If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user

 Actions

B787 Series

From SKYbrary Wiki

Article Information
Category: Aircraft Family Aircraft Family
Content source: SKYbrary About SKYbrary
Content control: EUROCONTROL EUROCONTROL


Description

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a long range, mid-sized, wide-body, twin-engine jet airliner. The Boeing 787 Series includes the following modifications:

Aircraft Family Members
ICAO Type Designator Name Length (m)
BOEING 787-10 Dreamliner BOEING 787-10 Dreamliner 68.3 m
BOEING 787-8 Dreamliner BOEING 787-8 Dreamliner 56.7 m
BOEING 787-9 Dreamliner BOEING 787-9 Dreamliner 62.8 m

Specification

Aircraft B787-8 B787-9 B787-10
Overall Length 56.7 m186.024 ft
62.8 m206.037 ft
Wing Span 60.1 m197.178 ft
60.1 m197.178 ft
60.1 m197.178 ft
Engines 2 x GEnx-1B (280 kN) or
2 x R-R Trent 1000 (280 kN) turbofans.
2 x GEnx-1B (320 kN) or
2 x R-R Trent 1000 (320 kN) turbofans.
2 x GEnx-1B (340 kN) or
2 x R-R Trent 1000 (340 kN) turbofans.
Passengers (3 seat config.) 242 280 323
Max. Range 7,850 nm14,538,200 m
14,538.2 km
47,697,506.597 ft
8,300 nm15,371,600 m
15,371.6 km
50,431,758.567 ft
Maximum takeoff weight 228,000 kg228 tonnes
253,000 kg253 tonnes

Accidents & Serious Incidents involving B787 Series

  • B788, Boston MA USA, 2013 (On 7 January 2013, a battery fire on a Japan Air Lines Boeing 787-8 began almost immediately after passengers and crew had left the aircraft after its arrival at Boston on a scheduled passenger flight from Tokyo Narita. The primary structure of the aircraft was undamaged. Investigation found that an internal short circuit within a cell of the APU lithium-ion battery had led to uncontained thermal runaway in the battery leading to the release of smoke and fire. The origin of the malfunction was attributed to system design deficiency and the failure of the type certification process to detect this.)
  • B788, London Heathrow UK, 2013 (On 12 July 2013 an unoccupied and unpowered Boeing 787-8, remotely parked at London Heathrow after an arrival earlier the same day caught fire. An investigation found that the source of the fire was an uncontained thermal runaway in the lithium-metal battery within an Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT). Fifteen Safety Recommendations, all but one to the FAA, were made as a result of the Investigation.)
  • B788, en-route Shikoku Island Japan, 2013 (On 16 January 2013, a main battery failure alert message accompanied by a burning smell in the flight deck was annunciated as an ANA Boeing 787-8 climbed through FL320 on a domestic flight. A diversion was immediately initiated and an emergency declared. A landing at Takamatsu was made 20 minutes later and an emergency evacuation completed. The Investigation found that the battery had been destroyed when thermal runway followed a suspected internal short circuit in one of the battery cells and concluded that certification had underestimated the potential consequences of such a single cell failure.)
  • B788, en-route, north of Darwin NT Australia, 2015 (On 21 December 2015, a Boeing 787-8 at FL400 in the vicinity of convective weather conducive to ice crystal icing penetrated an area which included maximum intensity weather radar returns. A very short period of erratic airspeed indications followed and the FCS reverted to Secondary Mode requiring manual flying. Since this Mode remained 'latched' and could therefore only be reset on the ground, it was decided that an en route diversion was appropriate and this was accomplished without further event. Boeing subsequently modified the FCS software to reduce the chances of reversion to Secondary Mode in short-duration unreliable airspeed events.)
  • B788, en-route, southwest of Kansai Japan, 2019 (On 29 March 2019, both engines of a Boeing 787-8 on descent to Kansai malfunctioned in quick succession causing auto ignition to be triggered by sub-idle engine rpm but thereafter, sufficient thrust was available to safely complete the flight just under half an hour after the dual malfunction. The Investigation found that the cause of these malfunctions had been contamination of the fuel system with abnormally large concentrations of residue which could be reliably traced to a routinely applied biocide and which had solidified and intermittently impeded the transfer of fuel from the tanks to the engines.)
  • B788, vicinity Amritsar India, 2018 (On 19 April 2018, a Boeing 787-8 suddenly encountered a short period of severe turbulence as it climbed from FL160 towards clearance limit FL 190 during a weather avoidance manoeuvre which had taken it close to the Amritsar overhead and resulted in a level bust of 600 feet, passenger injuries and minor damage to cabin fittings. The Investigation found that the flight had departed during a period of adverse convective weather after the crew had failed to download a pre flight met briefing or obtain and review available weather updates.)
  • A320 / B789 / A343, San Francisco CA USA, 2017 (On 7 July 2017 the crew of an Airbus A320, cleared for an approach and landing on runway 28R at San Francisco in night VMC, lined up for the visual approach for which it had been cleared on the occupied parallel taxiway instead of the runway extended centreline and only commenced a go-around at the very last minute, having descended to about 60 feet agl whilst flying over two of the four aircraft on the taxiway. The Investigation determined that the sole direct cause of the event was the poor performance of the A320 flight crew.)
  • B789 / A388, Singapore, 2017 (On 30 March 2017, a Boeing 787 taxiing for departure at night at Singapore was involved in a minor collision with a stationary Airbus A380 which had just been pushed back from its gate and was also due to depart. The Investigation found that the conflict occurred because of poor GND controlling by a supervised trainee and had occurred because the 787 crew had exercised insufficient prudence when faced with a potential conflict with the A380. Safety Recommendations made were predominantly related to ATC procedures where it was considered that there was room for improvement in risk management.)
  • B789 / B773, Delhi India, 2017 (On 7 October 2017, an arriving Boeing 787-9 and a departing Boeing 777-300 lost separation during intended use of runway 29 at Delhi when the 787-9 commenced a go around from overhead the runway because the departing 777-300 was still on the runway and came within 0.2 nm laterally and 200 feet vertically after ATC had failed to ensure that separation appropriate to mixed mode use was applied using speed control. The conflict was attributed to failure of the TWR controller to adhere to prevailing standard operating procedures.)
  • B789 / C172, en-route, northwest of Madrid Spain, 2017 (On 8 August 2017, a Boeing 787-9 climbing through FL109 after departing Madrid received and promptly followed a TCAS RA ‘DESCEND’ against crossing traffic at FL110 and this action quickly resolved the conflict. The Investigation found that both aircraft involved were following their IFR clearances and attributed the conflict to the controller involved who forgot to resolve a previously-identified potential conflict whilst resolving another potential conflict elsewhere in the sector. It was also found that the corresponding STCA activation had not been noticed and in any event had occurred too late to be of use.)
  • B789, London Gatwick UK, 2018 (On 28 March 2018, a Boeing 787-9 crew inadvertently commenced takeoff from the displaced threshold of the departure runway at Gatwick instead of the full length which was required for the rated thrust used. The Investigation found that the runway involved was a secondary one which the crew were unfamiliar with and to which access was gained by continuing along a taxiway which followed its extended centreline. It was noted that at least four other similar incidents had occurred during the previous six months and that various risk reduction actions had since been taken by the airport operator / ANSP.)
  • B789, Oslo Norway, 2018 (On 18 December 2018, a Boeing 787-9 was instructed to taxi to a specified remote de-icing platform for de-icing prior to takeoff from Oslo but on entering the assigned area, was in collision with a lighting mast causing significant damage to both aircraft and mast. The Investigation found that in the absence of any published information about restricted aircraft use of particular de-icing platforms and any markings, lights, signage or other technical barriers to indicate to the crew that they had been assigned an incorrect platform, they had visually assessed the clearance as adequate. Relevant Safety Recommendations were made.)
  • B789, Tel Aviv Israel, 2018 (On 29 March 2018, an augmented Boeing 787-9 crew completed an uneventful takeoff from Tel Aviv on a type conversion line check flight for one of the First Officers in the crew. After getting airborne, the crew found that all performance calculations including that for takeoff had been made on the basis of a Zero Fuel Weight which was 40 tonnes below the actual figure of 169 tonnes. The Investigation found that it was highly probable that automatic reduction in commanded pitch-up when rotation was attempted at too low a speed had prevented an accident during or soon after liftoff.)
  • B789, en-route, eastern Belgium, 2017 (On 29 April 2017, a Boeing 787-9 which had just reached cruise altitude after despatch with only one main ECS available began to lose cabin pressure. A precautionary descent and PAN was upgraded to a rapid descent and MAYDAY as cabin altitude rose above 10,000 feet. The Investigation found that aircraft release to service had not been preceded by a thorough enough validation of the likely reliability of the remaining ECS system. The inaudibility of the automated announcement accompanying the cabin oxygen mask drop and ongoing issues with the quality of CVR readout from 787 crash-protected recorders was also highlighted.)

Further Reading

For further information, visit the Boeing website