANA order was initially specified as 30 787-3, 290–330 seat, one-class domestic aircraft, and 20 787-8, long-haul, 210–250 seat, two-class aircraft for regional international routes such as Tokyo-Narita to Beijing-Capital, and could perform routes to cities not previously served, such as Denver, Moscow, and New Delhi.[17] The 787-3 and 787-8 were to be the initial variants, with the 787-9 entering service in 2010.[18]

On October 5, 2012, Indian state carrier Air India became the first carrier to take possession of a Dreamliner that was manufactured in the Charleston, South Carolina, Boeing plant. This was the first Boeing Dreamliner that was manufactured outside of Washington state.[19] Boeing would go on to use both the Everett and South Carolina plants to deliver the Dreamliner.

The 787 was designed to be the first production airliner with the fuselage comprising one-piece composite barrel sections instead of the multiple aluminum sheets and some 50,000 fasteners used on existing aircraft.[20][21] Boeing selected two new engines to power the 787, the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 and General Electric GEnx.[4] Boeing stated the 787 would be approximately 20 percent more fuel-efficient than the 767,[22] with approximately 40 percent of the efficiency gain from the engines,[23] plus gains from aerodynamic improvements,[24] increased use of lighter-weight composite materials, and advanced systems.[18] The airframe underwent extensive structural testing during its design.[25][26] The 787-8 and -9 were intended to have a certified 330 minute ETOPS capability.[27]

During the design phase, the 787 underwent extensive wind tunnel testing at Boeing's Transonic Wind Tunnel, QinetiQ's five-meter wind tunnel at Farnborough, United Kingdom, and NASA Ames Research Center's wind tunnel, as well as at the French aerodynamics research agency, ONERA. The final styling was more conservative than earlier proposals, with the fin, nose, and cockpit windows changed to a more conventional form. By 2005, customer-announced orders and commitments for the 787 reached 237 aircraft.[28] Boeing initially priced the 787-8 variant at US$120 million, a low figure that surprised the industry. In 2007, the list price was US$146–151.5 million for the 787-3, US$157–167 million for the 787-8, and US$189–200 million for the 787-9.[29]

Manufacturing and suppliers
On December 16, 2003, Boeing announced that the 787 would be assembled in its factory in Everett, Washington.[4] Instead of conventionally building the aircraft from the ground up, the final assembly employed 800 to 1,200 people to join completed subassemblies and integrate systems.[30] Boeing assigned global subcontractors to do more assembly work, delivering completed subassemblies to Boeing for final assembly. This approach was intended to result in a leaner, simpler assembly line and lower inventory,[31] with pre-installed systems reducing final assembly time by three-quarters to three days.[32][33] Subcontractors had early difficulties procuring needed parts and finishing subassemblies on schedule, leaving remaining assembly work for Boeing to complete as "traveled work."[34][35] In 2010, Boeing considered in-house construction of the 787-9 tail; the tail of the 787-8 is made by Alenia.[36] The 787 was unprofitable for some subcontractors; Alenia's parent company, Finmeccanica, had a total loss of €750 million on the project.[37]

Assembly of "Section 41", the nose section of the Boeing 787
Subcontracted assemblies included wing and center wing box (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Japan; Subaru Corporation, Japan);[38] horizontal stabilizers (Alenia Aeronautica, Italy; Korea Aerospace Industries, South Korea);[39] fuselage sections (Global Aeronautica, Italy; Boeing, North Charleston, US; Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Japan; Spirit AeroSystems, Wichita, US; Korean Air, South Korea);[40][41][42] passenger doors (Latécoère, France); cargo doors, access doors, and crew escape door (Saab AB, Sweden); software development (HCL Enterprise, India);[43] floor beams (TAL Manufacturing Solutions Limited, India);[44][45] wiring (Labinal, France);[46] wing-tips, flap support fairings, wheel well bulkhead, and longerons (Korean Air, South Korea);[47] landing gear (Messier-Bugatti-Dowty, UK/France);[48][49] and power distribution and management systems, air conditioning packs (Hamilton Sundstrand, Connecticut, US).[46][50]

To speed up deliveries, Boeing modified four used 747-400s into 747 Dreamlifters to transport 787 wings, fuselage sections, and other smaller parts. Japanese industrial participation was key to the project. Japanese companies co-designed and built 35% of the aircraft; the first time that outside firms played a key design role on Boeing airliner wings. The Japanese government supported development with an estimated US$2 billion in loans.[51] On April 26, 2006, Japanese manufacturer Toray Industries and Boeing signed a production agreement involving US$6 billion worth of carbon fiber, extending a 2004 contract.[4] In May 2007, the final assembly on the first 787 began at Everett.[52]

Boeing worked to trim excess weight since assembly of the first airframe began; in late 2006, the first six 787s were stated to be overweight, with the first aircraft being 5,000 lb (2,300 kg) heavier than specified.[53] The seventh and subsequent aircraft would be the first optimized 787-8s expected to meet all goals.[54][55] Accordingly, some parts were redesigned to include more use of titanium.[56][57] Early built 787s were overweight and some carriers decided to take later aircraft; in early 2015, Boeing was trying to sell 10 such aircraft.[58] In July 2015, Reuters reported that Boeing was considering reducing the use of titanium to reduce construction costs.[59]

The Everett Factory Hall's huge door opens as the first 787 is rolled out. Surrounding the aircraft are guests and the public.
The first public appearance of the 787 on July 8, 2007
Boeing planned the first flight by the end of August 2007 and premiered the first 787 (registered N787BA) at a rollout ceremony on July 8, 2007.[60] The 787 had 677 orders at this time, which is more orders from launch to roll-out than any previous wide-body airliner.[61] The major systems were not installed at the time; many parts were attached with temporary non-aerospace fasteners requiring replacement with flight fasteners later.[62]

In September 2007, Boeing announced a three-month delay, blaming a shortage of fasteners as well as incomplete software.[63] On October 10, 2007, a second three-month delay to the first flight and a six-month delay to first deliveries were announced due to supply chain problems, a lack of documentation from overseas suppliers, and flight guidance software delays.[64][65] Less than a week later, Mike Bair, the 787 program manager was replaced.[66] On January 16, 2008, Boeing announced a third three-month delay to the first flight of the 787, citing insufficient progress on "traveled work."[67] On March 28, 2008, to gain more control over the supply chain, Boeing announced plans to buy Vought Aircraft Industries' interest in Global Aeronautica; a later agreement was also made to buy Vought's factory in North Charleston.[68]

On April 9, 2008, a fourth delay was announced, shifting the maiden flight to the fourth quarter of 2008, and delaying initial deliveries by around 15 months to the third quarter of 2009. The 787-9 variant was postponed to 2012 and the 787-3 variant was to follow at a later date.[69] On November 4, 2008, a fifth delay was announced due to incorrect fastener installation and the Boeing machinists strike, stating that the first test flight would not occur in the fourth quarter of 2008.[70][71] After assessing the program schedule with suppliers,[72] in December 2008, Boeing stated that the first flight was delayed until the second quarter of 2009.[73] Airlines, such as United Airlines and Air India, stated their intentions to seek compensation from Boeing for the delays.[74][75]

A secondary factor in the delays faced by the 787 program was the lack of detailed specifications provided to partners and suppliers. In previous programs Boeing had supplied high level design data, but for the 787, decided to provide broad level specifications only, on the assumption that relevant partners had the competencies to perform the design and integration work with the limited data. This decision created several delays as suppliers struggled to work with the limited design data.[76]

Pre-flight ground testing
As Boeing worked with its suppliers toward production, the design proceeded through a series of test goals. On August 23, 2007, a crash test involving a vertical drop of a partial composite fuselage section from about 15 ft (4.6 m) onto a 1 in (25 mm)-thick steel plate occurred in Mesa, Arizona;[77][78] the results matched predictions, allowing modeling of various crash scenarios using computational analysis instead of further physical tests.[79][80] While critics had expressed concerns that a composite fuselage could shatter and burn with toxic fumes during crash landings, test data indicated no greater toxicity than conventional metal airframes.[81][82] The crash test was the third in a series of demonstrations conducted to match FAA requirements, including additional certification criteria due to the wide-scale use of composite materials.[78] The 787 meets the FAA's requirement that passengers have at least as good a chance of surviving a crash landing as they would with current metal airliners.[83]

The prototype Boeing 787 underwent taxi tests at Paine Field in November and December 2009.
On August 7, 2007, on-time certification of the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engine by European and US regulators was received.[84] The alternative GE GEnx-1B engine achieved certification on March 31, 2008.[85] On June 20, 2008, the first aircraft was powered up, for testing the electrical supply and distribution systems.[86] A non-flightworthy static test airframe was built; on September 27, 2008, the fuselage was successfully tested at 14.9 psi (102.7 kPa) differential, which is 150 percent of the maximum pressure expected in commercial service.[87] In December 2008, the 787's maintenance program was passed by the FAA.[88]

On May 3, 2009, the first test 787 was moved to the flight line following extensive factory testing, including landing gear swings, systems integration verification, and a total run-through of the first flight.[89] On May 4, 2009, a press report indicated a 10–15% range reduction, about 6,900 nmi (12,800 km; 7,900 mi) instead of the originally promised 7,700 to 8,200 nautical miles (14,300 to 15,200 km; 8,900 to 9,400 mi), for early aircraft that were about 8% overweight. Substantial redesign work was expected to correct this, which would complicate increases in production rates;[90] Boeing stated the early 787-8s would have a range of almost 8,000 nmi (15,000 km; 9,200 mi).[91] As a result, some airlines reportedly delayed deliveries of 787s to take later planes that may be closer to the original estimates.[92] Boeing expected to have the weight issues addressed by the 21st production model.[93]

On June 15, 2009, during the Paris Air Show, Boeing said that the 787 would make its first flight within two weeks. However, on June 23, 2009, the first flight was postponed due to structural reasons.[94][95] Boeing provided an updated 787 schedule on August 27, 2009, with the first flight planned to occur by the end of 2009 and deliveries to begin at the end of 2010.[96] The company expected to write off US$2.5 billion because it considered the first three Dreamliners built unsellable and suitable only for flight tests.[97] On October 28, 2009, Boeing selected Charleston, SC as the site for a second 787 production line, after soliciting bids from multiple states.[98] On December 12, 2009, the first 787 completed high-speed taxi tests, the last major step before flight.[99][100]

Flight testing

The first 787 taking off on its maiden flight in December 2009
On December 15, 2009, Boeing conducted the 787-8 maiden flight from Paine Field in Everett, Washington, at 10:27 am PST and landed three hours later at 1:33 p.m. at Seattle's Boeing Field. During the flight the 787 reached a top speed of 180 kn (333 km/h) and maximum altitude of 13,200 ft (4,000 m).[101] Originally scheduled for 5+
1
/
2
hours, the test flight was shortened to three hours due to unfavorable weather conditions.[102] The six-aircraft ground and flight test program was scheduled to be done in eight and a half months and 6800 hours, which was the fastest certification campaign for a new Boeing commercial design.[103]

The flight test program comprised six aircraft, ZA001 through ZA006, four with Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines and two with GE GEnx-1B64 engines. The second 787, ZA002 in All Nippon Airways livery, flew to Boeing Field on December 22, 2009, to join the flight test program;[104][105] the third 787, ZA004 made its first flight on February 24, 2010, followed by ZA003 on March 14, 2010.[106] On March 24, 2010, flutter and ground effects testing was completed, clearing the aircraft to fly its entire flight envelope.[107] On March 28, 2010, the 787 completed the ultimate wing load test, which requires that the wings of a fully assembled aircraft be loaded to 150% of the design limit load and held for 3 seconds. The wings were flexed approximately 25 ft (7.6 m) upward during the test.[108] Unlike past aircraft, the wings were not tested to failure.[109][110] On April 7, data showed the test had been a success.[111]

On April 23, 2010, the newest 787, ZA003, arrived at the McKinley Climatic Laboratory hangar at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, for extreme weather testing in temperatures ranging from 115 to -45 °F (46 to -43 °C), including takeoff preparations at both temperature extremes.[112] ZA005, the fifth 787 and the first with GEnx engines, began ground engine tests in May 2010,[113] and made its first flight on June 16, 2010.[114] In June 2010, gaps were discovered in the horizontal stabilizers of test aircraft due to improperly installed shims; all aircraft were inspected and repaired.[115] That same month, a 787 experienced its first in-flight lightning strike; inspections found no damage.[116] As composites can have as little as 1/1,000th the electrical conductivity of aluminum, conductive material is added to alleviate potential risks and to meet FAA requirements.[81][117][118] The FAA also planned requirement changes to help the 787 show compliance.[119] In December 2019, it was reported that Boeing had removed the copper foil that formed part of the protection against lightning strikes to the wings of the aircraft; it then worked with the FAA to override concerns raised.[120][121]

A 787 at the 2010 Farnborough Airshow
The 787 made its first appearance at an international air show at the Farnborough Airshow, United Kingdom, on July 18, 2010.[122]

On August 2, 2010, a Trent 1000 engine suffered a blowout at Rolls-Royce's test facility during ground testing.[123] This engine failure caused a reevaluation of the timeline for installing Trent 1000 engines; on August 27, 2010, Boeing stated that the first delivery to launch customer ANA would be delayed until early 2011.[124][125] That same month, Boeing faced compensation claims from airlines owing to ongoing delivery delays.[126] In September 2010, it was reported that two additional 787s might join the test fleet for a total of eight flight test aircraft.[127] On September 10, 2010, a partial engine surge occurred in a Trent engine on ZA001 at Roswell.[128] On October 4, 2010, the sixth 787, ZA006 joined the test program with its first flight.[129]

On November 9, 2010, the second 787, ZA002 made an emergency landing at Laredo International Airport, Texas, after smoke and flames were detected in the main cabin during a test flight.[130][131] The electrical fire caused some systems to fail before landing.[132] Following this incident, Boeing suspended flight testing on November 10, 2010; ground testing continued.[133][134] After investigation, the in-flight fire was primarily attributed to foreign object debris (FOD) that was present in the electrical bay.[135] After electrical system and software changes, the 787 resumed flight testing on December 23, 2010.[136][137]

Test evaluation and certification

The 787-8 received FAA and EASA certification on August 21, 2011.
On November 5, 2010, it was reported that some 787 deliveries would be delayed to address problems found during flight testing.[138][139] In January 2011, the first 787 delivery was rescheduled to the third quarter of 2011 due to software and electrical updates following the in-flight fire.[140][141] By February 24, 2011, the 787 had completed 80% of the test conditions for the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engine and 60% of the conditions for the General Electric GEnx-1B engine.[142] In July 2011, ANA performed a week of operations testing using a 787 in Japan.[143] The test aircraft had flown 4,828 hours in 1,707 flights combined by August 15, 2011.[106] During testing, the 787 visited 14 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America to test in extreme climates and conditions and for route testing.[144]

On August 13, 2011, certification testing of the Rolls-Royce powered 787-8 finished.[145] The FAA and European Aviation Safety Agency certified the 787 on August 26, 2011, at a ceremony in Everett, Washington.[146][147]

Entry into service

All Nippon Airways flew the first commercial 787 flight on October 26, 2011.
Certification cleared the way for deliveries and in 2011, Boeing prepared to increase 787 production rates from two to ten aircraft per month at assembly lines in Everett and Charleston over two years.[147] Legal difficulties clouded production at Charleston; on April 20, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board alleged that a second production line in South Carolina violated two sections of the National Labor Relations Act.[98] In December 2011, the National Labor Relations Board dropped its lawsuit after the Machinists' union withdrew its complaint as part of a new contract with Boeing.[148] The first 787 assembled in South Carolina was rolled out on April 27, 2012.[149]

The first 787 was officially delivered to All Nippon Airways (ANA) on September 25, 2011, at the Boeing Everett factory. A ceremony to mark the occasion was also held the next day.[150][151] On September 27, it flew to Tokyo Haneda Airport.[152][153] The airline took delivery of the second 787 on October 13, 2011.[154]

On October 26, 2011, an ANA 787 flew the first commercial flight from Tokyo's Narita International Airport to Hong Kong International Airport.[155] The Dreamliner entered service some three years later than originally planned. Tickets for the flight were sold in an online auction; the highest bidder had paid $34,000 for a seat.[156] An ANA 787 flew its first long-haul flight to Europe on January 21, 2012, from Haneda to Frankfurt Airport.[157]

Proposed variants
Freighter version
Although with no set date, Boeing expects to build a 787 freighter version, possibly in the 2018–2023 timeframe.[158][159] The freighter version would incorporate a large main deck cargo door, at the rear end of the fuselage and would carry palletized/containerized freight.[citation needed]

787-3

The 787-3 would feature a reduced wingspan with wingtip devices
The 787-3 would have carried 290–330 passengers in two-class over 2,500–3,050 nmi (4,630–5,650 km; 2,880–3,510 mi) range, limited by a 364,000 lb (165 t) MTOW.[160] In April 2008, to keep the -8 on track for delivery, the -9 stretch was postponed from 2010 to at least 2012 and prioritized before the 787-3 and its 43 orders to follow without a firm delivery date.[69]

It kept the -8 length but its 51.7 m wingspan would have fit in ICAO Aerodrome Reference Code D.[161] It was designed to operate on Boeing 757-300/Boeing 767-200 sized regional routes from airports with restricted gate spacing.[162] The wingspan was decreased by using blended winglets instead of raked wingtips.

By January 2010, all orders, from Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways, had been converted to the 787-8.[163] As it was designed specifically for the Japanese market, Boeing would likely scrap it after they switched orders.[164] The -8's longer wingspan makes it more efficient on stages longer than 200 nmi (370 km; 230 mi).[165] In December 2010, Boeing withdrew the short-haul model as it struggled to produce the 787-8 after program delays of three years.[166]

Market and costs

A defunct subsidiary of Norwegian Air Shuttle, Norwegian Long Haul operated the 787 as a long-haul low-cost carrier.
The 787 Dreamliner program has reportedly cost Boeing $32 billion.[167][168] In 2013, the 787 program was expected to be profitable after 1,100 aircraft have been sold.[169] At the end of 2013, the cost of producing a 787 exceeded the purchase price. Boeing's accounting method books sales immediately and distributes estimated production costs over ten years for the 1,300 aircraft it expects to deliver during that time. JPMorgan Chase analyst Joseph Nadol estimated the program's cash loss to be $45 million per airplane, decreasing as the program moves forward. The actual cash flow reflects Boeing collecting most of the purchase price upon delivery; Boeing expects deferred costs to total $25 billion before the company begins to break even on production; the comparable number for the Boeing 777, adjusted for inflation, is $3.7 billion.[170]

Boeing lost $30 million per 787 delivered in the first quarter of 2015, although Boeing planned to break even by the end of the year.[171] The accumulated losses for the 787 totaled almost $27 billion (~$32.8 billion in 2022) by May 2015. The cost of producing the fuselage may increase because of a tentative deal reached with Spirit Aerosystems of Wichita, Kansas, wherein severe price cuts demanded by Boeing would be eased, in return for a comprehensive agreement that lowers the cost of fuselages for other jetliners that Spirit helps Boeing manufacture.[172]

In the second quarter of 2015, Boeing lost $25 million (~$30.3 million in 2022) on each 787 delivered but was planning to break even per plane before the year-end. After that Boeing hoped to build 900 Dreamliners over six years at an average profit of more than $35 million each. But with deferred costs peaking in 2016 at $33 billion, (~$39.6 billion in 2022) Leeham analyst Bjorn Fehrm believes Boeing cannot make an overall profit on the program. Ted Piepenbrock, an academic affiliated with MIT and the University of Oxford, projects losses decreasing through the first 700 airliners and forecasts the cumulative deferred costs to peak beyond $34 billion. The model most favorable to Boeing projects a program loss of $5 billion after delivering 2,000 Dreamliners. Boeing's original development investment, estimated at least at a further $20 billion, is not included in these costs.[173]

To recoup the deferred costs and earn its goal of a "low single-digit" overall profit margin, Boeing has to make an average profit of more than $50 million on the final 205 airplanes of the accounting block to be delivered from 2020: a profit margin of more than 30% while the mature Boeing 737 and 777 programs have 20% to 25% margins. Boeing is reaching it through a larger proportion of the 20% to 40% higher price -9/10s, costing only 5% to 10% more than the -8 with lower production costs from reliability and producibility investments and the expected experience curve. Former Douglas Aircraft chief economist Adam Pilarski notes that two assembly sites slow the experience curve. Boeing assumed a faster improvement than on previous programs which had not happened. Competition with the Airbus A350 and the launch of the A330neo put strong pressure on the 787 pricing.[173]

A Jetstar 787-8 with a Qantas A330-200 in the background, 2018
On July 21, 2016, Boeing reported charges of $847 million against two flight-test 787s built in 2009. Boeing had planned to refurbish and sell them but instead wrote them off as research and development expense.[174] In 2017, Boeing's Jim Albaugh said that the requested return on net assets (RONA) led to outsourcing systems reducing investment, but improving RONA had to be balanced against the risk of loss of control.[175] From 2019, Boeing was to build 14 787s per month (168 per year), helping to offset the $28 billion in deferred production costs accumulated through 2015 and would add 100 aircraft to the current accounting block of 1,300 at the end of 2017 third quarter.[176] In 2019, the list price for a 787-8 was US$248.3M, $292.5M for a 787-9, and $338.4M for a 787-10.[177]

The valuation for a new 787-9 is $145 million in 2018, up from $135 million in 2014, but it may have been sold for $110–15 million to prevent A330neo sales while an A330-900 is worth $115 million.[178] In February 2018, Boeing priced six 787-9s for less than $100–115m each to Hawaiian Airlines, close to their production cost of $80–90m, to overcome its A330-800 order.[179] By late 2018, deferred production costs were reduced from a peak of $27.6 billion in early 2016 to $23.5 billion as assembly efficiency improved and the 800th production started.[180]

Production rate
By 2014, Boeing planned to improve financial return by reorganizing the production line, renegotiating contracts with suppliers and labor unions, and increasing the 787 production rate, stepwise, to 12 airplanes per month by the end of 2016 and 14 airplanes per month by the end of the decade.[170] By April 2015, the production rate was 10 per month;[181]

From late 2020, the production rate is to be reduced from 14 to 12 airplanes per month due to the China-United States trade war.[182] Production could be trimmed to 10 planes per month as demand for wide-body aircraft falters.[183] On October 1, 2020, Boeing announced the 787 would be produced only in North Charleston from mid-2021 due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on aviation, as the production rate fell to six per month.[184] In December, the monthly rate was further reduced to five.[185]

Quality-control issues (2019–2023)
2019
In 2019 reports began to emerge about quality-control issues at the North Charleston plant leading to questions about the jet's safety;[186][187] and later that same year KLM, which had discovered loose seats, missing and incorrectly installed pins, nuts and bolts not fully tightened and a fuel-line clamp left unsecured on its jet, complained that the standard of manufacture was "way below acceptable standards."[188]

2020
Early in 2020 Boeing engineers complained about depressions in the 787's vertical tail fin, affecting hundreds of planes or the vast majority of the fleet. Workers in Charleston and Everett had improperly discarded shims before the final installation of fasteners, which could lead to structural failure under limited loads. In late August 2020, Boeing grounded eight 787s due to such improper fuselage shimming and inner skin surfacing issues—issues which proved to have been discovered in August 2019 at Boeing South Carolina.[189][190]

The following month Boeing admitted that "nonconforming" sections of the rear fuselage did not meet engineering standards, and the FAA was investigating quality-control lapses dating back to the introduction of the 787 in 2011 and considering requiring additional inspections for up to 900 of the roughly 1,000 Dreamliners in service.[189] The FAA then began to inquire into the company's Quality Management System (QMS), which Boeing had previously argued justified a reduction of 900 quality inspectors, but which had failed to detect either the shim or skin surface issues.[191] A third quality-control issue then emerged, this time with the 787's horizontal stabilizers, and affecting as many as 893 Dreamliners: workers in Salt Lake City had clamped portions of the tail section too tightly, which could lead to premature material fatigue. At this point Boeing expected a one-time inspection during regularly scheduled maintenance to address the issues[192][193] and expected merely to slow 787 deliveries "in the near term".[194]

2021
By January 2021, Boeing had halted 787 deliveries to complete the inspection relating to the ongoing quality control issues,[195] then in March the FAA withdrew Boeing's delegated authority to inspect and sign off on four newly produced 787s, saying that it would extend this withdrawal to further aircraft if needed.[196] Boeing briefly resumed deliveries on March 26, 2021, handing over one 787-9 to United Airlines,[197] but deliveries ceased again in May 2021;[198] meaning that almost all deliveries had been paused for nearly a year.[199] The delay generated $1 billion in abnormal costs and caused the company to cut production to around two planes a month.[200]

On July 13, Boeing discovered gaps at joints in the forward pressure bulkhead and again reduced production; the company also investigated whether the issue affected 787s already in service.[201] Questions were asked about the inspection process used to check the work, and Boeing worked with the FAA to fix the problem, which was said to pose "no immediate threat to flight safety" and did not require 787s already in service to be grounded.[202]

On September 4, the Wall Street Journal reported that the FAA would not accept Boeing's proposed new inspection method, aiming to speed deliveries with targeted checks rather than nose-to-tail teardowns, until at least late October;[203] and in late November it was reported that the FAA had discovered further problems, including additional out of tolerance gaps and contamination and associated weakening of fuselage composites. The rectification process for existing aircraft was made more complex by a lack of detailed configuration data on each aircraft.[204] The new problems and the extension of the 13 month long disruption to 787 deliveries led to anger from buyers; a slide in the company's stock price; and demands by a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives for a review of the FAA's oversight of the plane.[205][206]

2022
In January 2022, it was reported that deliveries were not anticipated to restart until April 2022.[207] In February, the FAA announced that it would withdraw Boeing's delegated authority to issue airworthiness certificates for individual 787 aircraft until Boeing can demonstrate consistent quality, stable delivery processes, and a robust plan for the rework needed on the undelivered aircraft in storage.[208] In late March Boeing began sounding out suppliers about their ability to support the production of up to seven aircraft a month by late 2023.[209] Vistara, which had been expecting delivery of four Dreamliners in 2022, indicated a lack of confidence in Boeing meeting its delivery aims by arranging to lease aircraft instead.[210] Later in April reports began to emerge of a further delay of at least two months,[211] and it was only in late April that Boeing submitted the necessary certification package laying out the inspections and repairs to be undertaken on already constructed planes. The FAA rejected portions of the package as incomplete and returned it to Boeing, indicating a further delay before the resumption of deliveries.[212] In late July the FAA approved Boeing's revised certification package, leading the company to anticipate resuming deliveries "within days".[213] Deliveries resumed on August 10, 2022, after the FAA granted clearance.[214]

2023
In February 2023 a further problem, of an analysis error by a supplier related to the 787 forward pressure bulkhead, was identified, leading to a further temporary halt in deliveries (but not in production) and a 5% drop in the company's share price.[215] On March 10, the FAA approved the resumption of the deliveries.[216]

Design

Planform view of a 787-9 showing its 9.6 wing aspect ratio and 32° wing sweep

Front view of a Vietnam Airlines 787-10, the fuselage is 19 ft (5.8 m) wide and 19+1/2 ft (5.94 m) high while the fan has a 9.3 ft (2.8 m) diameter
The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a long-haul, widebody, twin-engine jetliner, designed with lightweight structures that are 80% composite by volume;[217] Boeing lists its materials by weight as 50% composite, 20% aluminum, 15% titanium, 10% steel, and 5% other materials.[218][219] Aluminum has been used throughout the leading edges of wings and tailplanes, titanium is predominantly present within the elements of the engines and fasteners, while various individual components are composed of steel.[219]

External features include a smooth nose contour, raked wingtips, and engine nacelles with noise-reducing serrated edges (chevrons).[220] The longest-range 787 variant can fly up to 7,635 nmi (14,140 km; 8,790 mi),[221] or the even longer Qantas QF 9 flight between Perth and London Heathrow, over 7,828 nmi (14,497 km; 9,008 mi). Its cruising airspeed is Mach 0.85 (488 kn; 903 km/h; 561 mph).[222] The aircraft has a design life of 44,000 flight cycles.[223]

Flight systems
Among 787 flight systems, a key change from traditional airliners is the electrical architecture. The architecture is bleedless and replaces bleed air with electrically powered compressors and four of six hydraulic power sources with electrically driven pumps while eliminating pneumatics and hydraulics from some subsystems, e.g. engine starters and brakes.[224] Boeing says that this system extracts 35% less power from the engines, allowing increased thrust and improved fuel efficiency.[225] Spoiler electromechanical actuators (SEMAs) control two of the seven spoiler pairs on each wing surface, providing roll control, air and ground speed brake, and droop capabilities similar to those provided by the hydraulic actuators used on the remaining spoiler surfaces. The SEMAs are controlled by electronic motor control units (EMCUs).[226]

The total available onboard electrical power is 1.45 megawatts, which is five times the power available on conventional pneumatic airliners;[227] the most notable electrically powered systems include engine start, cabin pressurization, horizontal-stabilizer trim, and wheel brakes.[228] Wing ice protection is another new system; it uses electro-thermal heater mats on the wing slats instead of traditional hot bleed air.[229][230] An active gust alleviation system, similar to the system used on the B-2 bomber, improves ride quality during turbulence.[231][232]

The Boeing 787 flight deck has fly-by-wire controls
The 787 has a "fly-by-wire" control system similar in architecture to that of the Boeing 777.[233][234] The flight deck features multi-function LCDs, which use an industry-standard graphical user interface widget toolkit (Cockpit Display System Interfaces to User Systems / ARINC 661).[235] The 787 flight deck includes two head-up displays (HUDs) as a standard feature.[236] Like other Boeing airliners, the 787 uses a yoke (as opposed to a side-stick). Under consideration is the future integration of forward-looking infrared into the HUD for thermal sensing, allowing pilots to "see" through clouds.[4] Lockheed Martin's Orion spacecraft will use a glass cockpit derived from Honeywell International's 787 flight deck systems.[237]

Honeywell and Rockwell Collins provide flight control, guidance, and other avionics systems, including standard dual head-up guidance systems,[4] Thales supplies the integrated standby flight display and power management,[4] while Meggitt/Securaplane provides the auxiliary power unit (APU) starting system, electrical power-conversion system, and battery-control system[238][239] with lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) batteries by GS Yuasa.[240][241] One of the two batteries weighs 28.5 kg and is rated 29.6 V, 76 Ah, giving 2.2 kWh.[242] Battery charging is controlled by four independent systems to prevent overcharging, following early lab testing.[243] The battery systems were the focus of a regulatory investigation due to multiple lithium battery fires, which led to the grounding of the 787 fleet starting in January 2013.[244]

A version of Ethernet (Avionics Full-Duplex Switched Ethernet (AFDX) / ARINC 664) transmits data between the flight deck and aircraft systems.[245] The control, navigation, and communication systems are networked with the passenger cabin's in-flight internet systems.[246] In January 2008, FAA concerns were reported regarding possible passenger access to the 787's computer networks; Boeing has stated that various protective hardware and software solutions are employed, including air gaps to physically separate the networks, and firewalls for software separation.[246][247] These measures prevent data transfer from the passenger internet system to the maintenance or navigation systems.[246]

The -9/10 hybrid laminar flow control (HLFC) system delays the critical transition from laminar to turbulent flow as far back as possible on the vertical tail by passive suction from leading-edge holes to mid-fin low-pressure doors but was dropped from the tailplane due to lower benefits than the extra complexity and cost.[248]