LouieBOS

I went through a LOT to use my miles to book a flight on the 787 from BOS-ATH (via YYZ on LOT) in July. Now LOT announces they are grounding their 787s through the summer.

Any chance LOTs 787s WILL fly by July? Think UA will be sympathetic and allow me to change my flights sans fees to something more convenient? I really don't want to be on an ancient LOT 767.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...e64_story.html

tomekp

This statement has either a political background (like: Dear Goverment, We need another $$$ from you because our fleet is grounded for almost a year)

or stupid statement just to be present in the media (if the issue is solved and planes are back into operation why would they keep them grounded)

or commercial (to support lease extensions or new leases for 767).

As a separate note: the battery issue is due to poor manufacturing of the Li-Ion cells and it may take a while to recover. More official information can be found here: http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2...oeing_787.html

Best,
tomekp

sp4294

Puts a bad light on the whole timeline for the grounding for everyone.

MichalFKowalik

probably I'm not objective but I do like to fly LO on short-haul as well as long haul in C. I don't eat onboard so that issue is gone.

But hey, with so many moving parts (grounded 787, new CEO, massive restructuring, shop ready for sale this year) I do not think there's anybody who is able to answer your question with a significant accuracy.

keep fingers crossed for luck or rebook now to the known option (UA)
mfk

peetahvw

Perhaps part of this is a leverage play by LOT. It does appear according to this article that if Boeing gets a fix in sooner, the 787s will return to the air sooner -
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...er-faults.html

Adding to this it seems like they're going to Boeing for help securing leases -
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/201...#axzz2L5EKQy7g

8420PR

Much better for LOT to make a decision to do their summer schedule without 787's than rely on a plane that may or may not be in the air. While other airlines with larger long haul fleets have some flexibility, LOT has none.

LouieBOS

Really annoying. UA has nothing at my 30k Saver level award available BOS-ATH. I haven't called yet to ask for a switch because I'm still hopeful the 787 flies. I dread the thought of going out of my way just to fly on an old rickety LOT 767.

N1003U

The article in the link below talks at one point about the 787 as a good idea, poorly executed. I think that is a great summary of the program to-date.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/podcast/at-...ampaign=022813

Are Boeing's Battery Difficulties Part of a Much Bigger Problem?

Seventy percent of the Dreamliner is preassembled by a tiered system of subcontractors that Boeing has never used before

...For example, the fuselage contained carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic, titanium, and only 15 percent aluminum...The entertainment system was vastly expanded from previous planes, but also, for the first time, Boeing put it on the same network as the flight-control system. As the saying has it, “What could go wrong?”...

...Boeing’s other planes have a straightforward supply chain. The Dreamliner’s was different: Besides component suppliers, there were system suppliers, and then preintegration suppliers, called tier 1 strategic partners. So there were two additional levels in the [supply] chain that had never existed before. And whereas previous models were 30 to 50 percent outsourced, for the Dreamliner it was more than two-thirds. Again, what could go wrong?...

...because the product is brand new, [and] utilizes a lot of unproven technologies, including the composite structure, including the entertainment system, including the lithium battery. So when you put all these unproven technologies together in a multilayered [supplier] structure, that indicates that you could have more risks in the supply chain....


...In Boeing’s case, when they decided to outsource the design...they really didn’t have a clear structure, communication strategy, coordination plan with the tier 1 structures...

...If you study the Toyota supply-chain structure, you find out there’s most of the tier 1, tier 2, even tier 3 suppliers, they were either former Toyota trusted employees or former Toyota executives...It’s like affiliated companies that they have long-term relationships, they have been closely communicated, closely coordinated, and closely trusted partners. Unlike Boeing’s case, when they delegate to the tier 1 strategic partners, they really don’t know who the tier 2 or the tier 3 suppliers were....

...they discovered that the tier 1 had subcontracted to some of the tier 2 without notifying Boeing, and also some of the tier 2 suppliers in turn subcontracted to some of the tier 3 suppliers, then when there was a major delay, Boeing had to track and trace down who these tier 2, tier 3 suppliers were, and then they discover that some of them are not doing their job properly. So that’s why they had to to track and trace and help these tier 2, tier 3 suppliers to [get] back on track...

...You look at the original team that was leading their efforts to deal with the 787 program, most of the folks on the team, they were focusing on marketing and finance. So there were no really key members who truly had the expertise in supply-chain management...

...even back in 2009...Boeing was already seeing some cancellations, because the plane was so far behind schedule. So how far behind schedule was the final first deliveries, and how much over the original budget did Boeing go?...

...For the delivery of the first 787 plane to All Nippon Airways, it was over three and a half years late. In terms of the development costs, it was over $10 billion over budget.[/B]...

...It was over $10 billion over budget, because they had to acquire two tier 1 suppliers who were underperforming. So there’s one. Second, they had to pay some of the penalty to some of the suppliers. And third, they had to replace some of the planes that some of the airlines can no longer wait for the 787. They had to swap this with other planes...

..from the strategic standpoint, [it] was brilliant, because the 787 aircraft can truly differentiate itself from all the other commercial aircraft, because one, it’s lightweight—the fuel efficiency. More importantly, that allowed all the passengers to fly any city pair around the world nonstop...the problem is the execution plan...

Boeing has some more work to do [to get back on track]. There’s two major issues...First, the lithium-ion battery, I think they are going to redesign, modify the design a little bit, to ensure that the fire would no longer be a threat. I think this one would push back for a few months at a minimum. The other issue they need to think carefully about is the composite material. This is the first time in commercial aviation history they use carbon fiber heavily on a commercial aircraft. The properties of all this carbon fiber up at 40 000 feet high is not very clear. ... the wing is attached to the fuselage in the middle section of the plane using epoxy tape.how it will work in the long haul, that still remains to be seen...they need to pay close attention for public safety issues.

planestupid

A remember reading an article saying that LOT are using "leased 767s" to cover for the defunct 787s. This implies that they are not using their own old 767s but rather somebody else's. But which? Does anyone know? I'm booked WAW to ORD in April and I'm keen to know what seats to expect. Thanks, ps

oliver2002

If you look at their 767 fleet you will see that -LPG is leased. -LPA & -LPE are well beyond their prime and probably need an urgent retirement. The sad part is that 767 are in high demand in summer and will cost a pretty penny, especially if the desperation of LO is known to the lessor

http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/L...ctive-b767.htm

FlyIgglesFly

Flew -LPE in C in January to ORD. Well beyond its prime is an understatement. It took at least 5 Zywiec to take the sting out of the swap from a 787.

It really is hard to see how they can expect to compete when their hard product makes LH C look good. I love WAW as an airport and would enjoy using it more, but Y (my typical cabin) on those birds is brutal.

planestupid

Hmmmm ... I'm starting to dread my upcoming 767 flight now. Should I change my ORD-WAW-FRA business class reservation and re-route on a different *A carrier? I could do this for USD 75 as I booked on a FFP programme. What would you advise? The only reason I booked LOT and chose a layover over a direct flight was so that I could experience the 787.

FlyIgglesFly

I'd try a reroute that either gets you on LX, LH new C (old C not worth the change), US, or UA. All are significant improvements. It'd be well worth the $75, IMHO.

Bernie2012

CNN was just airing some live pictures of a LO 787 preparing for the "first of two test flights", it was from a sunny place and not WAW (sun, no snow, reddish tarmack and non WAW stair), guess that is a new delivery which is going to be tested, they announced more information's to come during the ongoing program.

Keeping my fingers crossed.

oliver2002

SP-LRC is the one supposed to do some tests... it still belongs to Boeing: http://kpae.blogspot.de/search/label/SP-LRC

I guess the Polish will get it for free, if they ignore the scorch marks in the EE.

Seriously though, it seems the aircraft just went thru a normal 2h check flight:
http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2013...led-for-today/

ZA005 will probably do the test with the Li-ion afterburner vent installed.