Просмотр кода страницы Английская Википедия:Boeing 787 Dreamliner

{{Английская Википедия/Панель перехода}}
{{Short description|Boeing wide-body jet airliner introduced in 2011}}
{{distinguish|Boeing Dreamlifter}}
<!-- This article is a part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft]]. Please see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content]] for recommended layout, and guidelines. -->
{{Use mdy dates|date=October 2018}}
{{Use American English|date=April 2017}}
{|{{Infobox aircraft begin
 |name= Boeing 787 Dreamliner
 |logo= Dreamliner logo.svg
 |image= File:Boeing 787 N1015B ANA Airlines (27611880663) (cropped).jpg
 |caption= A Boeing 787-9, the midsize and most common variant, operated by [[All Nippon Airways]], the first and largest 787 operator
}}{{Infobox aircraft type
 | type              = [[Wide-body aircraft|Wide-body jet airliner]]
 | national origin   = United States
 | manufacturer      = [[Boeing Commercial Airplanes]]
 | first flight      = December 15, 2009
 | introduced        = October 26, 2011, with [[All Nippon Airways]]
 | status            = In service
 | produced          = 2007–present
 | primary user      = [[All Nippon Airways]]<!--Limit one (1) primary user. Top four (4) users listed in 'primary user' and 'more users' fields based on numbers in their fleets based on cited list in the Operators section. -->
 | more users        = [[United Airlines]] <br />[[Japan Airlines]] <br />[[American Airlines]] <!--Limit is THREE (3) in "more users" field. Please separate with <br />. Top 4 users match cited list of users in the Operators section below; see Operators section for other users. -->
 | number built      = 1,110 {{as of|2023|12|lc=yes}}<ref name=O_D_summ>{{cite report |url=https://www.boeing.com/commercial/#/orders-deliveries |title= Boeing: Orders and Deliveries (updated monthly) |publisher=[[Boeing]]|location=[[Chicago]]|date=December 31, 2023 |access-date=January 9, 2024}}</ref>
 | developed from    = 
|variants with their own articles= 
}}
|}

The '''Boeing 787 Dreamliner''' is an American [[Wide-body aircraft|wide-body jet airliner]] developed and manufactured by [[Boeing Commercial Airplanes]].
<!--development-->
After dropping its unconventional [[Boeing Sonic Cruiser|Sonic Cruiser]] project, Boeing announced the conventional '''7E7''' on January 29, 2003, which focused largely on efficiency.<!--ref name="787_flyingredef"-->
The program was launched on April 26, 2004, with an order for 50 aircraft from [[All Nippon Airways]] (ANA), targeting a 2008 introduction.<!--ref name=Boeing26apr2004-->
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 certificate|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.

<!--design--> 
At launch, Boeing targeted the 787 with 20% less [[Fuel economy in aircraft|fuel burn]] than replaced aircraft like the [[Boeing 767]], carrying 200 to 300 passengers on [[Point-to-point transit|point-to-point]] routes up to {{convert|8,500|nmi|abbr=~|lk=in}},<!--ref name=Boeing26apr2004--> a shift from [[Spoke-hub distribution paradigm|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 material]]s and makes extensive use of [[electrical system]]s. 
Externally, it is recognizable by its four-window cockpit, [[raked wingtip]]s, and noise-reducing [[Chevron (aeronautics)|chevrons]] on its engine [[nacelle]]s.
Development and production rely increasingly on [[subcontractor]]s 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.

<!--variants-->
The initial {{convert|186|ft|m|adj=mid|-long}} 787-8 typically seats 242 passengers over a range of {{cvt|7,355|nmi}}, with a {{cvt|502,500|lb|t}} [[MTOW]] compared to {{cvt|560,000|lb|t}} for later variants.
<!--ref name=characteristics-->
The stretched 787-9, {{cvt|206|ft}} long, can fly {{cvt|7,635|nmi}} with 290 passengers;<!--ref name=characteristics--> it entered service on August 7, 2014, with ANA.
The further stretched 787-10, {{cvt|224|ft|m}} long, seating 330 over {{cvt|6,430|nmi}},<!--ref name=characteristics--> entered service with [[Singapore Airlines]] on April 3, 2018.

<!--operations-->
Early 787 operations encountered several [[#Operational problems|problems]] caused mainly by its [[lithium-ion batteries]], which culminated in [[Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems|fires onboard]] some aircraft. In January 2013, the U.S. [[Federal Aviation Administration|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&nbsp;billion on the program; estimates for the number of aircraft sales needed to [[break-even|break even]] vary between 1,300 and 2,000.
{{as of|2023|12}}, the 787 program has booked a total of 1,909 orders and made 1,110 deliveries while recording zero fatalities and no [[hull loss]]es.

==Development==

===Background===
During the late 1990s, Boeing considered replacement aircraft programs due to slowing sales of the [[Boeing 767|767]] and [[Boeing 747-400|747-400]]. Two new aircraft were proposed. The [[Boeing 747#747X and 747X Stretch|747X]] would have lengthened the 747-400 and improved efficiency, and the [[Boeing Sonic Cruiser|Sonic Cruiser]] would have achieved 15% higher speeds (approximately [[Mach number|Mach]] 0.98) while burning fuel at the same rate as the 767.<ref name="need-speed">{{cite web|last=Gunter|first=Lori |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2002/july/i_ca2.html |title=The Need for Speed, Boeing's Sonic Cruiser team focuses on the future |publisher=Boeing Frontier magazine |date=July 2002 |access-date= January 21, 2011}}</ref> 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.<ref name="Forbes_Sonic_Cruiser_20010528">{{cite news |title=Paper plane: That Mach 0.95 Sonic Cruiser from Boeing will never fly. Here's why. |last=Banks |first=Howard |work=Forbes |date=May 28, 2001 |url=http://members.forbes.com/global/2001/0528/056.html |access-date=June 7, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071016070803/http://members.forbes.com/global/2001/0528/056.html |archive-date=October 16, 2007 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The global airline market was disrupted by the [[September 11, 2001, attacks|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.<ref name="787_flyingredef">{{cite book |last1= Norris |first1= G |last2= Thomas |first2= G |last3= Wagner |first3= M |last4= Forbes Smith |first4= C |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner – Flying Redefined |publisher=Aerospace Technical Publications International |year=2005 |isbn= 978-0-9752341-2-9}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |agency=Associated Press |url=http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2009373399_apusboeing787historyglance.html |title=History of the Boeing 787 |work=The Seattle Times |date=June 23, 2000 |access-date=October 28, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130606210919/http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2009373399_apusboeing787historyglance.html |archive-date=June 6, 2013 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> The emphasis on a smaller midsize twinjet rather than a large 747-size aircraft represented a shift from the [[Spoke-hub distribution paradigm|hub-and-spoke theory]] toward the [[Point-to-point transit|point-to-point theory]],<ref name="Aerlines">{{cite web |last=Cannegieter |first=Roger |url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/117503295/31-Cannegieter-Ranging-Capabilities |title=Long Range vs. Ultra High Capacity|publisher=Aerlines.nl |access-date=October 12, 2015}}</ref> in response to analysis of [[focus group]]s.<ref name="BabejPollak">{{cite news |last1=Babej |first1=Marc E. |last2=Pollak |first2=Tim |url=https://www.forbes.com/2006/05/23/unsolicited-advice-advertising-cx_meb_0524boeing.html |title= Boeing Versus Airbus |work=Forbes |date=May 24, 2006 |access-date=April 8, 2010}}</ref>

Randy Baseler, Boeing Commercial Airplanes VP Marketing stated that airport congestion comes from large numbers of [[regional jet]]s and small [[single-aisle]]s, 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 hub]]s can be avoided with [[point-to-point transit]].<ref name="Baseler_ Randy_200505">{{cite web |url= http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2005/05/kangaroo_hop.html |title= Kangaroo hop |work=Randy's Journal |publisher= The Boeing Company |date= May 20, 2005 |author= Randy Baseler}}</ref>

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 (businessman)|John McDonnell]] issued an ultimatum to "develop the plane for less than 40 percent of what the [[Boeing 777|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&nbsp;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.'"<ref>{{Cite magazine |url=https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution |title=Crash Course |first=Maureen |last=Tkacik |date=September 18, 2019 |magazine=The New Republic}}</ref>

[[File:Dreamliner logo.svg|thumb|The ''Dreamliner'' name was announced in July 2003. This logo is painted on many 787s.|alt=The Dreamliner logo]]
The replacement for the Sonic Cruiser project was named "7E7"<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/march/cover.html |title=Maximizing the Middle, Finding the sweet spot in the market |publisher=Boeing Frontier magazine |date=March 2003}}</ref> (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 [[Boeing Yellowstone Project|Yellowstone Project]] (of which the 7E7 became the first stage).<ref name="Boe_787_power_on">{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q2/080620b_nr.html |title=Boeing Achieves 787 Power On |publisher= Boeing |date=June 20, 2008|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130102064100/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q2/080620b_nr.html|archive-date=January 2, 2013}}</ref> Early concept images of the 7E7 included rakish [[cockpit]] windows, a dropped nose, and a distinctive "shark-fin" [[vertical stabilizer|tail]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/daydream-believer-how-different-is-the-boeing-787-218786/ |title=Daydream believer: How different is the Boeing 787? |work=Flight International |access-date=December 14, 2010}}</ref> 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".<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> 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''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/july/i_nan.html |title=Name Your Plane sweepstakes |date= July 2003 |publisher=Boeing Frontiers Online |access-date=September 28, 2007}}</ref> Other names included ''eLiner'', ''Global Cruiser'', and ''Stratoclimber''.{{Sfn |Norris|Wagner|2009|p=40}}<ref>[http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2003-06-15-New-Boeing-7E7-Airplane-Gets-a-Name "New Boeing 7E7 Airplane Gets a Name"]. Boeing, June 15, 2003.</ref>

[[File:All Nippon Airways Boeing 787-9 (JA830A) at Tokyo Haneda Airport.jpg|thumb|left|All Nippon Airways launched the 787 program with an order for 50 aircraft in 2004.|alt=Boeing 787 in launch customer All Nippon Airways' blue and white livery]]
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.<ref name=Boeing26apr2004>{{cite press release |url= https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2004-04-26-Boeing-Launches-7E7-Dreamliner |title=Boeing Launches 7E7 Dreamliner |publisher=Boeing |date=April 26, 2004}}</ref> 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 [[Narita International Airport|Tokyo-Narita]] to [[Beijing Capital International Airport|Beijing-Capital]], and could perform routes to cities not previously served, such as [[Denver International Airport|Denver]], [[Sheremetyevo International Airport|Moscow]], and [[Indira Gandhi International Airport|New Delhi]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.metrodenver.org/blog-tags/industries/ANA-Japan-Denver-international-flight.html |title=ANA says Denver still in hunt for non-stop to Tokyo |publisher=Metro Denver |date=April 8, 2009 |access-date=December 14, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110103031140/http://www.metrodenver.org/blog-tags/industries/ANA-Japan-Denver-international-flight.html |archive-date=January 3, 2011}}</ref> The 787-3 and 787-8 were to be the initial variants, with the 787-9 entering service in 2010.<ref name=start/>

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)|Washington state]].<ref>{{Cite news|date=October 5, 2012|title=Air India takes delivery of first South Carolina-made Boeing 787 |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-southcarolina-idUSBRE8941AW20121005|access-date=July 23, 2020}}</ref> 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 material|composite]] barrel sections instead of the multiple aluminum sheets and some 50,000 fasteners used on existing aircraft.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.rdmag.com/Featured-Articles/2006/11/The-Dream-of-Composites/ |title=The Dream of Composites |work=R&D Magazine |date=November 20, 2006 |access-date= November 23, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120405220154/http://www.rdmag.com/Featured-Articles/2006/11/The-Dream-of-Composites/ |archive-date=April 5, 2012}}</ref><ref name= rdmag_200707>{{cite news |url=http://www.rdmag.com/Featured-Articles/2006/11/The-Dream-of-Composites/ |title=The Dream of Composites |work= RD mag |last1= Walz |first1= Martha |date= November 20, 2006 |access-date= September 2, 2011}}</ref> Boeing selected two new engines to power the 787, the [[Rolls-Royce Trent 1000]] and [[General Electric GEnx]].<ref name="787_flyingredef" />  Boeing stated the 787 would be approximately 20 percent more fuel-efficient than the 767,<ref name=AviationWeek_2009_0109>{{cite web |url= http://aviationweek.com/awin/boeing-rules-out-787-window-change |title= Boeing Rules Out 787 Window Change |last= Norris |first= Guy |date= January 9, 2009 |work=[[Aviation Week]]|url-access=subscription}}</ref> with approximately 40 percent of the efficiency gain from the engines,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=222308 |title=Design News – Features – Boeing's 'More Electric' 787 Dreamliner Spurs Engine Evolution |first=Joseph |last=Ogando |publisher=designnews.com |date=June 7, 2007 |access-date=September 7, 2011 |archive-date=April 6, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120406062451/http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=222308 |url-status=dead}}</ref> plus gains from aerodynamic improvements,{{Sfn |Norris|Wagner|2009|p=48}} increased use of lighter-weight composite materials, and advanced systems.<ref name=start>{{cite web |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/dream-start-205611/ |title=Dream start |first= Carole|last=Shifrin|work=Flight International|date=March 27, 2006|access-date=September 27, 2015}}</ref> The airframe underwent extensive structural testing during its design.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://seattletimes.com/html/boeingaerospace/2003889663_boeing180.html|title=Boeing news – Fired engineer calls 787's plastic fuselage unsafe |work= [[The Seattle Times]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://csmres.co.uk/cs.public.upd/article-downloads/boeing-final.pdf |title=Review – History of 787 Composites Project at Boeing |publisher=csmres.co.uk}}</ref> The 787-8 and −9 were intended to have a certified 330 minute [[ETOPS]] capability.<ref>{{cite book|last=Pandey |first=Mohan |title=How Boeing Defied the Airbus Challenge |year=2010 |publisher=Createspace |location=USA |isbn=978-1-4505-0113-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0IWXSQAACAAJ}}</ref>

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 Airfield|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.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Boeing's 787: trials, tribulations, and restoring the dream|journal=Reinforced Plastics|last=Marsh|first=George|doi=10.1016/S0034-3617(09)70311-X|volume=53|issue=8|pages=16–21|year=2009}}</ref> Boeing initially priced the 787-8 variant at US$120&nbsp;million, a low figure that surprised the industry. In 2007, the list price was US$146–151.5&nbsp;million for the 787-3, US$157–167&nbsp;million for the 787-8, and US$189–200&nbsp;million for the 787-9.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atwonline.com/aircraftenginescomponents/news/boeing-boosts-aircraft-prices-55-rising-cost-labor-materials-0309 |title=Boeing boosts aircraft prices 5.5% on rising cost of labor, materials |publisher=[[Air Transport World]] |date=June 26, 2007 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref>

===Manufacturing and suppliers===
On December 16, 2003, Boeing announced that the 787 would be assembled in its [[Boeing Everett Factory|factory]] in [[Everett, Washington]].<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> 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.<ref name="bca_20061206">"[https://web.archive.org/web/20071223183836/http://boeingmedia.com/imageDetail.cfm?id=14679&KeyWord=787&buID=0&caid=0&prid=0&sc=lrg&pn=1&clr=&CFID=2903355&CFTOKEN=34556541 Boeing Unveils 787 Final Assembly Factory Flow]." Boeing, December 6, 2006. Retrieved September 3, 2011.</ref> 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,<ref>{{cite news |title= Boeing's Big Dream |newspaper= Fortune |date= May 5, 2008 |page= 182}}. [http://bx.businessweek.com/boeing-787/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fc.moreover.com%2Fclick%2Fhere.pl%3Fr1389599468%26f%3D9791 (online version)] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130730051153/http://bx.businessweek.com/boeing-787/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fc.moreover.com%2Fclick%2Fhere.pl%3Fr1389599468&f=9791 |date=July 30, 2013}}</ref> with pre-installed systems reducing final assembly time by three-quarters to three days.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2007-07-09-boeing-787-debuts_N.htm |title=Boeing unveils 787 Dreamliner; Airbus sends congrats |work=USA Today |date=July 9, 2007 |access-date= September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title= Boeing's Big Dream |newspaper= Fortune |date= May 5, 2008 |page= 187}}</ref> Subcontractors had early difficulties procuring needed parts and finishing subassemblies on schedule, leaving remaining assembly work for Boeing to complete as "traveled work."<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q2/080409b_nr.html |title=Boeing Revises 787 First Flight and Delivery Plans; Adds Schedule Margin to Reduce Risk of Further Delays |publisher=Boeing |date=April 9, 2008 |access-date=September 2, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110915024602/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q2/080409b_nr.html |archive-date=September 15, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref>"Boeing's Big Dream", ''Fortune'', May 5, 2008, p. 182.</ref> In 2010, Boeing considered in-house construction of the 787-9 tail; the tail of the 787-8 is made by Alenia.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engines-components/news/boeing-considers-moving-787-9-tail-build-house-1022 |access-date= October 30, 2010 |title=Boeing considers moving 787-9 tail build in-house |work= ATW Online |date= October 30, 2010}}</ref> The 787 was unprofitable for some subcontractors; Alenia's parent company, Finmeccanica, had a total loss of €750 million on the project.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-debt-dogs-finmeccanica-381607/ |title= In focus: Debt dogs Finmeccanica |work= Flightglobal |first=Dan |last=Thisdell |date=February 4, 2013 |access-date=April 18, 2015}}</ref>

[[File:Boeing 787 Section 41 final assembly.jpg|thumb|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);<ref>"Boeing's Big Dream", ''Fortune'', May 5, 2008, p. 184.</ref> [[Tailplane|horizontal stabilizers]] ([[Alenia Aeronautica]], Italy; [[Korea Aerospace Industries]], South Korea);<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-29/korea-aerospace-to-double-exports-helped-by-boeing-787-parts.html |title=Boeing 787 Supplier Korea Aerospace Hires Share-Sale Arrangers |work=Bloomberg |date=September 29, 2010 |access-date=September 2, 2011 |first=Sookyung |last=Seo}}</ref> fuselage sections (Global Aeronautica, Italy; Boeing, [[North Charleston, South Carolina|North Charleston]], US; [[Kawasaki Heavy Industries]], Japan; [[Spirit AeroSystems]], [[Wichita, Kansas|Wichita]], US; [[Korean Air]], South Korea);<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=775 |title=Boeing Completes Acquisition of Vought Operations in South Carolina |publisher=Boeing |date=July 30, 2009 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref name="seatimes_20050911">{{cite news |last=Gates |first=D. |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002486348_787global11.html |title=Boeing 787: Parts from around world will be swiftly integrated |work=The Seattle Times |date= September 11, 2005|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/04/119_6376.html |title= Korean Air to Buy 10 '787 Dreamliners' |work=The Korea Times |date=July 12, 2007}}</ref> passenger doors ([[Latecoere group|Latécoère]], France); cargo doors, access doors, and crew escape door ([[Saab AB]], Sweden); software development ([[HCL Enterprise]], India);<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.hcltech.com/pdf/boeing.pdf |title= Boeing |publisher= HCL Technologies |access-date= January 20, 2013}}</ref> floor beams ([[Tata Group|TAL Manufacturing Solutions Limited]], India);<ref>{{cite news |url= http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hPLDpu6bLmTgk5mXHXMgUR0moZSw |title= India's Tata Group to supply parts for Boeing Dreamliner |agency=Agence France-Presse |date= February 6, 2008 |access-date= February 7, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url= http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-02-07/nagpur/27783974_1_tata-and-boeing-tata-motors-tal-manufacturing-solutions |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131016083341/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-02-07/nagpur/27783974_1_tata-and-boeing-tata-motors-tal-manufacturing-solutions |url-status= dead |archive-date= October 16, 2013 |title= Tatas to make Boeing 787 parts at Mihan |date= February 7, 2008 |last= Bhagwat |first= Ramu |work= [[The Times of India]] |access-date= September 2, 2011}}</ref> wiring ([[Labinal]], France);<ref name=787_team/> wing-tips, [[Flap (aircraft)|flap]] support fairings, wheel well bulkhead, and [[longeron]]s (Korean Air, South Korea);<ref name=KAL>{{cite news |url= http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-business/korean-air-ready-for-787-ramp-up-20100930-15y0k.html |title=Korean Air ready for 787 ramp up |work= The Brisbane Times|date=September 30, 2010 |access-date= September 3, 2011}}</ref> landing gear ([[Messier-Bugatti-Dowty]], UK/France);<ref>{{cite news |title= Boeing's Big Dream |newspaper= Fortune |date= May 5, 2008 |page= 189}}</ref><ref>Kennedy, Bill. "[https://archive.today/20130820070734/http://www.ctemag.com/aa_pages/2009/0903_Aerospace.html Wheels up]", ''Cutting Tool Engineering'', March 2009. Retrieved January 14, 2014.</ref> and power distribution and management systems, air conditioning packs ([[Hamilton Sundstrand]], [[Connecticut]], US).<ref name=787_team>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/dev_team.html |title=787 Dreamliner International team facts |publisher=Boeing |access-date=June 10, 2010}}</ref><ref name=air_conditioning>{{cite web |url=http://www.hamiltonsundstrandcorp.com/hsc/news_index/1,10392,CLI1_DIV22_ETI2807_PID25168,00.html |title=Hamilton Sundstrand delivers first cabin air conditioning packs for Boeing 787 Dreamliner |access-date=August 21, 2007 |last=Coulom |first=Dan |date=August 20, 2007 |type=press release |publisher=Hamilton Sundstrand |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070828032108/http://www.hamiltonsundstrandcorp.com/hsc/news_index/1%2C10392%2CCLI1_DIV22_ETI2807_PID25168%2C00.html |archive-date=August 28, 2007 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

To speed up deliveries, Boeing modified four used [[Boeing 747-400|747-400s]] into [[Boeing Dreamlifter|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&nbsp;billion in loans.<ref name=Boeing_shares>{{cite news |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003707208_787globalbuild15.html |title=Boeing shares work, but guards its secrets |work=The Seattle Times |date=May 15, 2007 |first=Dominic |last=Gates|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref>  On April 26, 2006, Japanese manufacturer [[Toray Industries]] and Boeing signed a production agreement involving US$6&nbsp;billion worth of [[carbon fiber]], extending a 2004 contract.<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> In May 2007, the final assembly on the first 787 began at Everett.<ref>Moores, Victoria. [http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-boeing-begins-787-final-assembly-214060/ "Pictures: Boeing begins 787 final assembly"]. ''Flight International'', May 22, 2007.</ref>

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 {{cvt|5000|lb}} heavier than specified.<ref name=FG_2006>{{cite news |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/weight-remains-challenge-for-boeing-as-787-progresses-303711/ |title= Weight remains challenge for Boeing as 787 progresses |work=Flightglobal |date= November 6, 2006 |access-date= May 23, 2015}}</ref> The seventh and subsequent aircraft would be the first optimized 787-8s expected to meet all goals.<ref name="KOMOTV News">{{cite news |url= http://komonews.com/archive/boeing-chief-787-still-on-schedule |title=Boeing Still Working On 787 Weight Issue, Carson Says |agency=Associated Press |date=December 7, 2006 |access-date=July 22, 2016}}</ref><ref name="Financial Times">{{cite news |url=http://www.ft.com/cms/608e941e-2beb-11dc-b498-000b5df10621.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221210/http://www.ft.com/cms/608e941e-2beb-11dc-b498-000b5df10621.html |archive-date=December 10, 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |title=Boeing to deliver test 787s to its customers |work=Financial Times |date=July 6, 2007}}</ref> Accordingly, some parts were redesigned to include more use of [[titanium]].<ref name="spi_20061207">{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Virtual-rollout-of-the-787-1221725.php |title=Virtual rollout of the 78 |last=Wallace |first=James |work=[[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] |publisher=Hearst Communications Inc |date=December 7, 2006 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|author=Dominic Gates |url=https://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/23/business/la-fi-dreamliner23-2009dec23 |title=Boeing's 787 Dreamliner is no lightweight |work= Los Angeles Times |date=December 23, 2009 |access-date=January 21, 2013}}</ref> Early built 787s were overweight and some carriers decided to take later aircraft; in early 2015, Boeing was trying to sell 10 such aircraft.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Johnsson |first1=Julie |title=Boeing Lining Up Buyers for Early Overweight Dreamliners |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-24/boeing-said-to-line-up-buyers-for-early-overweight-dreamliners |publisher=[[Bloomberg News|Bloomberg]] |date= February 24, 2015}}</ref> In July 2015, Reuters reported that Boeing was considering reducing the use of titanium to reduce construction costs.<ref>{{cite news|title= Boeing looks at pricey titanium in bid to stem 787 losses |url= https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-787-titanium-insight-idUSKCN0PY1PL20150724|work= Reuters|date= July 24, 2015|access-date= August 2, 2015|last= Scott|first= Alwyn|location= Seattle|archive-date= July 27, 2015|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150727034153/http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/24/us-boeing-787-titanium-insight-idUSKCN0PY1PL20150724|url-status= live}}</ref>

[[File:Boeing 787 Roll-out.jpg|thumb|left|The first public appearance of the 787 on July 8, 2007|alt=The Everett Factory Hall's huge door opens as the first 787 is rolled out. Surrounding the aircraft are guests and the public.]]
Boeing planned the first flight by the end of August 2007 and premiered the first 787 ([[Aircraft registration|registered]] N787BA) at a rollout ceremony on July 8, 2007.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2007-07-08-Boeing-Celebrates-the-Premiere-of-the-787-Dreamliner |title=Boeing Celebrates the Premiere of the 787 Dreamliner |date=July 8, 2007 |publisher=Boeing |access-date=June 14, 2011}}</ref>  The 787 had 677 orders at this time, which is more orders from launch to roll-out than any previous wide-body airliner.<ref name="677 orders">{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q3/070708b_nr.html |title=Boeing Celebrates the Premiere of the 787 Dreamliner |publisher=Boeing |date=July 8, 2007 |access-date=January 21, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629094912/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q3/070708b_nr.html |archive-date=June 29, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> The major systems were not installed at the time; many parts were attached with temporary non-aerospace [[fastener]]s requiring replacement with flight fasteners later.<ref name="Flight Global">{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/09/10/216664/boeing-787-first-flight-suffers-two-month-delay.html |title=Boeing 787 first flight suffers two-month delay |work=[[Flight International]] |first=Stephen |last=Trimble |date= September 10, 2007 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref>

In September 2007, Boeing announced a three-month delay, blaming a shortage of fasteners as well as incomplete software.<ref name=Bloomb_delay1>{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aUs7S1JX0HuI |title=Boeing Delays 787's First Flight to November–December (Update4) |work=Bloomberg |date= September 5, 2007|access-date=September 3, 2011}}</ref> 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.<ref name="ny_times_20071010_delivery_delay">{{cite news |first=Nicola |last=Clark |title=Boeing Delays Deliveries of 787 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/business/10cnd-boeing.html |work=The New York Times |date=October 10, 2007 |access-date=December 22, 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q4/071010d_nr.html |title=Boeing Reschedules Initial 787 Deliveries and First Flight |publisher=Boeing |date=October 10, 2007 |access-date=September 3, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111103062004/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q4/071010d_nr.html |archive-date=November 3, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Less than a week later, Mike Bair, the 787 program manager was replaced.<ref>{{cite news|title=787 Program Chief Replaced at Boeing |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/business/17boeing.html |agency=Associated Press |work=The New York Times |date= October 17, 2007 |access-date=November 24, 2007}}</ref> On January 16, 2008, Boeing announced a third three-month delay to the first flight of the 787, citing insufficient progress on "traveled work."<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q1/080116a_nr.html |title=Boeing Shifts Schedule for 787 First Flight |publisher=Boeing |date=January 16, 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080119140122/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q1/080116a_nr.html |archive-date=January 19, 2008 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124696971307105465 |title=Boeing Sets Deal to Buy a Dreamliner Plant |work=The Wall Street Journal |first=Peter |last=Sanders |date=July 8, 2009}}</ref>

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.<ref name="787 variants delayed to at least 2012"/> On November 4, 2008, a fifth delay was announced due to incorrect fastener installation and the [[Boeing Machinists Strike of 2008|Boeing machinists strike]], stating that the first test flight would not occur in the fourth quarter of 2008.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2008351743_boeing05.html |title=Fasteners incorrectly installed |date= November 5, 2008|access-date=November 11, 2008 |work=The Seattle Times |first=Dominic |last=Gates}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://edition.cnn.com/2008/BUSINESS/11/04/boeing.strike.ap/index.html |title=Boeing says 787 test flight delayed again |publisher=CNN |date=November 4, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081108074053/http://edition.cnn.com/2008/BUSINESS/11/04/boeing.strike.ap/index.html |archive-date=November 8, 2008}}</ref> After assessing the program schedule with suppliers,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSpIiLLg_Uj8|title=Boeing Reviews Dreamliner Schedule for More Delays (Update2) |publisher=Bloomberg |date=December 4, 2008|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> in December 2008, Boeing stated that the first flight was delayed until the second quarter of 2009.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/12/11/320030/boeing-confirms-787-first-flight-pushed-back-to-2q-2009.html |title=Boeing confirms 787 first flight pushed back to 2Q 2009 |work=Flight International |date= December 11, 2008 |access-date=December 14, 2010}}</ref> Airlines, such as [[United Airlines]] and [[Air India]], stated their intentions to seek [[financial compensation|compensation]] from Boeing for the delays.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/morning_call/2012/02/united-may-seek-damages-for-787-delays.html |title=United may seek damages for 787 delays |work=PSBJ |date= February 27, 2012 |access-date=March 14, 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://profit.ndtv.com/news/corporates/article-govt-approves-air-india-compensation-package-for-dreamliner-delay-308387 |title=Govt approves Air India compensation package for Dreamliner delay |date=July 25, 2012 |access-date=July 25, 2012}}</ref>

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.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kotha |first=Suresh |title=Managing A Global Partnership Model: Lessons from the Boeing 787 'Dreamliner' Program |publisher=HOBOKEN: Blackwell Publishing Ltd |year=2013 |pages=41–66}}</ref> <!-- Further updates go below for chronological structure -->

===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 {{cvt|15|ft}} onto a {{cvt|1|in}}-thick steel plate occurred in [[Mesa, Arizona]];<ref name=Crash_Test>{{cite web |url= http://komonews.com/archive/boeing-performs-crash-test-on-787-fuselage-section|title= Boeing performs crash test on 787 fuselage section |date= August 23, 2007 |work=Komo News |access-date=July 22, 2016}}</ref><ref name=Design_News_2008_0829>{{cite web |url= http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=216921 |title= Boeing Performs Crash Test on 787 Dreamliner: Tests currently under analysis |access-date= September 9, 2011 |editor-last= Snyder |editor-first= Sean |date= August 29, 2007 |work= [[Design News]] |publisher= Reed Elsevier |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20111217215108/http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=216921 |archive-date= December 17, 2011 |df= mdy-all}}</ref> the results matched predictions, allowing modeling of various crash scenarios using computational analysis instead of further physical tests.<ref name=Forbes_2007_0906>{{cite news |url= https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/09/06/ap4091000.html |title= Boeing Says 787 Fuselage Test a Success |access-date=September 7, 2007 |last=Gillespie |first= Elizabeth M |date= September 6, 2007 |work=Forbes}} {{dead link|date=January 2022|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}} [http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2007-09/8971748-boeing-says-787-fuselage-test-a-success-020.htm Alt URL]</ref><ref name=Design_News_2007_0906>{{cite web |url= http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=225409 |title= Announcement of Boeing Fuselage Crash Test Results |access-date= September 9, 2011 |editor-last= Snyder |editor-first= Sean |date= September 6, 2007 |work= [[Design News]] |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20111217215519/http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=225409 |archive-date= December 17, 2011 |df= mdy-all}}</ref> 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.<ref name="seattletimes_09_18">{{cite news |first=Dominic |last=Gates |title=Fired engineer calls 787's plastic fuselage unsafe |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2003889663_boeing180.html |work=The Seattle Times |date=September 18, 2007 |access-date= November 24, 2007}}</ref><ref name=drops>{{cite web|last=Matlack |first=Carol |url=http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2009/gb20090626_089756.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090629051805/http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2009/gb20090626_089756.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=June 29, 2009 |title=More Boeing 787 Woes as Qantas Drops Order |work= Bloomberg BusinessWeek |publisher= Bloomberg |date=June 26, 2009 |access-date= December 14, 2010}}</ref> 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.<ref name=Design_News_2008_0829/> 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.<ref>Gates, Dominic. (September 18, 2007) "[http://seattletimes.com/html/boeingaerospace/2003889663_boeing180.html Boeing news |Fired engineer calls 787's plastic fuselage unsafe]". ''The Seattle Times''. Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref>

[[File:Boeing 787 first flight taxi turn.jpg|thumb|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.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/08/07/215951/european-and-us-regulators-certify-trent-1000-for-boeing-787.html |title=European and US regulators certify Trent 1000 for Boeing 787 |work=Flight International |access-date=December 14, 2010}}</ref> The alternative GE GEnx-1B engine achieved certification on March 31, 2008.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/genx/genx_20080331.html |title= GEnx-1B Engine Receives FAA Certification |access-date= April 4, 2008 |date= March 31, 2008 |type= press release |publisher= GE Aviation |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080405223719/http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/genx/genx_20080331.html |archive-date= April 5, 2008 |df= mdy-all}}</ref> On June 20, 2008, the first aircraft was powered up, for testing the electrical supply and distribution systems.<ref name="TPN interactive-2011">{{cite web |url=http://poweron.tpninteractive.com/ |title=PowerOn Interactive Site |publisher=TPN interactive |access-date=December 14, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110727220342/http://poweron.tpninteractive.com/ |archive-date=July 27, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> A non-flightworthy static test airframe was built; on September 27, 2008, the fuselage was successfully tested at 14.9 [[pounds per square inch|psi]] (102.7 kPa) differential, which is 150 percent of the maximum pressure expected in commercial service.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q3/080927a_nr.html |title=Boeing Completes 787 Dreamliner 'High Blow' Test |publisher=Boeing |date=September 27, 2008 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> In December 2008, the 787's maintenance program was passed by the FAA.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q4/081222b_nr.html |title=FAA Approves Boeing 787 Dreamliner Maintenance Program |publisher=Boeing |date= December 22, 2008|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref>

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.<ref name="flightline">{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2009/q2/090503a_nr.html |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner Moves to Flight Line for Testing |publisher=Boeing |date=May 3, 2009 |access-date=May 3, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090505154141/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2009/q2/090503a_nr.html |archive-date=May 5, 2009 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> On May 4, 2009, a press report indicated a 10–15% range reduction, about {{cvt|6900|nmi}} instead of the originally promised {{convert|7,700|to|8,200|nmi}}, for early aircraft that were about 8% overweight. Substantial redesign work was expected to correct this, which would complicate increases in production rates;<ref name="ATW May 4, 09">{{cite news |url= http://atwonline.com/aircraftenginescomponents/news/bernstein-research-sees-further-787-delays-bigger-range-shortfall-03-0 |title= Bernstein Research sees further 787 delays, bigger range shortfall |newspaper= ATW Daily News |date= May 4, 2009 |access-date= September 9, 2011}}</ref> Boeing stated the early 787-8s would have a range of almost {{cvt|8000|nmi}}.<ref name="Boeing confirms weight">Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/05/07/326087/boeing-confirms-787-weight-issues.html "Boeing confirms 787 weight issues"]. ''Flight International'', May 7, 2009. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref> As a result, some airlines reportedly delayed deliveries of 787s to take later planes that may be closer to the original estimates.<ref>Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/03/09/323414/concerns-raised-over-expected-787-range-shortfall.html "Concerns raised over expected 787 range shortfall"]. ''Flight International'', March 9, 2009. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref> Boeing expected to have the weight issues addressed by the 21st production model.<ref name="Shanghai casts doubt">Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/03/14/323853/shanghai-casts-doubt-over-early-787-delivery-slots.html "Shanghai casts doubt over early 787 delivery slots"]. ''Flight International'', March 14, 2009. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref>

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.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=720 |title=Boeing Postpones 787 First Flight |publisher=Boeing |date= June 23, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Dreamliner 787 Composites Approach Takes Another Big Hit |url=http://www.designnews.com/blog/Engineering_Materials/22707-Dreamliner_787_Composites_Approach_Takes_Another_Big_Hit.php |newspaper=Design News |date=September 10, 2009 |access-date=September 11, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090924190951/http://www.designnews.com/blog/Engineering_Materials/22707-Dreamliner_787_Composites_Approach_Takes_Another_Big_Hit.php |archive-date=September 24, 2009 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> 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.<ref name="boeing.mediaroom.com">{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=812 |title=Boeing Announces New 787 Schedule and Third-Quarter Charge |publisher=Boeing |date= August 27, 2009}}</ref> The company expected to write off US$2.5&nbsp;billion because it considered the first three Dreamliners built unsellable and suitable only for flight tests.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2009760894_boeingdelay28.html |title=Boeing still sure delayed 787 will be profitable |work=The Seattle Times |access-date= September 23, 2009 |first=Dominic |last=Gates |date= August 28, 2009}}</ref> On October 28, 2009, Boeing selected Charleston, SC as the site for a second 787 production line, after soliciting bids from multiple states.<ref name=sc/> On December 12, 2009, the first 787 completed high-speed taxi tests, the last major step before flight.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=991 |title=Boeing Completes 787 Dreamliner High-Speed Taxi Test |publisher=Boeing |date= December 12, 2009|access-date=September 3, 2011}}</ref><ref name=FG_final_gaunlet>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/12/08/335914/787-approaches-final-gauntlet-testing.html |title=787 approaches final gauntlet testing |work=Flight International |date= December 8, 2009 |access-date=December 15, 2009}}</ref>

===Flight testing===
[[File:Boeing 787 first flight.jpg|thumb|left|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&nbsp;am PST and landed three hours later at 1:33&nbsp;p.m. at Seattle's [[Boeing Field]]. During the flight the 787 reached a top speed of {{cvt|180|knots|km/h|0}} and maximum altitude of {{cvt|13,200|feet}}.<ref>{{cite press release |url= http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2009-12-15-Boeing-787-Dreamliner-Completes-First-Flight |title= Boeing 787 Dreamliner Completes First Flight |publisher= Boeing |date= December 15, 2009}}</ref> Originally scheduled for {{sfrac|5|1|2}} hours, the test flight was shortened to three hours due to unfavorable weather conditions.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://old.seattletimes.com/html/boeingaerospace/2010517316_787firstflight16.html |work= [[The Seattle Times]] |title= Rain shortens 787 first flight, fails to dampen optimism |date= December 16, 2009 |author= Dominic Gates |access-date= June 8, 2017 |archive-date= November 19, 2018 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20181119092158/http://old.seattletimes.com/html/boeingaerospace/2010517316_787firstflight16.html |url-status= dead }}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/787-first-flight-is-just-the-start-for-gruelling-pro-336319/ |title= 787 first flight is just the start for gruelling programme |date= December 22, 2009 |author= Jon Ostrower |work= Flight International}}</ref>

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 [[Aircraft livery|livery]], flew to [[Boeing Field]] on December 22, 2009, to join the flight test program;<ref>{{cite news |url= http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE2/history/20091222/1710Z/KPAE/KBFI |title= Boeing Commercial Airplane Group No.2 |date= December 22, 2009 |newspaper= FlightAware}}</ref><ref>[http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1010 "Second Boeing 787 Dreamliner Completes First Flight"]. Boeing, December 22, 2009. Retrieved September 2011.</ref> the third 787, ZA004 made its first flight on February 24, 2010, followed by ZA003 on March 14, 2010.<ref name="787flighttest"/> On March 24, 2010, flutter and ground effects testing was completed, clearing the aircraft to fly its entire [[flight envelope]].<ref>Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/03/24/339861/boeing-completes-787-flutter-and-ground-effects-testing.html "Boeing completes 787 flutter and ground effects testing"]. ''Flight International'', March 24, 2010. Retrieved September 3, 2011.</ref> 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 {{cvt|25|ft}} upward during the test.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1138/ |title=Boeing Completes Ultimate-Load Wing Test on 787 |publisher=Boeing |date=March 28, 2010 |access-date=March 30, 2010 |archive-date=April 7, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120407055438/http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1138%2F |url-status=dead }}</ref> Unlike past aircraft, the wings were not tested to failure.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303410404575152123922009294 |title=Boeing's Dreamliner Lags Testing Schedule |work= The Wall Street Journal |date= March 30, 2010 |first=Peter |last=Sanders|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/03/boeing-787-passes-incredible-wing-flex-test/ |title=Boeing 787 Passes Incredible Wing Flex Test |magazine=Wired |date= March 29, 2010 |first=Jason |last=Paur}}</ref> On April 7, data showed the test had been a success.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1151 |title=Boeing Confirms Success on 787 Wing, Fuselage Ultimate Load Test |publisher=Boeing |date= April 7, 2010}}</ref>

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 {{cvt|115|to|-45|F}}, including takeoff preparations at both temperature extremes.<ref>[http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2010/04/23/Boeing-787-in-hotcold-testing-in-Florida/UPI-83021272046892/ "Boeing 787 in hot/cold testing in Florida"]. UPI, April 23, 2010. Retrieved September 3, 2011.</ref>  ZA005, the fifth 787 and the first with GEnx engines, began ground engine tests in May 2010,<ref>[http://787flighttest.com/2010/05/ "First 787 GEnx Engine Runs Complete"]. Boeing, May 12, 2010.</ref> and made its first flight on June 16, 2010.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/06/17/343366/video-genx-powered-787-completes-maiden-flight.html|title=VIDEO: GEnx powered 787 completes maiden flight|work=Flight International |access-date=July 21, 2010}}</ref> In June 2010, gaps were discovered in the horizontal stabilizers of test aircraft due to improperly installed shims; all aircraft were inspected and repaired.<ref>{{cite web |title= Horizontal stabiliser gaps force 787 inspections and reduced flight envelope |work=Flight International |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/06/25/343682/horizontal-stabiliser-gaps-force-787-inspections-and-reduced-flight.html |date= June 25, 2010 |access-date=June 26, 2010}}</ref> That same month, a 787 experienced its first in-flight lightning strike; inspections found no damage.<ref name="www.wired.com">{{cite magazine |title=Boeing 787 Withstands Lightning Strike |author=Jason Paur |date=June 17, 2010 |url=https://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/boeing-787-withstands-lightning-strike/ |magazine=Wired}}</ref> 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.<ref name="seattletimes_09_18"/><ref>"FAA Probes American's Inspections". ''The Wall Street Journal'', May 16, 2008, p. B1.</ref><ref>Gates, Dominic. [http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002844619_boeing05.html "Building the 787, When lightning strikes"]. ''The Seattle Times'', March 5, 2006. Retrieved September 3, 2011.</ref> The FAA also planned requirement changes to help the 787 show compliance.<ref name="seattletimes_2009_02_08">{{cite news |title=FAA to loosen fuel-tank safety rules, benefiting Boeing's 787 |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2008719843_lightning08.html |work= The Seattle Times |first=Dominic |last=Gates |date=February 8, 2009|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-engineers-objected-to-boeings-removal-of-some-787-lightning-protection-measures |title=FAA engineers objected to Boeing's removal of some 787 lightning protection measures |newspaper=The Seattle Times|date=December 2019 |access-date= January 5, 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.aerotime.aero/rytis.beresnevicius/24324-boeing-787-lightning-protection-faa-objection |title=Boeing discarded 787 lightning protection, despite FAA objections |publisher=Aerotime Hub |date=December 11, 2019 |access-date=February 9, 2020 |archive-date=September 15, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200915184120/https://www.aerotime.aero/rytis.beresnevicius/24324-boeing-787-lightning-protection-faa-objection |url-status=dead }}</ref>

[[File:B787-1659.jpg|thumb|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.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10676791 "Dreamliner lands at Farnborough"]. BBC News, July 18, 2010. Retrieved July 18, 2010.</ref>

On August 2, 2010, a Trent 1000 engine suffered a blowout at Rolls-Royce's test facility during ground testing.<ref name="bloomTrent">{{cite news |last=Mustoe |first=Howard |url=http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ae3AMBTC3nlg |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130118124821/http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ae3AMBTC3nlg |url-status=dead |archive-date=January 18, 2013 |title=Rolls-Royce Blowout Shutters Boeing, Airbus Test Bed |publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |date=August 24, 2010 |access-date=August 29, 2010}}</ref> 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.<ref name="bbc_delay_2011">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11106378 |title= Boeing delays delivery of 787 aircraft until next year |publisher=BBC |date= August 27, 2010 |access-date= August 27, 2010}}</ref><ref name="fgTrent">{{cite web |last= Ostrower |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/08/28/346766/lack-of-production-engine-for-airplane-nine-drives-787.html |title= Lack of production engine for Airplane Nine drives 787 delay |work=Flight International |date= August 28, 2010 |access-date=August 29, 2010}}</ref> That same month, Boeing faced compensation claims from airlines owing to ongoing delivery delays.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engines-components/news/boeing-faces-claim-787-delays-sixth-flight-test-aircraft-wont-fly-u |title=Boeing faces claim on 787 delays; sixth flight test aircraft won't fly until September |publisher=ATW Online |date= August 16, 2010 |access-date=August 16, 2010}}</ref> In September 2010, it was reported that two additional 787s might join the test fleet for a total of eight flight test aircraft.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engines-components/news/787-flight-test-fleet-expand-0902 |title=787 flight test fleet to expand |publisher=ATW Online |date=September 10, 2010 |access-date=September 9, 2010}}</ref>  On September 10, 2010, a partial engine surge occurred in a Trent engine on ZA001 at Roswell.<ref name="awSurge">{{cite web |last=Norris |first=Guy |url=http://aviationweek.com/awin/boeing-787-suffers-engine-surge-during-flight-tests-deliveries-may-slip-again |title=Boeing 787 Suffers Engine Surge During Tests; Deliveries May Slip Again |work=Aviation Week |date=September 16, 2010 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> On October 4, 2010, the sixth 787, ZA006 joined the test program with its first flight.<ref>[http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1455 "Sixth Boeing 787 Makes First Flight, Testing Program Making Good Progress"]. Boeing, October 4, 2010.</ref>

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.<ref name="787fireovertexas">{{cite news |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2013387936_787emergency10.html |title= Electrical fire forces emergency landing of 787 test plane |work=The Seattle Times |date= November 9, 2010|access-date=November 9, 2010 |first=Dominic |last=Gates}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131204675 |title= Boeing 787 Makes Emergency Landing On Test Flight |agency=Associated Press |publisher= NPR |date= November 9, 2010 |access-date=November 9, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101114032902/http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131204675 |archive-date=November 14, 2010}}</ref> The electrical fire caused some systems to fail before landing.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/11/15/349637/787-electrical-fire-raises-prospect-of-further-delay.html |work= Flightglobal |title=787 electrical fire raises prospect of further delay |date= November 15, 2010 |access-date= November 15, 2010}}</ref> Following this incident, Boeing suspended flight testing on November 10, 2010; ground testing continued.<ref>Norris, Guy. "787s Grounded After Emergency Landing". ''Aviation Week'', November 10, 2010. Retrieved June 14, 2011.</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Norris |first=Guy |url=http://aviationweek.com/awin/787s-remain-grounded-investigation-continues |title=787s Remain Grounded As Investigation Continues |work=Aviation Week |date=November 11, 2010 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> After investigation, the in-flight fire was primarily attributed to [[Foreign object damage|foreign object debris]] (FOD) that was present in the electrical bay.<ref>Rothman, Andrea. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-22/boeing-787-fire-sparked-by-stray-tool-la-tribune-says.html "Boeing 787 Fire Sparked by Stray Tool"]. ''Bloomberg'', November 25, 2010.</ref> After electrical system and software changes, the 787 resumed flight testing on December 23, 2010.<ref>Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/12/23/351332/787-flight-tests-resume-final-schedule-unclear.html "787 flight tests resume, final schedule unclear"]. ''Air Transport Intelligence'', December 23, 2010. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref><ref>[http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1571 "Boeing Resumes 787 Flight Testing"]. Boeing, December 23, 2010.</ref>

=== Test evaluation and certification ===
[[File:Boeing 787 Dreamliner arrival Airventure 2011.jpg|thumb|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.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/11/05/349334/boeing-faces-prospect-of-further-787-delay.html |title= Boeing faces prospect of further 787 delay |work=Flight International |date= November 5, 2010 |access-date=November 6, 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/11/04/349310/jal-hit-by-further-787-delivery-delay.html |title= JAL hit by further 787 delivery delay |work=Air Transport Intelligence |date= November 4, 2010 |access-date=November 6, 2010}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1584 |title=Boeing Sets 787 First Delivery for Third Quarter |publisher=Boeing |date= January 18, 2011|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/01/18/351976/boeing-expects-first-787-delivery-in-the-third-quarter.html |title= Boeing expects first 787 delivery in the third quarter |work=Flight International |date= January 18, 2011}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/02/24/353640/picture-boeing-passes-1000-787-flights.html |title= Boeing passes 1,000 787 flights |last= Ostrower |first= Jon |work=Air Transport Intelligence|date= February 24, 2011|access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> In July 2011, ANA performed a week of operations testing using a 787 in Japan.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/07/04/359077/all-nippon-airways-starts-week-long-787-validation.html |title= All Nippon Airways starts week-long 787 validation |author=Koh, Quintella |work=Air Transport Intelligence|date= July 4, 2011 |access-date=July 6, 2011}}</ref> The test aircraft had flown 4,828 hours in 1,707 flights combined by August 15, 2011.<ref name="787flighttest">{{cite web |url=http://787flighttest.com |title=787 Dreamliner Flight Test site |publisher=Boeing |access-date= August 15, 2011}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web |last=Ostrower |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/08/certification-flight-testing-c.html |title=Certification flight testing complete, the 787 fleet is still busy |publisher=Flightblogger on Flightglobal.com |date=August 15, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111221105122/http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/08/certification-flight-testing-c.html |archive-date=December 21, 2011}}</ref>

On August 13, 2011, certification testing of the Rolls-Royce powered 787-8 finished.<ref>Ostrower, Jon. [http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/08/17/360898/boeing-confirms-787-certification-flight-test-completion.html "Boeing confirms 787 certification flight test completion"]. ''Air Transport Intelligence'', August 17, 2011. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref> The FAA and [[European Aviation Safety Agency]] certified the 787 on August 26, 2011, at a ceremony in Everett, Washington.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/08/26/361346/787-wins-certification-from-faa-and-easa.html |title=787 wins certification from FAA and EASA |date=August 26, 2011 |work= Air Transport Intelligence |access-date=August 26, 2011}}</ref><ref name=faa>{{cite web |url=http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=13064 |type=press release |title=FAA Approves Production of Boeing 787 Dreamliner |publisher=FAA |date=August 26, 2011 |access-date=August 29, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110908035536/http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=13064 |archive-date=September 8, 2011 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all}}</ref>

===Entry into service===
[[File:All Nippon Airways, Boeing 787-8, JA823A (14305502433).jpg|thumb|left|[[All Nippon Airways]] flew the first commercial 787 flight on October 26, 2011.]]
<!--Introduction-->
<!--Production-->
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.<ref name=faa/> 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.<ref name=sc>{{cite news |author=Cohen, Aubrey |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Boeing-illegally-put-second-787-line-in-S-C-1345345.php |title=Boeing illegally put second 787 line in S.C., complaint says |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |date=April 20, 2011}}</ref> In December 2011, the National Labor Relations Board dropped its lawsuit after the [[International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers|Machinists' union]] withdrew its complaint as part of a new contract with Boeing.<ref name="Hananel-2011">{{cite news |last=Hananel |first=Sam |url=https://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/12/09/labor_board_withdraws_boeing_complaint/ |title=Labor board drops high-profile Boeing complaint |newspaper=Boston Globe |agency=Associated Press |date=December 9, 2011}}</ref>  The first 787 assembled in [[Boeing South Carolina|South Carolina]] was rolled out on April 27, 2012.<ref name=debutssc>{{cite news |last=Peterson |first=Kyle |title=Boeing Debuts First 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-idUSBRE83Q15Q20120427 |work=Reuters |date=April 27, 2012 |access-date=June 30, 2017 |archive-date=May 2, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120502212420/http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/us-boeing-idUSBRE83Q15Q20120427 |url-status=live}}</ref>

<!--Delivery-->
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.<ref name=FG_Formal_Delivery>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-formally-delivers-first-787-to-ana-362515 |title=Boeing formally delivers first 787 to ANA |work=Flight International |date=September 25, 2011 |first=Jon |last=Ostrower}}</ref><ref name=Boe_Contractual_Delivery>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-09-25-Boeing-ANA-Complete-Contractual-Delivery-of-First-787-Dreamliner |title=Boeing, ANA Complete Contractual Delivery of First 787 Dreamliner |publisher=Boeing |date=September 25, 2011}}</ref> On September 27, it flew to Tokyo [[Haneda Airport]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-idUSTRE78Q2O220110927 |title=First delivered Boeing 787 takes off for Japan |work=Reuters |date=September 27, 2011 |author=Tim Hepher |access-date=June 30, 2017 |archive-date=September 27, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927222231/http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/27/us-boeing-idUSTRE78Q2O220110927 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |agency=Associated Press |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-delivers-first-787-1.1112430 |title=Boeing delivers first 787 |date=September 26, 2011}}</ref> The airline took delivery of the second 787 on October 13, 2011.<ref name=ST_2nd_787_delivered>{{cite news |url=http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-delivers-its-second-787-and-jumbo-freighter/ |title=Boeing delivers its second 787 and jumbo freighter |newspaper=The Seattle Times |date=October 13, 2011}}</ref>

On October 26, 2011, an ANA 787 flew the first commercial flight from Tokyo's [[Narita International Airport]] to [[Hong Kong International Airport]].<ref name=Reuters_Dreamliner_1st_pax>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dreamliner-idUSTRE79P02Q20111026 |title=Dreamliner carries its first passengers and Boeing's hopes |author=Tim Kelly |work=Reuters |date=October 26, 2011 |access-date=June 30, 2017 |archive-date=October 27, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111027232436/http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/26/us-dreamliner-idUSTRE79P02Q20111026 |url-status=live}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15456914 |title=Boeing's Dreamliner completes first commercial flight |date=October 26, 2011 |work=BBC News}}</ref> An ANA 787 flew its first long-haul flight to Europe on January 21, 2012, from Haneda to [[Frankfurt Airport]].<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://www.ana.co.jp/wws/us/e/local/about_ana/corp_info/pr/2011/pdf/111005.pdf |title=ANA launches first long-haul service to Europe on 787 Dreamliner |publisher=ANA |date=October 5, 2011}}</ref>

===Proposed variants===

====Freighter version====
Although with no set date, Boeing expects to build a 787 freighter version, possibly in the 2018–2023 timeframe.<ref>{{cite news |last= Ng |first= J |url= http://www.marketwatch.com/story/boeing-executive-says-no-freighter-version-of-787-likely-for-10-years |title= Boeing executive says no freighter version of 787 is likely for 10 years |newspaper= Marketwatch |publisher= Dow Jones |access-date= January 2, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last= Black |first= Thomas |url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-19/boeing-sets-future-787-freighter-to-fend-off-airbus-jets |title= Boeing Sets Future 787 Freighter to Fend Off Airbus Jets |newspaper= Bloomberg Business |access-date= March 21, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161012192645/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-19/boeing-sets-future-787-freighter-to-fend-off-airbus-jets |archive-date= October 12, 2016 |url-status= }}</ref>{{Update inline|date=January 2024}} 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|date=March 2022}}

====787-3====
[[File:Dreamliner rendering 787-3.jpg|thumb|left|The 787-3 would feature a reduced wingspan with [[wingtip devices]]]]

The 787-3 would have carried 290–330 passengers in two-class over {{cvt|2,500|–|3,050|nmi}} range, limited by a {{cvt|364000|lb|t}} [[maximum takeoff weight|MTOW]].<ref name="787-3 specs">{{cite web |url= http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/787-3prod.html |title= Boeing 787-3 Dreamliner Fact Sheet |publisher= Boeing |access-date= November 23, 2007 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20071119171849/http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/787-3prod.html |archive-date= November 19, 2007}}</ref> 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.<ref name="787 variants delayed to at least 2012">{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/04/11/222930/787-variants-delayed-to-at-least-2012.html |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20081015200341/http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/04/11/222930/787-variants-delayed-to-at-least-2012.html |url-status=dead |archive-date= October 15, 2008 |date= April 11, 2008 |work= Flight International |title= 787 variants delayed to at least 2012 |author= Stephen Trimble}}</ref>

It kept the −8 length but its 51.7 m wingspan would have fit in [[ICAO#Aerodrome reference code|ICAO Aerodrome Reference Code]] D.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.aci-na.org/static/entransit/Gen.%20Rich%20Breuhaus.pdf |title= 787 Dreamliner: A New Airplane for a New World |author= Rich Breuhaus |date= May 20, 2008 |publisher= Boeing |work= ACI-NA Commissioners Conference |access-date= March 6, 2017 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170307045010/http://www.aci-na.org/static/entransit/Gen.%20Rich%20Breuhaus.pdf |archive-date= March 7, 2017 |url-status=dead}}</ref> It was designed to operate on [[Boeing 757]]-300/[[Boeing 767]]-200 sized regional routes from airports with restricted gate spacing.{{Sfn |Norris|Wagner|2009|p=38}} The wingspan was decreased by using blended [[wingtip device#Winglet|winglets]] instead of [[raked wingtip]]s.

By January 2010, all orders, from [[Japan Airlines]] and [[All Nippon Airways]], had been converted to the 787-8.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ana-abandons-787-3-336950/ |title= ANA abandons 787-3 |work= Flight International |author= Jon Ostrower |date=January 8, 2010}}</ref> As it was designed specifically for the Japanese market, Boeing would likely scrap it after they switched orders.<ref name=Boeing_likely_scrap>{{cite news |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2010963351_boeingbloom03.html |title= Boeing will likely scrap 787-3 |work= The Seattle Times |date= February 2, 2010}}</ref> The −8's longer wingspan makes it more efficient on stages longer than {{convert|200|nmi|km mi|abbr=on}}.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/singapore-2010-757-replacement-gets-new-focus-as-787-3-337996/ |title= SINGAPORE 2010: 757 replacement gets new focus as 787-3 dwindles |work= Flightglobal |date= February 3, 2010}}</ref> In December 2010, Boeing withdrew the short-haul model as it struggled to produce the 787-8 after program delays of three years.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2013672244_boeingprices14.html |title= Boeing raises aircraft prices 5.2%, cancels short-haul 787 |work= The Seattle Times |date= December 13, 2010 |author= Susanna Ray}}</ref>

===Market and costs===
[[File:Norwegian Boeing 787-9 (EI-LNI) above clouds.jpg|thumb|A defunct subsidiary of [[Norwegian Air Shuttle]], [[Norwegian Long Haul]] operated the 787 as a long-haul [[low cost carrier|low-cost carrier]].]]

The 787 Dreamliner program has reportedly cost Boeing $32&nbsp;billion.<ref name=Sea_Times_cost>{{cite news |last=Gates |first=Dominic |author-link=Dominic Gates |title=Boeing celebrates 787 delivery as program's costs top $32 billion |url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2016310102_boeing25.html |work=The Seattle Times |date=September 24, 2011 |access-date=September 26, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.economist.com/news/business/21698706-building-new-plane-take-airbus-would-be-huge-risk-boeing-eye-storm|title=The eye of the storm|newspaper=The Economist|issn=0013-0613|date=May 14, 2016}}</ref> In 2013, the 787 program was expected to be profitable after 1,100 aircraft have been sold.<ref name=laing>{{cite web |author= Jonathan R. Laing |url= http://online.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424052748703889404578439060025345082 |title= Will Boeing's Battery Fix Fly? |work= [[Barron's (newspaper)|Barron's]] |date= April 27, 2013}}</ref>
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&nbsp;billion before the company begins to [[break-even|break even]] on production; the comparable number for the [[Boeing 777]], adjusted for inflation, is $3.7&nbsp;billion.<ref name="wsj-cut-cost"/>

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.<ref>{{cite news |author= Stephen Trimble |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-787-unit-loss-declines-but-deferred-costs-rise-411502/ |date= April 22, 2015 |title=Boeing 787 unit loss declines, but deferred costs rise |work=[[Flightglobal]]}}</ref>
The accumulated losses for the 787 totaled almost $27&nbsp;billion (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=27000000000|start_year=2015}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) 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.<ref name=WSJ150504>{{cite news |author= Jon Ostrower |title= Boeing Pursues Fresh Deal With Spirit AeroSystems |work= The Wall Street Journal |date= May 4, 2015 |url= https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-pursues-fresh-deal-with-spirit-aerosystems-1430779586 |url-access= subscription}}</ref>

In the second quarter of 2015, Boeing lost $25 million (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=25000000|start_year=2015}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) 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 [[Deferral|deferred]] costs peaking in 2016 at $33&nbsp;billion, (~${{Format price|{{Inflation|index=US-GDP|value=33000000000|start_year=2016}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US-GDP}}) 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&nbsp;billion. The model most favorable to Boeing projects a program loss of $5&nbsp;billion after delivering 2,000 Dreamliners. Boeing's original development investment, estimated at least at a further $20&nbsp;billion, is not included in these costs.<ref name=seattletimes17oct2015/>

To recoup the deferred costs and earn its goal of a "low single-digit" overall profit margin, Boeing has to make an average [[Profit (accounting)|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 [[A350|Airbus A350]] and the launch of the [[A330neo]] put strong pressure on the 787 pricing.<ref name=seattletimes17oct2015>{{cite news |url= https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/will-787-program-ever-show-an-overall-profit-analysts-grow-more-skeptical/ |title= Will 787 program ever show an overall profit? Analysts grow more skeptical |date= October 17, 2015 |author= Dominic Gates |newspaper= Seattle Times}}</ref>

[[File:Jetstar Airways (VH-VKG) Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner at Sydney Airport (1).jpg|thumb|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.<ref>{{cite news |title= Boeing 787 financial hit underscores cost of launching a new airliner |url= http://atwonline.com/blog/boeing-787-financial-hit-underscores-cost-launching-new-airliner |date= July 21, 2016 |last= Walker |first= Karen |publisher=[[Air Transport World]]}}</ref> 
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.<ref name=AvWeek4Dec2017>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/opinion-jim-albaugh-s-lessons-aerospace-success |title= Opinion: Jim Albaugh's Lessons Of Aerospace Success |date= December 4, 2017 |author= [[James Albaugh]] |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>
From 2019, Boeing was to build 14 787s per month (168 per year), helping to offset the $28&nbsp;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.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-commits-to-next-production-rate-increase-for-441119/ |title= Boeing commits to next production-rate increase for 787 |date= September 13, 2017 |author= Stephen Trimble |work= Flightglobal}}</ref>
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.<ref name=prices>{{cite web |title= About Boeing Commercial Airplanes: Prices |url= http://www.boeing.com/company/about-bca/#/prices |publisher= Boeing}}</ref>

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.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/intense-a330b787-competition-could-impact-values/ |title= Intense A330/B787 Competition Could Impact Values |author= Aircraft Value News |date= June 11, 2018}}</ref>  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.<ref>{{Cite news |url= https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/20/boeing-displaces-airbus-hawaiian-wins-787-9-deal-airline-cancels-a330-800-order/ |title= Boeing displaces Airbus at Hawaiian, wins 787-9 deal; airline cancels A330-800 order |date= February 20, 2018 |work= Leeham}}</ref>
By late 2018, deferred production costs were reduced from a peak of $27.6&nbsp;billion in early 2016 to $23.5&nbsp;billion as assembly efficiency improved and the 800th production started.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/aerospace-2018/boeing-and-airbus-hope-leave-production-glitches-behind-2019 |title= Boeing And Airbus Hope To Leave Production Glitches Behind In 2019 |date= December 17, 2018 |author=Guy Norris |author2=Jens Flottau |author3=Bradley Perrett |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>

===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.<ref name="wsj-cut-cost">{{cite news |author=Ostrower, Jon |title=Boeing's Key Mission: Cut Dreamliner Cost |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=June 10, 2014 |page=B1 |url=https://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304361604579292333739357034 |access-date=June 10, 2014 |url-access= subscription}}</ref>
By April 2015, the production rate was 10 per month;<ref name="LH150423">{{cite web |title= Bjorn's Corner: Boeing's 787 and Airbus' 350 programs, a snapshot |author= Bjorn Fehrm |date= April 23, 2015 |publisher= Leeham News and Comment |url= http://leehamnews.com/2015/04/23/bjorns-corner-boeings-787-and-airbus-350-program-snapshot/}}</ref>

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|China-United States trade war]].<ref>{{cite news |url= https://leehamnews.com/2019/10/23/boeing-to-cut-787-production-rate-cites-global-trade-environment/ |title= Boeing to cut 787 production rate, cites global trade environment |date= October 23, 2019 |work= Leeham News}}</ref>
Production could be trimmed to 10 planes per month as demand for wide-body aircraft falters.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-24/boeing-weighs-another-cut-to-787-output-in-new-threat-to-cash |title= Boeing Mulls Another Cut to 787 Output in New Threat to Cash |author= Julie Johnsson and Siddharth Vikram Philip |date= January 24, 2020 |agency= Bloomberg}}</ref>
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.<ref>{{cite press release |url= https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2020-10-01-Boeing-to-Consolidate-787-Production-in-South-Carolina-in-2021 |title= Boeing to Consolidate 787 Production in South Carolina in 2021 |date= October 1, 2020 |publisher= Boeing}}</ref>
In December, the monthly rate was further reduced to five.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://leehamnews.com/2020/12/04/boeing-further-trims-787-production-now-sees-5-mo-in-2021/ |title= Boeing further trims 787 production; now sees 5/mo in 2021 |author= Scott Hamilton |date= December 4, 2020 |work= Leeham News}}</ref>

===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;<ref>{{cite news |last1=Kiersz |first1=Andy |title='I never plan to fly on it': Workers reportedly recount poor practices at a Boeing factory in South Carolina that could spell trouble for Dreamliner plane |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-787-dreamliner-south-carolina-factory-production-problems-2019-4 |access-date=16 July 2021 |location=[[New York City|New York]]|publisher=[[Axel Springer SE]] |date=21 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing-dreamliner-production-problems.html|title=Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet|first1=Natalie|last1=Kitroeff|first2=David|last2=Gelles|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|url-access=subscription|location=[[Charleston, South Carolina|Charleston]]|date=April 20, 2019}}</ref> 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."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Slotnick |first1=David |title=Airlines flying Boeing's 787-10 Dreamliner are complaining about quality they say is 'way below acceptable standards' |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-787-dreamliner-airline-complaints-quality-production-2019-8 |access-date=16 July 2021 |work=Business Insider |location=[[New York City|New York]]|publisher=[[Axel Springer SE]]|date=5 August 2019}}</ref>

; 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]].<ref name="WSJ_Dreamliner_lapses">{{Cite news |last1=Tangel |first1=Andrew|last2=Pasztor |first2=Andy |date=September 7, 2020 |title= Production Problems Spur Broad FAA Review of Boeing Dreamliner Lapses |language=en-US |newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|location=[[Charleston, South Carolina|Charleston]]|publisher=[[Dow Jones & Company]]|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/production-problems-prompt-broad-faa-review-of-boeing-dreamliner-lapses-11599498118 |access-date=September 7, 2020 |url-access=subscription|issn=0099-9660}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Ostrower |first=Jon |date=August 27, 2020 |title=Boeing pulls eight 787s from service over structural issue |url=https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/boeing-pulls-eight-787s-from-service-over-structural-issue/ |access-date= September 7, 2020 |website=Air Current}}</ref>

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.<ref name="WSJ_Dreamliner_lapses" /> 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.<ref>{{cite web |last=Ostrower |first=Jon |date=September 8, 2020 |title=Scarce quality data on 787 skins as FAA peels back onion on Boeing |url=https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/scarce-data-on-787-quality-as-faa-peels-back-onion-on-boeing/ |access-date=September 8, 2020 |website=Air Current}}</ref> 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<ref>{{cite news |last=Shepardson |first=David |date=September 10, 2020 |title=Boeing in talks with FAA about new reported 787 production issue |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-787/boeing-in-talks-with-faa-about-new-reported-787-production-issue-idUSKBN26200P |access-date=September 10, 2020 |work=[[Reuters]]|location=[[Seattle]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Harger |first=Charlie |date=September 10, 2020 |title=Report raises new questions about structural integrity of Boeing 787 Dreamliner |url=https://komonews.com/news/local/report-raises-new-questions-about-structural-integrity-of-boeing-787-dreamliner |access-date= September 10, 2020 |publisher=KOMO News}}</ref> and expected merely to slow 787 deliveries "in the near term".<ref name="Boeing_Flags_Additional_787_Production_Problem">{{Cite news |last1=Cameron |first1=Doug |last2=Pasztor |first2=Andy |date=September 8, 2020 |title= Boeing Flags Additional 787 Production Problem |language=en-US |newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|location=[[Salt Lake City]]|publisher=[[Dow Jones & Company]] |url-access=subscription|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-flags-additional-787-production-problem-11599577936 |access-date=September 8, 2020}}</ref>

; 2021
By January 2021, Boeing had halted 787 deliveries to complete the inspection relating to the ongoing quality control issues,<ref>{{cite news|title=Boeing to resume 787 deliveries no sooner than February |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/boeing-to-resume-787-deliveries-no-sooner-than-february/142159.article|work=FlightGlobal|publisher=[[DVV Media Group]]|author=Jon Hemmerdinger|date=January 28, 2021|access-date=February 22, 2021}}</ref> then in March the FAA withdrew Boeing's [[Organization Designation Authorization|delegated authority]] to inspect and sign off on four newly produced 787s, saying that it would extend this withdrawal to further aircraft if needed.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Tangel|first=Andrew|date=2021-03-18|title=Boeing Faces New Hurdle in Delivering Dreamliners|newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|location=[[Washington, D.C.]]|publisher=[[Dow Jones & Company]] |url-access=subscription|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-faces-new-hurdle-in-delivering-dreamliners-11616018860|access-date=2021-03-18|issn=0099-9660}}</ref> Boeing briefly resumed deliveries on March 26, 2021, handing over one 787-9 to [[United Airlines]],<ref>{{Cite news|date=2021-03-26|title=Boeing Delivers First 787 in Months as Inspections Continue |last1=Johnsson|first1=Julie|last2=Bachman|first2=Justin|agency=[[Bloomberg News]] |location=[[New York City|New York]]|publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.]]|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-26/boeing-delivers-first-787-since-october-as-inspections-continue|url-access=subscription|access-date=2021-04-02}}</ref> but deliveries ceased again in May 2021;<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/as-orders-trickle-in-boeing-ramps-up-737-max-but-787-deliveries-are-still-blocked/|title = As orders trickle in, Boeing ramps up 737 MAX but 787 deliveries are still blocked|last=Gates|first=Dominic|newspaper=[[The Seattle Times]]|location=[[Seattle]]|date=October 12, 2021}}</ref> meaning that almost all deliveries had been paused for nearly a year.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeings-delivery-of-new-787-dreamliners-likely-delayed-until-at-least-late-october-11630783728|title=Boeing's Delivery of New 787 Dreamliners Likely Delayed Until at Least Late October|newspaper=[[Wall Street Journal]]|url-access=subscription|location=[[Chicago]]|publisher=[[Dow Jones & Company]]|date=September 6, 2021|last1=Tangel|first1=Andrew}}</ref> The delay generated $1&nbsp;billion in abnormal costs and caused the company to cut production to around two planes a month.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/27/boeing-ba-3q-2021-earnings-report-cut-to-dreamliner-production.html|title=Boeing posts loss as Dreamliner flaws drive up costs, but airplane sales rise|last=Josephs|first=Leslie|work=[[CNBC]]|publisher=[[NBCUniversal News Group]]|location=[[Chicago]]|date=October 27, 2021}}</ref>

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.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Jones |first1=Callum |title=Boeing cuts 787 production after structural fault found |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boeing-cuts-787-production-after-structural-fault-found-n65x56ggf |newspaper=[[The Times of London]] |location=[[Chicago]]|url-access=subscription|date=July 14, 2021}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news|title=Boeing discloses a new problem with the 787 Dreamliner |url=https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/13/business/boeing-787-dreamliner-faa/index.html|department=CNN Business|work=[[CNN]]|location=New York|publisher=[[Warner Bros. Discovery]]|first1=Chris|last1=Isidore|date=July 13, 2021}}</ref>

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;<ref>{{cite news|title=Boeing's Delivery of New 787 Dreamliners Likely Delayed Until at Least Late October |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeings-delivery-of-new-787-dreamliners-likely-delayed-until-at-least-late-october-11630783728|work=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|date=September 4, 2021}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-memo-reveals-more-boeing-787-manufacturing-defects-including-contamination-of-carbon-fiber-composites/|newspaper=[[The Seattle Times]]|location=[[Seattle]]|last=Gates|first=Dominic|title = FAA memo reveals more Boeing 787 manufacturing defects, including contamination of carbon fiber composites|date=November 19, 2021}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-20/boeing-buyers-ire-builds-as-787-disruptions-pass-13-month-mark |title=Boeing Buyers' Ire Builds as 787 Disruptions Pass 13-Month Mark |first1=Julie |last1=Johnsson |first2=Alan |last2=Levin |publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.]]|location=New York|date=November 20, 2021 |agency=[[Bloomberg News]] |access-date=2022-02-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/u-house-panel-wants-answers-211418557.html|title=U.S. House panel wants answers on Boeing 787 |date=19 November 2021 |agency=Reuters|via=[[Yahoo! News]] UK}}</ref>

; 2022
In January 2022, it was reported that deliveries were not anticipated to restart until April 2022.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2021/12/12/dreamliner-slowdown-to-extend-into-april.html |title=Region's Boeing 787 suppliers could see production delays into spring |first=Marissa |last=Nall |date=December 13, 2021 |newspaper=Puget Sound Business Journal|publisher=[[American City Business Journals]]|location=[[Seattle]]}}</ref> In February, the FAA announced that it would withdraw Boeing's delegated authority to issue [[airworthiness certificate]]s 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.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Hemmerdinger |first1=Jon |title=FAA to issue 787 airworthiness certificates, taking authority from Boeing |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/faa-to-issue-787-airworthiness-certificates-taking-authority-from-boeing/147537.article |work=FlightGlobal |publisher=DVV Media GROUP|date=February 15, 2022 |language=en}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://m.marketscreener.com/news/latest/Exclusive-Boeing-tests-suppliers-on-787-output-hikes-sources--39733596/ |title=Exclusive-Boeing tests suppliers on 787 output hikes -sources |work=MarketScreener.com |date=March 11, 2022 |access-date=April 20, 2022}}</ref> [[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.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/vistara-takes-dreamliner-aircraft-on-lease-to-boost-international-ops-122080600692_1.html |title=Vistara takes Dreamliner aircraft on lease to boost international ops |publisher=[[Business Standard]]|via=[[Press Trust of India]]|date=2022-08-06 |access-date= 2024-01-06}}</ref>  Later in April reports began to emerge of a further delay of at least two months,<ref>{{cite news|last=Tangel |first=Andrew |url=https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/boeing-dreamliner-delays-faa-defects-11651067545 |title=Boeing Looked for Flaws in Its Dreamliner and Couldn't Stop Finding Them |date=April 27, 2022 |newspaper=[[The Wall Street Journal]] |location=[[Chicago]]|publisher=[[Dow Jones & Company]]|access-date=April 28, 2022}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/exclusive-us-faa-finds-boeing-787-certification-documents-incomplete-sources-2022-05-13/|title=Exclusive: U.S. FAA finds Boeing 787 certification documents incomplete -sources|first1=Eric M.|last1=Johnson|first2=David|last2=Shepardson|work=Reuters |date=May 13, 2022}}</ref> In late July the FAA approved Boeing's revised certification package, leading the company to anticipate resuming deliveries "within days".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/30/us-approves-boeing-inspection-rework-plan-to-resume-787-deliveries.html |title=U.S. Approves Boeing inspection, rework plan to resume 787 deliveries |date=July 30, 2022 |publisher=[[CNBC]]}}</ref> Deliveries resumed on August 10, 2022, after the FAA granted clearance.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Josephs |first=Leslie |date=August 10, 2022 |title=Boeing delivers first 787 Dreamliner since 2021 ending pause over manufacturing flaws |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/10/boeing-delivers-first-787-dreamliner-since-2021-after-manufacturing-flaws.html |access-date=August 10, 2022 |publisher=CNBC}}</ref>

; 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.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-shares-fall-after-new-dreamliner-delivery-halt-2023-02-24/|title=Boeing shares fall after new Dreamliner delivery halt|first1=Abhijith|last1=Ganapavaram|first2=Valerie|last2=Insinna |newspaper=Reuters |date=February 24, 2023|via= reuters.com}}</ref> On March 10, the FAA approved the resumption of the deliveries.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.airlinerwatch.com/2023/03/faa-approves-resumption-of-b787.html |title=FAA Approves Resumption of B787 Dreamliner Deliveries |date=March 13, 2023 |accessdate=March 17, 2023}}</ref>

==Design==
[[File:N1015X Air Tahiti Nui Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner 33.jpg|thumb|Planform view of a 787-9 showing its 9.6 [[wing aspect ratio]] and 32° [[wing sweep]]]]
[[File:Vietnam Airlines 787-10 VN-A879 F2F.jpg|thumb|Front view of a [[Vietnam Airlines]] 787-10, the fuselage is {{convert|19|ft|m|abbr=on}} wide and {{frac|19|1|2}} ft (5.94 m) high while the fan has a {{convert|9.3|ft|m|abbr=on}} diameter]]

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is a long-haul, widebody, twin-engine jetliner, designed with lightweight structures that are 80% [[composite material|composite]] by volume;<ref>[http://www.industryweek.com/companies-amp-executives/boeing-787-matter-materials-special-report-anatomy-supply-chain "Boeing 787: A Matter of Materials – Special Report: Anatomy of a Supply Chain"]. IndustryWeek.com, December 1, 2007.</ref> Boeing lists its materials by weight as 50% composite, 20% [[aluminium|aluminum]], 15% [[titanium]], 10% steel, and 5% other materials.<ref name=Boeing_787_Fact_Sheet>{{cite web |url= http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/programfacts.html |title= 787 Dreamliner Program Fact Sheet |work=Boeing web page |publisher=The Boeing Company |access-date=July 10, 2007}}</ref><ref name=Boeing_AIAA_May_2005>{{cite conference |url= http://www.aiaa.org/events/aners/Presentations/ANERS-Hawk.pdf |title= The Boeing 787 Dreamliner: More Than an Airplane |date= May 25, 2005 |author=Hawk, Jeff |conference=AIAA/AAAF Aircraft Noise and Emissions Reduction Symposium |website=[[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]]|access-date=July 15, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070808001501/http://www.aiaa.org/events/aners/Presentations/ANERS-Hawk.pdf |archive-date=August 8, 2007}}</ref> 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.<ref name=Boeing_AIAA_May_2005/>

External features include a smooth nose contour, [[raked wingtip]]s, and engine [[nacelle]]s with noise-reducing serrated edges ([[chevron (aerospace)|chevrons]]).<ref name="noise reducing chevron">{{cite journal |url=http://www.afmc.org.cn/13thacfm/invited/201.pdf |journal=Proceedings of the 13th Asian Congress of Fluid Mechanics December 17–21, 2010, Dhaka, Bangladesh |title=Evolution from 'Tabs' to 'Chevron Technology' – a Review |pages=47–63 |author1=Zaman, K. B. M. Q. |author2=Bridges, J. E. |author3=Huff, D. L. |publisher=[[NASA Glenn Research Center]]. Cleveland, Ohio, US |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121120185702/http://www.afmc.org.cn/13thacfm/invited/201.pdf |archive-date=November 20, 2012}} 1.34 MB.</ref>  The longest-range 787 variant can fly up to {{cvt|7635|nmi|-1}},<ref name=characteristics/> or the even longer [[Qantas]] QF 9 flight between [[Perth Airport|Perth]] and [[Heathrow Airport|London Heathrow]], over {{cvt|7,828|nmi}}. Its cruising airspeed is {{cvt|0.85|Mach|altitude_ft=40,000|knots km/h mph|0}}.<ref name="787_bg">{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/background.html |title=Boeing 787 program background |access-date=May 4, 2007}}</ref> The aircraft has a design life of 44,000 flight cycles.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Ostrower |first1=Jon |title=FARNBOROUGH: Boeing presses on with 787 flight-testing (Jul 11, 2010) |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-boeing-presses-on-with-787-flight-testi-343871/ |website=[[FlightGlobal]]|access-date=April 2, 2017}}</ref>

===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.<ref name="AERO_QTR_406_787_from_the_ground_up">[http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_06/AERO_Q406_article4.pdf "Boeing 787 from the Ground Up"]. Boeing, Aero magazine, QTR_04/06.</ref> Boeing says that this system extracts 35% less power from the engines, allowing increased thrust and improved [[fuel efficiency]].<ref name= nobleed1>{{cite web |last=Sinnet |first= Mike |title=Saving Fuel and enhancing operational efficiencies |url=http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_07/AERO_Q407_article2.pdf |publisher=Boeing |year=2007 |access-date=January 17, 2013}}<!--bigger article than nobleed2--></ref> [[Actuator|Spoiler electromechanical actuators]] (SEMAs) control two of the seven [[Spoiler (aeronautics)|spoiler]] pairs on each wing surface, providing roll control, air and ground [[Air brake (aeronautics)|speed brake]], and [[Leading-edge droop flap|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).<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/media/787_Report_Final.pdf |title= Boeing 787-8 Design, Certification, and Manufacturing Systems Review |author= Boeing 787-8 Critical System Review Team |publisher= Federal Aviation Administration |date= March 19, 2014}}</ref>

The total available onboard electrical power is 1.45 megawatts, which is five times the power available on conventional pneumatic airliners;<ref name="el-power">Susanna Ray, Thomas Black & Mary Jane Credeur. "[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-17/boeing-787-groundings-trace-to-one-of-a-kind-technology.html Boeing 787 Groundings Traced to One-of-a-Kind Technology]" [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]], January 17, 2013. Retrieved January 17, 2013.</ref> the most notable electrically-powered systems include engine start, cabin pressurization, horizontal-stabilizer trim, and wheel brakes.<ref>"Taking to the skies", p. 47. ''[[Aviation Week & Space Technology]]'', December 10, 2012.</ref> Wing ice protection is another new system; it uses electro-thermal heater mats on the wing slats instead of traditional hot [[bleed air]].<ref name=nobleed2>[http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_07/article_02_4.html "787 No Bleed Systems"]. Boeing Aero magazine, Quarter 4, 2007.</ref><ref>[http://www.compositesworld.com/articles/787-integrates-new-composite-wing-deicing-system 787 integrates new composite wing deicing system]. Composites World, December 30, 2008.</ref> An active gust alleviation system, similar to the system used on the [[Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit|B-2]] bomber, improves ride quality during turbulence.<ref name="Aero_America_200607"/><ref name=Grumman_patent>[http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4905934.html Universal-type gust alleviation system for aircraft, United States Patent 4905934]. Free patents online, original publication March 6, 1990. Retrieved December 9, 2009.</ref>

[[File:Boeing 787-8 N787BA cockpit (cropped).jpg|thumb|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]].<ref>{{cite news |title= Taking to the skies |newspaper= Aviation Week & Space Technology |date= December 10, 2012 |page= 48}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aviationtoday.com/2005/06/01/boeing-787-integrations-next-step/|title=Boeing 787: Integration's Next Step|date=June 1, 2005|website=Aviation Today}}</ref> 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]]).<ref name="whatisarinc661">"[https://web.archive.org/web/20041023221505/http://www.engenuitytech.com/products/VAPS/XT_661/faq.shtml What is ARINC 661?]" Web archive of Engenuity Technologies page.</ref> The 787 flight deck includes two [[head-up display]]s (HUDs) as a standard feature.<ref name="bca_20050831">"[http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q3/nr_050831g.html Boeing Unveils 787 Dreamliner Flight Deck] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070409040504/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q3/nr_050831g.html |date=April 9, 2007}} Boeing, August 31, 2005. Retrieved September 2, 2011.</ref>  Like other Boeing airliners, the 787 uses a [[yoke (aircraft)|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.<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> [[Lockheed Martin]]'s [[Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle|Orion spacecraft]] will use a glass cockpit derived from [[Honeywell International]]'s 787 flight deck systems.<ref name="fi_20061006_orion">{{cite news |last= Coppinger |first= Rob |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/10/06/209724/nasa-orion-crew-vehicle-will-use-voice-controls-in-boeing-787-style-honeywell-smart.html |title= NASA Orion crew vehicle will use voice controls in Boeing 787-style Honeywell smart cockpit |work=[[Flight International]] |date= October 6, 2006 |access-date= October 6, 2006}}</ref>

[[Honeywell]] and [[Rockwell Collins]] provide flight control, guidance, and other [[avionics]] systems, including standard dual [[Head-up display|head-up guidance systems]],<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> [[Thales Group|Thales]] supplies the integrated standby flight display and power management,<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> while [[Meggitt]]/Securaplane provides the [[auxiliary power unit]] (APU) starting system, electrical power-conversion system, and battery-control system<ref name=meggitt>{{cite web |last=Brewin |first=Bob |title=A 2006 battery fire destroyed Boeing 787 supplier's facility |url= http://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tech/2013/01/2006-battery-fire-destroyed-boeing-787-suppliers-facility/60809/ |publisher=nextgov.com |date=January 22, 2013 |access-date= January 23, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Power conversion |url=http://www.securaplane.com/products/power-conversion |publisher= [[Meggitt]]/Securaplane |access-date=January 30, 2013}}</ref> with [[lithium cobalt oxide]] (LiCoO<sub>2</sub>) batteries by [[GS Yuasa]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gsyuasa-lp.com/aviation-lithium-ion-markets |publisher=[[GS Yuasa]] |title=Lithium Power |access-date=January 20, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130116222539/http://www.gsyuasa-lp.com/aviation-lithium-ion-markets |archive-date=January 16, 2013 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name=gs2005>{{cite web |title=Thales selects GS Yuasa for Lithium ion battery system in Boeing's 787 Dreamliner |url= http://www.s399157097.onlinehome.us/PDFS/BoeingPR_06_12_2005.pdf |publisher=[[GS Yuasa]] |access-date=January 18, 2013}}</ref> One of the two batteries weighs 28.5&nbsp;kg and is rated 29.6&nbsp;V, 76&nbsp;Ah, giving 2.2&nbsp;kWh.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gs-yuasa.com/us/technic/vol7/pdf/007_01_014.pdf |title=Development of Large-sized Lithium-ion Battery for Aviation Applications |work=GS Yuasa |access-date=January 20, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130203145213/http://www.gs-yuasa.com/us/technic/vol7/pdf/007_01_014.pdf |archive-date=February 3, 2013 |df=mdy-all}}</ref>  Battery charging is controlled by four independent systems to prevent overcharging, following early lab testing.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020199686_787batterysafetyxml.html |title=Boeing: 787 battery blew up in '06 lab test, burned down building |work=[[Seattle Times]] |date=January 24, 2013 |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref> The battery systems were the focus of [[Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems|a regulatory investigation]] due to multiple [[Lithium-ion battery#Safety|lithium battery fires]], which led to [[#Lithium-ion battery problems|the grounding of the 787 fleet]] starting in January 2013.<ref name=faaground>{{cite web |url=http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14233 |title= FAA Statement |publisher= [[Federal Aviation Administration]] |date= January 16, 2013 |access-date= January 17, 2013}}</ref>

A version of [[Ethernet]] ([[Avionics Full-Duplex Switched Ethernet]] (AFDX) / [[ARINC]] 664) transmits data between the flight deck and aircraft systems.<ref name=Miltary_Electronics_200607>{{cite news |url=http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Articles&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=226247 |title=AFDX technology to improve communications on Boeing 787 |work=mae.pennet.com |publisher=mae.pennnet.com |date=April 2005 |last=McHale |first=John |access-date=July 8, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040803173325/http://mae.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Articles |archive-date=August 3, 2004 |url-status=dead}}</ref> The control, navigation, and communication systems are networked with the passenger cabin's in-flight internet systems.<ref name="787 May Be Vulnerable"/> 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 gap (networking)|air gaps]] to physically separate the networks, and [[Firewall (computing)|firewalls]] for software separation.<ref name="787 May Be Vulnerable">{{cite magazine |url=https://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/dreamliner_security |title=FAA: Boeing's New 787 May Be Vulnerable to Hacker Attack |last=Zetter|first=Kim |date= January 4, 2008 |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] |access-date=January 6, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-01-02/html/E7-25467.htm |title=Special Conditions: Boeing Model 787-8 Airplane; Systems and Data Networks Security—Isolation or Protection From unauthorized Passenger Domain Systems Access |date=January 3, 2008 |quote=For these design features, the applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for protection and security of airplane systems and data networks against unauthorized access. |work=[[Federal Aviation Administration]] |publisher= U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) |access-date=November 1, 2012}}</ref> These measures prevent data transfer from the passenger internet system to the maintenance or navigation systems.<ref name="787 May Be Vulnerable"/>

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.<ref name=Flight28mar2018/>

===Airframe===
[[File:787fuselage.jpg|thumb|Disassembled composite fuselage section of the Boeing 787]]

The 787 is the first commercial aircraft to have an airframe majority made of [[carbon fiber reinforced polymer]] (CFRP), applied in: the [[empennage]], fuselage, wings, doors, and in most other main components.<ref name=Composites_flying_prt1>{{cite web |author= Marsh, George |url= http://www.materialstoday.com/composite-applications/features/composites-flying-high-part-1/ |title= Composites flying high (Part 1) |publisher= Materials Today |date= April 8, 2014 |access-date= May 23, 2015 |archive-date= September 16, 2015 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150916181258/http://www.materialstoday.com/composite-applications/features/composites-flying-high-part-1/ |url-status= dead }}</ref>  Each 787 contains approximately {{convert|35|MT|lb|abbr=off|order=flip}} of CFRP, made with {{cvt|23|MT|lb|order=flip}} of pure carbon fiber.<ref name= Toray_2005_0412>{{cite web |url= http://www.toray.com/ir/press/pdf/050412press.pdf |date= April 12, 2005 |title= Market Research Report: Strategic Business Expansion of Carbon Fiber, Torayca |type= press release |publisher=[[Toray Industries]] |access-date=July 9, 2007 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070204052035/http://www.toray.com/ir/press/pdf/050412press.pdf |archive-date= February 4, 2007}}</ref> CFRP materials have a higher [[Specific strength|strength-to-weight ratio]] than conventional [[aluminum]] structural materials, which contributes significantly to the 787's weight savings,<ref name=Boeing_AIAA_May_2005/> as well as superior fatigue behavior.<ref name=787DreamBorn>{{cite news |author=Wallace, James |url= http://www.seattlepi.com/business/321719_dreamliner29.html |title= How the 787 'Dream' was born |newspaper=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |date=June 29, 2007}}</ref> Historically, the first CFRP primary structure in Boeing commercial aircraft was put into service in 1984 on the horizontal tail of the [[Boeing 737 Classic]], and in the mid-1990s on both vertical and horizontal tail (empennage) of the [[Boeing 777]].<ref>{{cite conference |url=http://www.iccm-central.org/Proceedings/ICCM16proceedings/contents/pdf/MonA/MoAM1-01sp_roeselerw228184p.pdf |title=COMPOSITE STRUCTURES: THE FIRST 100 YEARS |author=William G. Roeseler |author2=Branko Sarh |author3=Max U. Kismarton |book-title=16TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE MATERIALS |date= July 9, 2007}}</ref> In the early 2000s, while studying the proposed [[Boeing Sonic Cruiser|Sonic Cruiser]], Boeing built and tested the first CFRP fuselage section for commercial aircraft, a {{convert|20|ft|m|abbr=off|sp=us|adj=on}} long [[anechoic chamber]], which later applied to the Dreamliner.<ref name="bca_scfuse_test">{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/photorelease/q3/pr_020724h2.html |title=Boeing Testing Sample Sonic Cruiser Fuselage |publisher=Boeing |date=July 24, 2002 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081205020633/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/photorelease/q3/pr_020724h2.html |archive-date=December 5, 2008 |df=mdy-all}}</ref><ref name="bca_787_first_s41">{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q2/pr_050613h2.html |title=Development Work on Boeing 787 Noses Ahead |publisher=Boeing |date=July 13, 2005 |access-date=June 14, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100505031408/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q2/pr_050613h2.html |archive-date=May 5, 2010 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Instead of designing one-piece composite fuselage barrels like the 787, the competing [[Airbus A350]] uses a slightly more conventional approach with CFRP panels on CFRP frames, which is considered less risky in terms of assembly tolerance between fuselage sections.<ref name=drops/>

Safety can be a concern due to lower impact energy absorption and poorer fire, smoke and toxicity capability of CFRP fuselages in the event of a crash landing, leading to [[whistleblower]] complaints at Boeing by [[Vince Weldon]], who was fired in 2006.<ref name="register20070919">{{cite news |first=Lester |last=Haines |title=787 unsafe, claims former Boeing engineer |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/dreamliner_allegations/ |newspaper=[[The Register]] |date=September 19, 2007 }}</ref><ref name="seattletimes_09_18"/> The [[Occupational Safety and Health Administration]] (OSHA) later denied Weldon whistleblower status "largely on the grounds that Boeing's 787 design does not violate any FAA regulations or standards".<ref name="register20070919"/> Boeing further argued that CFRP structures have been used on empennages and other parts of airliners for many years without incident, and special damage detection procedures will be instituted for the 787 to detect any potential hidden damage.<ref name="seattlepi_20060110">{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Airbus-to-use-composites-1192234.php |title=Airbus to use composites |last=Wallace |first=James |date=January 9, 2006 |work=[[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] |publisher=Hearst Communications Inc.}}</ref>

In 2006, Boeing launched the 787 GoldCare program.<ref name=boeingfrontiers_200607>{{cite news |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2006/july/i_ca02.pdf |title=Good as GoldCare: Revolutionary 787 fleet support program complements airplane's technical achievements |last=Bickers |first=Chaz |work=Boeing Frontiers |publisher=Boeing |date=July 2006 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> This is an optional, comprehensive life-cycle management service, whereby aircraft in the program are routinely monitored and repaired, as needed. Although the first program of its kind from Boeing, post-sale protection programs are not new; such programs are usually offered by third party service centers. Boeing is also designing and testing composite hardware so inspections are mainly visual. This reduces the need for ultrasonic and other non-visual inspection methods, saving time and money.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-09-02/business/0709010055_1_composites-mary-anne-greczyn-airbus-sas |title=Boeing coining plan for composite parts |last=Johnsson |first=Julie |date=September 2, 2007 |work=[[Chicago Tribune]]|publisher=Tribune Interactive}}</ref>

===Interior===
[[File:SIA 787-10 regional economy (40354390274).jpg|thumb|Most airlines have a nine-abreast (3–3–3) economy class, although some select an eight-abreast lower density]]
[[File:Business class of Qatar Airways' 25th Boeing 787-8.jpg|thumbnail|[[Qatar Airways]] 787-8 [[business class]] cabin in 1–2–1 layout|alt=Airliner cabin with pod-like seats arranged in pairs or alone against the widewalls.]]

The 787-8 is designed to typically seat 234 passengers in a three-class setup, 240 in two-class domestic configuration, and 296 passengers in a high-density economy arrangement. Seat rows can be arranged in four to seven abreast in first or business—e.g., 1–⁠2–⁠1, 2–⁠2–⁠2, or 2–⁠3–⁠2. Eight or nine abreast are options in economy—e.g., 3–⁠2–⁠3, 2–⁠4–⁠2, or 3–⁠3–⁠3. Typical seat room ranges from {{cvt|46|to|61|in|cm}} pitch in first, {{cvt|36|to|39|in|cm}} in business, and {{cvt|32|to|34|in|cm}} in economy.<ref name="787_Airport_descrip">{{cite book |chapter-url=http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/acaps/787.pdf |title=D6-58331, Boeing 787 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning |date=December 2015 |publisher=Boeing Commercial Aircraft |chapter=Section 2.4 Interior Arrangements; Section 2.5 Cabin Cross–Sections |pages=10, 13}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Flynn |first=David |title=BA reveals Airbus A380, Boeing 787 Dreamliner seatmaps |date=December 12, 2012 |url=http://www.ausbt.com.au/ba-british-airways-reveals-airbus-a380-boeing-787-dreamliner-seatmaps |publisher=Australian Business Traveller |access-date=December 21, 2012}}</ref>

Cabin interior width is approximately {{convert|18|ft|cm|sigfig=2}} at armrest level.<ref name="787_Airport_descrip" /><ref name="spi_787_details">{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Boeing-details-787-improvements-1187786.php |title=Boeing details 787 improvements |last=Wallace |first=James |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |publisher=Hearst Communications |date=November 18, 2005 |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> The Dreamliner's cabin width is {{convert|15|in|cm}} more than that of the Airbus A330 and A340,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a330-200/specifications.html |publisher=Airbus |title=A330 and A340 family specifications |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080304140424/http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a330a340/a330-200/specifications.html |archive-date=March 4, 2008 |df=mdy}}</ref> {{convert|5|in|cm|sigfig=2}} less than the A350,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a350/comfort.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080205041546/http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/a350/comfort.html |archive-date=February 5, 2008 |publisher=Airbus |title=A350 XWB Xtra comfort}}</ref> and {{cvt|16|in|cm|sigfig=2}} less than the 777.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/277877_airshow18.html |title=Airbus unveils widebody, says A350 XWB will top 787 and 777 |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |date=July 18, 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070611110609/http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/277877_airshow18.html |archive-date=June 11, 2007}}</ref> The 787's economy seats can be up to {{cvt|17.5|in|cm|sigfig=3}} wide for nine-abreast seating<ref>{{cite web|title=British Airways 787-8 Seat Map |url=http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/British_Airways/British_Airways_Boeing_787-8.php|website=SeatGuru |access-date=August 28, 2014}}</ref> and up to {{convert|19|in|cm}} wide for eight-abreast seating arrangements. Most airlines are selecting the nine-abreast (3–3–3) configuration.<ref name="wide">{{cite news|last=Wallace |first=James |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Aerospace-Notebook-More-seats-sought-on-787-1196487.php |title=Aerospace Notebook: More seats sought on 787 |newspaper=Seattle-PI |date=February 22, 2006 |access-date=February 12, 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.smarttravelasia.com/economy.htm |title=A survey of the best airline economy seats |work=Smart travel Asia |last=Verghese |first=Vijay |access-date=February 12, 2012}}</ref> The 787's nine-abreast seating for economy provides passengers less space, particularly across the hips and shoulders, than any other jet airliner.<ref name="runwaygirl1">{{cite web |url=https://www.runwaygirlnetwork.com/2015/01/22/opinion-why-i-tell-people-to-avoid-flying-on-a-787/|title=Why I tell people to avoid flying on a 787|date=January 22, 2015|access-date=September 5, 2016}}</ref> Some observers recommended passengers avoid flying 787s with nine-abreast seating,<ref name="runwaygirl1" /><ref name="runwaygirl2">{{cite web |url=https://www.runwaygirlnetwork.com/2015/08/23/negative-feedback-prompts-british-airways-to-widen-seats-for-787-9/ |title=Negative feedback prompts British Airways to widen seats for 787-9|date=August 23, 2015|access-date=September 5, 2016}}</ref> although others suggested that the 787 is more comfortable than other airliners.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/15-hours-on-a-boeing-787-dreamliner-in-coach/ |title=15 hours on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, in coach|first=Geoffrey |last=Morrison |access-date=September 5, 2016}}</ref>

The 787's cabin windows have dimensions of {{cvt|10.7|by|18.4|in|cm}},<ref name="787wind">{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Aerospace-Notebook-In-Airbus-Boeing-duel-jet-1239599.php|title=Aerospace Notebook: In Airbus, Boeing duel, jet windows a shut case |last=Wallace |first=James |date=June 5, 2007 |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |access-date=September 2, 2011}}</ref> and a high eye level so passengers can maintain a view of the horizon.<ref name="windows">{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/business/389650_dreamwindows27.html |title=Continental plans Dreamliner seats to be roomy, with a view |last=Wallace |first=James |work=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |date=November 26, 2008 |access-date=November 28, 2008}} {{dead link|date=April 2021|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}} [http://nycaviation.com/forum/threads/31844-Continental-plans-Dreamliner-seats-to-be-roomy-with-a-view Alt URL] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150928145820/http://nycaviation.com/forum/threads/31844-Continental-plans-Dreamliner-seats-to-be-roomy-with-a-view |date=September 28, 2015}}</ref> The composite fuselage permits larger windows without the need for structural reinforcement.{{Sfn|Norris|Wagner|2009|p=49}} Instead of plastic window shades, the windows use [[electrochromism]]-based [[smart glass]] (supplied by [[PPG Industries]])<ref name="fi_20051220">{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2005/12/20/203644/qantas-deal-sees-launch-of-787-9.html |title=Qantas deal sees launch of 787-9 |last=Norris |first=Guy |date=December 20, 2005 |work=[[Flight International]] |publisher=Reed Elsevier}}</ref> allowing flight attendants<ref name="scho">{{cite web|last=Schofield|first=Adrian|title=The 787 windows issue (with pics) |url=http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-dff2ffd7bdbb&plckPostId=Blog%3A7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-dff2ffd7bdbbPost%3Ae6490d58-496e-471d-b2fc-6b00abffde16|work=[[Aviation Week]]|access-date=January 29, 2013|date=June 24, 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130120200621/http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:7a78f54e-b3dd-4fa6-ae6e-dff2ffd7bdbb|archive-date=January 20, 2013|df=mdy-all}}</ref> and passengers to adjust five levels of sunlight and visibility to their liking,<ref name="brown" /> reducing cabin glare while maintaining a view to the outside world,<ref name="windows" /><ref name="turner220" /> but the most opaque setting still has some transparency.<ref name="scho" /><ref>{{cite web |last=Flynn |first=David |title=Light fantastic: Boeing 787 Dreamliner's digital window tinting |url=http://www.ausbt.com.au/light-fantastic-boeing-787-dreamliner-s-digital-window-tinting |publisher=Australian Business Traveller |date=October 26, 2011 |access-date=January 27, 2013}}</ref> While the lavatory window also uses smart glass, it was given a traditional sunshade.<ref name="brown">{{cite web |last=Parker Brown |first=David |title=ANA is NOT Looking to Install Sunshades on their Boeing 787s — No Complaints Were Received |url=http://www.airlinereporter.com/2012/06/do-boeing-787-dreamliner-windows-dim-enough/ |work=Airline Reporter |date=June 21, 2012 |access-date=January 27, 2013}}</ref>

The 787's cabin features [[light-emitting diode]]s (LEDs)<ref name="LED">{{cite web |url=http://www.diehl.com/en/diehl-aerosystems/aircraft-systems/interior-lighting-systems.html |title=Interior Lighting Systems, Mood Lighting |publisher=[[Diehl Aerospace]] |location=Germany |access-date=May 1, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120317051452/http://www.diehl.com/en/diehl-aerosystems/aircraft-systems/interior-lighting-systems.html |archive-date=March 17, 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref> as standard equipment, allowing the aircraft to be entirely "bulbless". LED lights have previously been an option on the Boeing 777 and Airbus aircraft fitted with standard [[Fluorescent lamp|fluorescent lights]].<ref name="diehl">{{cite web |url=http://www.diehl-aerospace.de/index.php?id=3638&L=1 |title=Mood Lighting System |publisher=Diehl Aerospace |year=2012 |access-date=January 1, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120120155631/http://www.diehl-aerospace.de/index.php?id=3638&L=1 |archive-date=January 20, 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/in-focus-cabin-interior-advances-beyond-seats-and-ife-369430/ |title=In Focus: Cabin interior advances beyond seats and IFE |last=Gubisch |first=Michael |date=December 20, 2005 |work=[[Flight International]] |publisher=Reed Elsevier}}</ref> The system has three-color LEDs plus a white LED.<ref name="LED" /> The 787 interior was designed to better accommodate persons with mobility, sensory, and cognitive disabilities. For example, a {{cvt|56|by|57|in|cm|sigfig=2}} convertible lavatory includes a movable center wall that allows two separate lavatories to become one large wheelchair-accessible facility.<ref name="Boeing_787_Improved_Access">{{cite web |url=http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/news/2007/q1/070326c_nr.html|date=March 26, 2007 |last=Cram |first=Jennifer |title=Boeing Unveils Improved Access Features on the 787 |work=Boeing press release |publisher=Boeing |access-date=July 10, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071011230241/http://boeing.com/commercial/787family/news/2007/q1/070326c_nr.html |archive-date=October 11, 2007}}</ref>

The 787's internal cabin pressure is the equivalent of {{convert|6000|ft|m}} altitude, resulting in a higher pressure than for the {{convert|8000|ft|m}} altitude of older conventional aircraft.<ref name="breathe" /> According to Boeing, in a joint study with [[Oklahoma State University]], this significantly improves passenger comfort.<ref name="Aero_America_200607">{{cite news |url=http://www.aiaa.org/aerospace/images/articleimages/pdf/AA_July05_CRO1.pdf|title=Airbus and Boeing spar for middleweight |publisher=[[American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics]] |date=July 2006 |last=Croft |first=John |access-date=July 8, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070710095616/http://www.aiaa.org/aerospace/images/articleimages/pdf/AA_July05_CRO1.pdf |archive-date=July 10, 2007}}</ref><ref name="bca_20040719">{{cite press release |url=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q3/nr_040719i.html |title=Boeing 7E7 Offers Preferred Cabin Environment, Study Finds |publisher=Boeing |date=July 19, 2004 |access-date=June 14, 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111106180815/http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q3/nr_040719i.html |archive-date=November 6, 2011 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> Cabin air pressurization is provided by electrically driven compressors, rather than traditional engine-bleed air, thereby eliminating the need to cool heated air before it enters the cabin.<ref name="Design_News_20070604">{{cite news |url=http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=222308 |title=Boeing's 'More Electric' 787 Dreamliner Spurs Engine Evolution: On the 787, Boeing eliminated bleed air and relied heavily on electric starter generators |work=[[Design News]] |date=June 4, 2007 |editor-last=Ogando |editor-first=Joseph |access-date=September 9, 2011 |archive-date=April 6, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120406062451/http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=222308 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://aviationweek.com/awin/massive-787-electrical-system-pressurizes-cabin |title=Massive 787 Electrical System Pressurizes Cabin |last=Dornheim |first=Michael |work=Aviation Week & Space Technology |date=March 27, 2005 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> The cabin's humidity is programmable based on the number of passengers carried and allows 15% humidity settings instead of the 4% found in previous aircraft.<ref name="breathe">{{cite news |url=https://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2006-10-30-boeing-air-usat_x.htm |work=USA Today |first=Marilyn |last=Adams |title=Breathe easy, Boeing says |date=November 1, 2006}}</ref> The composite fuselage avoids metal fatigue issues associated with higher cabin pressure and eliminates the risk of corrosion from higher humidity levels.<ref name="breathe" /> The cabin air-conditioning system improves air quality by removing ozone from outside air and, besides standard [[HEPA]] filters, which remove [[Aerosol|airborne particles]], uses a gaseous filtration system to remove odors, irritants, and gaseous contaminants, as well as particulates like viruses, bacteria and allergens.<ref name="Boeing_AIAA_May_2005" /><ref name="turner220">{{cite book |last=Turner |first=Edgar |title=The Birth of the 787 Dreamliner |year=2010 |publisher=Andrews McMeel |location=Kansas City, [[Missouri|MO]] |isbn=978-0-7407-9667-8 |page=220}}</ref>

=== Engines ===
The 787 is powered by two engines, which use all-electrical [[Bleed air|bleedless]] systems taken from the Sonic Cruiser, eliminating the superheated air conduits normally used for aircraft power, de-icing, and other functions.<ref name="787_flyingredef"/><ref name=787DreamBorn/> As part of its "[[Quiet Technology Demonstrator]] 2" project, Boeing adopted several engine noise-reducing technologies for the 787. These include an air inlet containing sound-absorbing materials and exhaust duct cover with a [[chevron (aerospace)|chevron]]-toothed pattern on the rim for a quieter mixing of exhaust and outside air.<ref name="noise reducing chevron"/> Boeing expects these developments to make the 787 significantly quieter both inside and out.<ref name=Goodrich_noise>{{cite web |url=http://www.goodrich.com/Feature/SingleStory/0,1285,67,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071019053358/http://www.goodrich.com/Feature/SingleStory/0%2C1285%2C67%2C00.html |archive-date=October 19, 2007 |date=August 16, 2005 |title=GR & Boeing Demo. Quiet Technology |type=press release |publisher=Goodrich |access-date=July 10, 2007 |url-status=dead}}</ref>  The noise-reducing measures prevent sounds above 85 [[decibel]]s from leaving airport boundaries.<ref name=Boeing_AIAA_May_2005/>

The two different engine models compatible with the 787 use a standard electrical interface to allow an aircraft to be fitted with either [[Rolls-Royce Trent 1000]] or [[General Electric GEnx|General Electric GEnx-1B]] engines. This interchangeability aims to save time and cost when changing engine types;<ref name="787_flyingredef" /> while previous aircraft could exchange engines for those of a different manufacturer, the high cost and time required made it rare.<ref name="What's new">{{cite journal|last=Corliss|first=Bryan |url=http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090621/BIZ/701299594 |title= What's new, different about the 787|journal=The Daily Herald|date=June 21, 2009|access-date=January 22, 2011}}</ref><ref name="leeham_20060718">"{{cite web |url= http://www.leeham.net/filelib/SCOTTSCOLUMN071805.pdf |title= 787 Is not Meeting 24hour-Engine Change Promo, lessor says |website= Leeham |date= July 18, 2005 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060923145748/http://www.leeham.net/filelib/SCOTTSCOLUMN071805.pdf |archive-date= September 23, 2006}}</ref> In 2006, Boeing addressed reports of an extended change period by stating that the 787 engine swap was intended to take 24 hours.<ref name="leeham_20060718"/>

In 2016, Rolls-Royce began flight testing its new [[Trent 1000|Trent 1000 TEN]] engine. It has a new compressor system based on the compressor in [[Rolls-Royce Trent XWB]] engine and a new turbine design for extra thrust, up to {{cvt|78000|lbf|kN}}. Rolls-Royce plans to offer the TEN on the 787-8, −9 and −10.<ref>[http://www.rolls-royce.com/products-and-services/civil-aerospace/products/civil-large-engines/trent-1000/programme-update.aspx] rolls-royce.com</ref>
In early 2020, of 1484 orders, 905 selected GE (61.0%), 476 selected RR (32.1%) and 103 were undecided (6.90%).<ref>{{cite web|last=Kingsley-Jones2020-02-26T16:46:00+00:00|first=Max|title=Can Rolls-Royce win back confidence in 787 engine market? |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/engines/can-rolls-royce-win-back-confidence-in-787-engine-market/136946.article|access-date=November 1, 2020|website=Flight Global}}</ref>

<gallery mode="packed" heights="160">
File:VN-A861 LBG SIAE 2015 (18987933836).jpg|[[General Electric GEnx|GEnx-1B]] nacelle
File:Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 (7976551649).jpg|[[Rolls-Royce Trent 1000|RR Trent 1000]] nacelle
</gallery>

== Operational history ==<!--PR flights-->
On December 6, 2011, test aircraft ZA006 (sixth 787), powered by General Electric GEnx engines, flew {{cvt|10710|nmi}} non-stop from Boeing Field eastward to [[Shahjalal International Airport]] in [[Dhaka]], Bangladesh, setting a new world distance record for aircraft in the 787's weight class, which is between {{cvt|440000|and|550000|lb|kg}}. This flight surpassed the previous record of {{convert|9127|nmi}}, set in 2002 by an [[Airbus A330]]. The Dreamliner then continued eastbound from Dhaka to return to Boeing Field, setting a world-circling speed record of 42 hours, 27 minutes.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-12-08-Boeing-787-Dreamliner-Sets-Speed-Distance-Records |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner Sets Speed, Distance Records |publisher=Boeing |date=December 8, 2011}}</ref> In December 2011, Boeing started a six-month promotion 787 world tour, visiting various cities in China, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, United States, and others.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2011-11-23-Boeing-Announces-787-Dream-Tour |title=Boeing Announces 787 Dream Tour |publisher=Boeing |date=November 23, 2011}}</ref> In April 2012, an ANA 787 made a delivery flight from Boeing Field to [[Haneda Airport]] partially using [[biofuel]] from cooking oil.<ref>{{cite press release |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2012-04-16-Boeing-ANA-Celebrate-First-787-Biofuel-Flight |title=Boeing, ANA Celebrate First 787 Biofuel Flight |publisher=Boeing |date=April 17, 2012}}</ref>

<!--Passenger satisfaction-->
ANA surveyed 800 passengers who flew the 787 from Tokyo to Frankfurt: expectations were surpassed for 90% of passengers; features that met or exceeded expectations included air quality and cabin pressure (90% of passengers), cabin ambiance (92% of passengers), higher cabin humidity levels (80% of passengers), headroom (40% of passengers) and the larger windows (90% of passengers). 25% said they would go out of their way to again fly on the 787.<ref>{{cite news |title=Rave reviews for Boeing's 787 |url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/rave-reviews-for-boeings-787/news-story/070f6492c47f34db0e36432897931128 |work=The Australian |author=Steve Creedy |date=June 12, 2012}}</ref>

[[File:United Airlines Boeing 787 Breidenstein-1.jpg|thumb|[[United Airlines]] was the North American launch customer for all three 787 variants.]]
<!--fuel burn-->
After its first six months of service, Rolls-Royce powered ANA aircraft were burning around 21% less fuel than the replaced 767-300ER on international flights, slightly better than the 20% originally expected, and 15–20% on domestic routes, while GE-powered Japan Airlines aircraft were potentially slightly better.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://aviationweek.com/awin/operators-reporting-positive-787-fuel-burn-results |title=Operators Reporting Positive 787 Fuel-Burn Results |date=June 26, 2012 |author=Guy Norris |work=Aviation Week}}</ref>  Other 787 operators have reported similar fuel savings, ranging from 20 to 22% compared with the 767-300ER.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airlines-singing-praises-787 |title=Airlines Singing Praises of 787 |work=Aviation Week and Space Technology |date=July 14, 2014 |author=Guy Norris |author2=Cathy Buyck |author3=Adrian Schofield |author4=Madhu Unnikrishnan |author5=Jeremy Torr |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150417071619/http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airlines-singing-praises-787/ |archive-date=April 17, 2015 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> An analysis by consultant [[AirInsight]] concluded that [[United Airlines]]' 787s achieved an operating cost per seat that was 6% lower than the Airbus A330.<ref name="wsj-cut-cost"/> In November 2017, [[International Airlines Group]] chief [[Willie Walsh (businessman)|Willie Walsh]] said that for its budget carrier [[Level (airline)|Level]] the lower [[cost of ownership]] of its two [[A330-200]] more than offsets the {{cvt|6|t|lb|order=flip}} higher [[fuel economy in aircraft|fuel burn]] ($3,500 on a Barcelona-Los Angeles flight). It would introduce three more A330s as there were not enough 787 pilots.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/iag-lauds-ownership-cost-benefit-of-level-a330s-442905/ |title=IAG lauds ownership-cost benefit of Level A330s |date=November 6, 2017 |author=David Kaminski Morrow |work=Flightglobal}}</ref>

<!--APU-->
Early operators discovered that if the APS5000 [[Auxiliary power unit]] was shut down with the inlet door closed, heat continued to build up in the tail compartment and cause the rotor shaft to bow. It could take up to two hours for the shaft to straighten again. This was particularly acute on short haul flights as there was insufficient time to allow the unit to cool before a restart was needed. Procedures were modified and the [[Auxiliary power unit|APU]] was later redesigned to address the issue.<ref>{{cite web |title=Boeing tackles 787 APU overheating issue |url=http://aviationweek.com/awin/boeing-tackles-787-apu-overheating-issue |work=Aviation Week |date=May 27, 2013 |access-date=December 8, 2014}}</ref>

<!--Production issues-->
On September 15, 2012, the [[NTSB]] requested the grounding of certain 787s due to GE engine failures; GE believed the production problem had been fixed by that time.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-urges-grounding-for-certain-genx-powered-787-and-747-8s-376525/ |title=NTSB urges grounding for certain GEnx-powered 787 and 747-8s |work=Flight International |date=September 15, 2012}}</ref> In December 2012, responding to unhappiness within the airline industry at the continuing issues affecting the aircraft, Boeing CEO James McNerney stated that he regretted the impact on passengers: he went on to say that the 787's issues had been no greater than those experienced with the introduction of other Boeing models such as the [[Boeing 777|777]].<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com/2012/12/boeing-problems-with-787-dreamliner-normal |title=Boeing: Problems with 787 Dreamliner "Normal" |publisher=frequentbusinesstraveler.com|date=December 16, 2012 |access-date=December 16, 2012}}</ref><ref name="July 2013 Incident Timeline">{{cite news |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/10207415/Boeing-787-Dreamliner-a-timeline-of-problems.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220111/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/10207415/Boeing-787-Dreamliner-a-timeline-of-problems.html |archive-date=January 11, 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |newspaper=The Telegraph |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner: a timeline of problems |date= July 28, 2013 |access-date= August 14, 2013 |location=London}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

In March 2014, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries informed Boeing of a new problem that was caused by a change in manufacturing processes. Employees did not fill gaps with shims to connect wing rib aluminum shear ties to the carbon composite wing panels; the tightened fasteners, without shims, cause excessive stress that creates hairline cracks in the wings, which could enlarge and cause further damage. Forty-two aircraft awaiting delivery were affected, and each one required 1–2 weeks to inspect and repair. However, Boeing did not expect this problem to affect the overall delivery schedule, even if some airplanes were delivered late.<ref name="wsj-wing-defect">{{cite news |author=Ostrower, Jon |title=New Boeing woe: 787 wing defect |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=March 8–9, 2014 |pages=B1, B4}}</ref>

<!--Dispatch reliability-->
Dispatch reliability is an industry standard measure of the rate of departure from the gate with no more than 15 minutes delay due to technical issues.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.avbuyer.com/articles/business-aviation-and-the-boardroom/aircraft-reliability/ |title=Aircraft Reliability |last1=Wyndham |first1=David |date=October 1, 2012 |website=AvBuyer |publisher=World Aviation Communication Ltd}}</ref> The 787-8 started out with a ~96% operational reliability, increasing to ~98.5% in April 2015. Daily utilization increased from five hours in 2013 to twelve hours in 2014.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/better-dispatch-reliability-boeing-787-deliveries-reach-350 |title=With Better Dispatch Reliability, Boeing 787 Deliveries Reach 350 |date=November 24, 2015 |author=Guy Norris |work=Aviation Week & Space Technology |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Dispatch reliability grew to 99.3% in 2017.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://leehamnews.com/2017/05/11/istat-asia-2017-fight-lead/ |title=ISTAT Asia 2017: The fight for the lead |author=Bjorn Fehrm |date=May 11, 2017 |work=Leeham}}</ref>

<!--Route opening-->
Airlines have often assigned the 787 to routes previously flown by larger aircraft that could not return a profit. For example, Air Canada offered a [[Toronto Pearson International Airport|Toronto-Pearson]] to [[Indira Gandhi International Airport|New Delhi]] route, first utilizing a [[Lockheed L1011]], then a [[Boeing 747-400]], then an [[Airbus A340-300]], but none of these types were efficient enough to generate profit. The airline operated the route profitably with a 787-9, and credits the right number of seats and greater [[fuel efficiency]] for this success.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/air-canada-s-787-expansion-plans-still-play |author=Brian Sumers |title=Air Canada's 787 Expansion Plans Still In Play |work=Aviation Week & Space Technology |date=January 22, 2016 |url-access=subscription}}</ref>

Up to June 30, 2017, after 565 units were delivered since 2011: 60% -8 (340) and 40% -9 (225), the airports with most 787 departures are [[Haneda airport]] with 304 weekly, Narita with 276 and [[Doha Airport]] with 265.<!--<ref name=Anna9Aug2017/>--> By the end of 2017, there were 39 airlines operating the 787 on 983 routes with an average length of {{cvt|5,282|km|nmi mi}}, including 163 new routes (17%).<ref name=Anna9Aug2017>{{cite news |url=http://www.anna.aero/2017/08/09/boeing-delivered-565-787s-since-introduction-2011/ |date=August 9, 2017 |title=787: Living the dream with amazing new routes? (Or just another great replacement aircraft?) |work=Airline Network News & Analysis}}</ref> {{as of|2018|March|24}}, the 787's longest route is [[Qantas]]' Perth-London Heathrow, a distance of {{cvt|14,499|km|nmi mi}} and the second-longest regular scheduled flight behind Qatar Airways' {{cvt|14,529|km|nmi mi}} route from Doha to Auckland, flown with a Boeing 777-200LR.<ref>{{cite news|title=Jet makes history on flight from Australia |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-43530332|access-date=March 26, 2018|work=BBC News|date=March 25, 2018}}</ref> In March 2020, [[Air Tahiti Nui]] executed a record commercial flight of {{cvt|9,765|mi|nmi km}}, from [[Faa'a International Airport|Papeete]] to [[Charles de Gaulle Airport|Paris-Charles de Gaulle]], on a route that would typically refuel at [[Los Angeles]] but was able to fly the Boeing 787-9 non-stop because it was "nowhere near full" due to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]].<ref>{{cite news|last=Street|first=Francesca|title=Virus creates world's longest passenger flight |publisher=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/coronavirus-worlds-longest-flight/index.html|date=March 17, 2020|access-date=March 17, 2020}}</ref>

In 2023, the first 787s to be withdrawn from commercial service, two 10-year-old -8s, were [[aircraft recycling|torn down]] by Irish company [[Ireland West Airport|EirTrade Aviation]], as they would otherwise have shortly required 12-year [[aircraft maintenance checks|check]]s and landing-gear overhauls.<ref name=Flight1june20232/>
The used [[aircraft part|part]]s were in high demand amid the [[2021–2023 global supply chain crisis|post-pandemic global shortage]].<ref name=Flight1june20232/> However, there is no obvious recycling path for the [[airframe]] made of [[carbon composite]].<ref name=Flight1june20232>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/advanced-materials-emerge-as-challenging-new-frontier-for-aircraft-recycling/153420.article |title= Advanced materials emerge as challenging new frontier for aircraft recycling |author= Howard Hardee |date= 1 June 2023|work= Flightglobal }}</ref>

==Variants==
[[File:Boeing 787 size comparison.svg|thumb|upright=1
|alt=Diagrams of outlines of three different aircraft imposed over one another
|Size comparison of the Boeing
{{legend||border=2px solid black|787-8,}}
{{legend|#d3d3d3|outline=#aaa|[[Boeing 777-300ER|777-300ER]],}}
{{legend|#00ced1|outline=#aaa|[[Boeing 767-300ER|767-300ER]], and}}
{{legend|#4040ff|outline=#aaa|[[Boeing 737-800|737-800]]}}
]]

The shortest Dreamliner variant, the 787-8 was the first variant to fly in December 2009, then the longer 787-9 in September 2013, followed by the longest variant, the 787-10, in March 2017. These variants are called ''B788'', ''B789'', and ''B78X'', respectively in the [[List of ICAO aircraft type designators]].<ref name=ICAOcode>{{cite web |url= http://cfapp.icao.int/Doc8643/reports/Part2-By%20Type%20Designator(Decode).pdf |title= aircraft type designators |publisher= International Civil Aviation Organization}}</ref> The short-range 787-3 was canceled in 2010.

===787-8===
[[File:N26902 - Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner - United Airlines.jpg|thumb|The initial 787-8 is the shortest variant at 186{{nbsp}}ft (56.7{{nbsp}}m)]]

With a typical capacity of 220 passengers<ref name="aerospace-technology.com">{{Cite web |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner Long-Range, Mid-Size Airliner - Aerospace Technology |url=https://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/dreamliner/ |access-date=2022-12-11 |website=www.aerospace-technology.com}}</ref> and a range of {{convert|7355|nmi}}, the −8 is the base model of the 787 family and was the first to enter service in 2011.<ref name="characteristics"/> The 787-8 is targeted to replace the [[Boeing 767-200ER]] as well as expand into new non-stop markets where larger planes would not be economically viable.<ref>{{Cite web  |date=2020-10-06 |title=The ultimate guide to aircraft variants |url=https://www.key.aero/article/ultimate-guide-aircraft-variants |access-date=2024-01-06|publisher=[[Key Publishing]]}}</ref> {{as of|2023|January||df=US}}, approximately 26% of 787 orders are for the 787-8 with 386 delivered. In 2018, Boeing said it would change the −8 manufacturing to raise its [[commonality]] with the −9 above the current 30% to be more like the 95% commonality between the −9 and −10, as it will benefit from learning from those.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://leehamnews.com/2018/04/17/boeing-to-implement-structural-design-change-in-787-8-for-production-commonality |title= Boeing to implement structural design change in 787-8 for production commonality |date= April 17, 2018 |work= Leeham News}}</ref>
When it was launched, a new 787-8 was to cost only slightly more than the [[767-300ER]], valued new for $85 million at its 1990s peak, but it ended being 20% more costly.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/b767-300er-historical-value-behavior-defy-expectations/ |title= B767-300ER Historical Value Behavior Defy Expectations |publisher= Aircraft Value News |date= October 29, 2018}}</ref> Its closest competitor is the [[Airbus A330neo#A330-800|Airbus A330-800]].{{cn|date=October 2023}}

===787-9===
Keeping the same wingspan as the 787-8, the 787-9 is a lengthened and strengthened variant with a {{convert|{{#expr:206-186}}|ft|m}} longer fuselage and a {{convert|{{#expr:557000-502500}}|lb|kg}} higher maximum take-off weight (MTOW), seating 259 passengers in a typical three-class arrangement<ref name="aerospace-technology.com"/> over a {{convert|7635|nmi|mi km}} range.<ref name="characteristics"/> It features [[Boundary layer control|active boundary-layer control]] on the tail surfaces, reducing drag.<ref name=king1>{{cite news |last=Kingsley-Jones |first=Max |title=Aero secrets of Boeing's new Dreamliner |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-aero-secrets-of-boeings-new-dreamliner-401784/ |work=[[Flightglobal]] |date=July 18, 2014 |access-date=July 24, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140724213345/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/farnborough-aero-secrets-of-boeings-new-dreamliner-401784/|archive-date=July 24, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> It is targeted to replace the [[Boeing 767-300ER]] and [[Airbus A330-300]]. It competes with the [[Airbus A330neo#A330-900|Airbus A330-900]].

In 2005, the entry into service (EIS) was planned for 2010. The firm configuration was finalized on July 1, 2010.<ref>{{cite web |title=Boeing clears firm configuration hurdle for 787-9 |work=Flight International |date= July 1, 2010 |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/07/01/343969/boeing-clears-firm-configuration-hurdle-for-787-9.html |access-date=July 2, 2010}}</ref> By October 2011, deliveries were scheduled to begin in 2014.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-delays-first-747-8i-and-787-9-deliveries-363941/ |title=Boeing delays first 747-8I and 787-9 deliveries |work=Flightglobal |date=October 27, 2011 |access-date=January 20, 2013}}</ref>

The prototype 787-9 made its maiden flight from Paine Field on September 17, 2013.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-787-9-takes-off-for-maiden-flight-390652/ |title=Boeing 787-9 takes off for maiden flight |work= Flightglobal |date= September 17, 2013}}</ref> By November 8, 2013, it had flown 141 hours.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-completes-first-flight-of-2nd-787-9-392727/ |title= Boeing completes first flight of 2nd 787-9 |date= November 8, 2013 |work= Flight Global}}</ref> A 787-9 was on static display at the 2014 [[Farnborough Air Show]] prior to first delivery.<ref>{{cite news |first= Tim |last= Stake |date= July 7, 2014 |title= Air NZ 787-9 To Be Showcased at Famous Airshow |url= http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/10241024/Air-NZ-787-9-to-be-showcased-at-famous-airshow |publisher= Fairfax New Zealand |access-date= July 12, 2014}}</ref> On July 8, 2014, Launch customer [[Air New Zealand]] took its first 787-9, in a distinctive black livery in a ceremony at Paine Field.<ref>{{cite news |first= James |last= Durston |title= Air New Zealand shows off stunning, all-black Dreamliner |url= http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/09/travel/air-new-zealand-787-9-dreamliner/ |publisher= CNN |date= July 9, 2014 |access-date= July 9, 2014}}</ref> Its first commercial flight was from [[Auckland Airport|Auckland]] to Sydney on August 9, 2014.<ref name=ANZ_first>{{cite web |url=http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/08/air-new-zealand-operates-first-787-service |title=Air New Zealand operates first 787 service |date=August 9, 2014 |website=Australian Aviation |access-date=August 10, 2014}}</ref>

[[File:Air New Zealand Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner landing at Perth Airport.jpg|thumb|left|The longer 787-9 ({{convert|206|ft|m|abbr=on|disp=semicolon}}) was introduced by [[Air New Zealand]] on August 9, 2014]]
The 787-9 was to begin commercial service with [[All Nippon Airways]] on August 7, 2014.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.ana.co.jp/eng/aboutana/press/2014/140731.html |title= ANA sets date for first scheduled flights with Boeing 787-9 |publisher= All Nippon Airways |access-date= November 6, 2014}}</ref> [[United Airlines]] was to start the longest nonstop scheduled 787 service between Los Angeles and Melbourne in October 2014.<ref>{{cite news |title= United Airlines to Launch Nonstop Service Between Los Angeles and Melbourne, Australia |publisher= [[United Airlines]] |date= February 20, 2014 |url= http://newsroom.unitedcontinentalholdings.com/2014-02-20-United-Airlines-to-Launch-Nonstop-Service-Between-Los-Angeles-and-Melbourne-Australia |access-date= March 1, 2014 |archive-date= October 15, 2014 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141015160240/http://newsroom.unitedcontinentalholdings.com/2014-02-20-United-Airlines-to-Launch-Nonstop-Service-Between-Los-Angeles-and-Melbourne-Australia |url-status= dead }}</ref> [[Air China]] started a 787-9 route between Beijing and Chengdu in May 2016.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/52/52558.html |title= Air China Brings China's First Boeing 787-9 Home |publisher= China Aviation Daily |access-date= July 8, 2016}}</ref> {{as of|2023|January|df=US}}, 63% of all 787 orders are for the 787-9, with 580 deliveries. A 2014 787-9 leased for $1.05 million per month, and fell to $925,000 per month in 2018.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.aircraftvaluenews.com/a350-900-lease-rentals-hold-steady/ |title= A350-900 Lease Rentals Hold Steady |author= Aircraft Value News |date= May 14, 2018}}</ref>

The {{convert|20|ft|adj=on}} stretch was achieved by adding {{convert|10|ft|adj=on}} (five-frame) extensions forward and aft of the wing.<!--<ref name=AW161219/>--> The 787-8 and 787-9 have 50% [[commonality]]: the wing, fuselage and systems of the 787-8 had required radical revision to achieve the [[payload]]-range goals of the 787-9.<!--<ref name=AW161219/>-->  Following a major revamp of the original 787-8 wing, the latest configuration for the 787-9 and −10 is the fourth design evolution.<ref name=AW161219/>

On March 25, 2018, a [[Qantas]] 787-9 completed the first scheduled non-stop flight between Australia and the UK flying seventeen hours from [[Perth Airport|Perth]] to [[London Heathrow]].<ref name="PERtoLHR">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-43530332 |title=Australia-UK: First non-stop flight arrives in London from Perth |date=March 25, 2018 |work=BBC News |access-date=March 25, 2018 |language=en-GB}}</ref> On October 20, 2019, a Qantas 787-9 was flight tested from New York to Sydney with a restricted payload. A team of researchers monitored passengers and crew to investigate wellness and performance on long flights.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.lapresse.ca/voyage/201910/20/01-5246153-le-plus-long-vol-direct-de-lhistoire-a-dure-plus-de-19-heures.php|title=Le plus long vol direct de l'histoire a duré plus de 19 heures|date=October 20, 2019|work=La Presse|access-date=October 20, 2019|agency=Agence France-Presse}}</ref> On March 16, 2020, an [[Air Tahiti Nui]] 787-9 achieved the [[Longest flights|longest commercial flight]] of {{cvt|8,485|nmi}}.<ref>{{Cite press release |url=https://www.airtahitinui.com/us-en/air-tahiti-nui-new-record-worlds-longest-flight-tahiti-paris-working |title=New Record For World's Longest Flight |date=March 20, 2020 |website= Air Tahiti Nui}}</ref>

===787-10===
[[File:Boeing 787-10 ‘9V-SCA’ Singapore Airlines (48587751501).jpg|thumb|A 787-10 of [[Singapore Airlines]]. The −10 is the longest 787 variant and is only assembled in Charleston, South Carolina.]]

<!--studies-->
In December 2005, pushed by the interest of [[Emirates (airline)|Emirates]] and [[Qantas]], Boeing was studying the possibility of stretching the 787-9 further to seat 290 to 310 passengers. This variant would be similar to the capacity of the [[Airbus A350-900]], and the Boeing 777-200, although with a shorter range.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Everett-work-force-for-787-pegged-at-1-000-1190602.php |title= Everett work force for 787 pegged at 1,000 |date= December 21, 2005 |work= [[Seattle Post-Intelligencer]] |author= James Wallace}}</ref> Customer discussions were continuing in early 2006.<ref name=baseler>{{cite web |url= http://www.boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2006/02/dash_10.html |title=Dash 10 |work= Boeing Blog |last= Baseler |first= Randy |date= February 8, 2006}}</ref> Mike Bair, Boeing's vice president and general manager for the 787 development program at the time, said it was easier to proceed with the 787-10 development after other customers followed Emirates' request. It is targeted to replace the [[Boeing 767-400ER]] and [[Airbus A330|Airbus A330-300]]. It competes with the Airbus A330-900.<ref name="wsj_20060327">{{cite news |url= https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB114349310320609340 |title= Boeing to Offer Larger Version of 787 Dreamliner |work=The Wall Street Journal |date= March 28, 2006 |first= J. Lynn |last= Lunsford}}</ref>

<!--launch-->
On May 30, 2013, [[Singapore Airlines]] became the launch customer by stating it would order 30 787-10s (provided Boeing launched the program), to be delivered in 2018–2019.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/singapore-to-launch-787-10x-with-order-for-30-386486/ |title= Singapore to launch 787-10X with order for 30 |work= Flight International |last= Kaminski-Morrow |first= David |date= May 30, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.ausbt.com.au/singapore-airlines-signs-up-for-boeing-s-787-10x-dreamliner |title=Singapore Airlines signs up for Boeing's 787-10X Dreamliner |publisher= Australian Business Traveller |last= Flynn |first= David |date= May 30, 2013}}</ref> On June 18, 2013, Boeing officially launched the 787-10 at the Paris Air Show, with orders or commitments for 102 aircraft from [[Air Lease Corporation]] (30), Singapore Airlines (30), [[United Airlines]] (20), [[British Airways]] (12), and [[GE Capital Aviation Services]] (10).<ref name="787-10">{{cite web |title=Boeing Launches 787-10 Dreamliner |url=http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2711 |publisher= Boeing |date=June 18, 2013}}</ref> As of January 2023 the aircraft has 189 orders out of which 115 have been delivered, 7 of which are stored.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/displaystandardreport.cfm?cboCurrentModel=787&optReportType=AllModels&cboAllModel=787&ViewReportF=View+Report |title=787 Model Summary Through June 2018 |website=Boeing |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180719132838/http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/displaystandardreport.cfm?cboCurrentModel=787&optReportType=AllModels&cboAllModel=787&ViewReportF=View+Report |archive-date=July 19, 2018 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

<!--economics-->
The variant was envisioned as replacing Boeing 777-200, [[Airbus A330]] and [[Airbus A340]] aircraft.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/paris-boeing-launches-787-10-with-five-customers-387321/ |title=PARIS: Boeing launches 787-10 with five customers |work= Flight International |author= Trimble, Stephen |date= June 18, 2013 |access-date= June 29, 2013}}</ref> The −10 is to compete against the Airbus A350-900. According to Boeing, it offers better economics than the A350 on shorter routes.<ref>{{cite web |last= Metcalf |first= Eddy |title= Boeing To Launch 787-10 Dreamliner The Most Efficient Jetliner In History |url= http://avstop.com/june_2013/boeing_to_launch_787_10_dreamliner_the_most_efficient_jetliner_in_history.htm |publisher= Aviation Online Magazine |date= June 19, 2013 |access-date= July 6, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130809140043/http://avstop.com/june_2013/boeing_to_launch_787_10_dreamliner_the_most_efficient_jetliner_in_history.htm |archive-date= August 9, 2013 |url-status= dead}}</ref> [[Steven Udvar-Hazy]] said, "If it's identically configured, the −10 has a little bit of an edge on the −900", but smaller than Boeing's estimate of 10 percent.<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-18/air-lease-s-hazy-says-boeing-787-10-beats-airbus-on-fuel |title= Air Lease's Hazy Says Boeing 787-10 Beats Airbus on Fuel |publisher= [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |date= June 18, 2013}}</ref> The 787-10 is {{cvt|224|ft}} long, seats 336 passengers in a two-class cabin configuration, and has a range of {{cvt|6330|nmi}}.<ref>{{cite web |title= Boeing 787 Dreamliner (Technical Specs) |publisher= Boeing |url= https://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/ |date= February 2022}}</ref>

[[File:Boeing 787-10 rollout (32305466134).jpg|thumb|Rollout of 787-10 on February 17, 2017. The −10 is the longest 787 variant at {{convert|224|ft|m|abbr=on}}.]]
<!--design-->
Boeing completed detailed design for the −10 on December 2, 2015.<ref>{{cite press release |title= Boeing Completes Detailed Design for the 787-10 Dreamliner |publisher= [[Boeing]] |date= December 2, 2015 |url= http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-12-02-Boeing-Completes-Detailed-Design-for-the-787-10-Dreamliner}}</ref> Major assembly began in March 2016.<ref>{{cite press release |url= http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2016-03-15-Boeing-787-10-Dreamliner-Begins-Major-Assembly |title= Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner Begins Major Assembly |date= March 15, 2016 |publisher= Boeing}}</ref> Designers targeted 90% [[commonality]] between the 787-9 and −10 and achieved 95%; the {{convert|18|ft|m|adj=on}} stretch was reached by adding 10&nbsp;ft forward of the wing and 8&nbsp;ft aft, and by strengthening the fuselage for bending loads in the center [[wingbox]]. Because of the length and additional [[tail strike]] protection needed, a semilevered [[landing gear]] enables rotation over the aft wheels rather than at the bogie center, like the 777-300ER, and the cabin [[air conditioning]] system has 15% more capacity. The first and third −10 test-platforms incorporate Rolls-Royce's new [[Trent 1000]] TEN engines, while the second is powered by the competing General Electric [[GEnx]]-1B engine.<ref name=AW161219>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/simplicity-vital-boeing-787-10-execution |title= Simplicity Is Vital To Boeing 787-10 Execution |date= December 19, 2016 |author= Guy Norris |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>

<!--assembly-->
Major fuselage parts were received for final assembly on November 30, 2016. The 787-10's mid-fuselage sections are too large for transport to Everett, Washington and it is built only in Charleston, South Carolina;<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.postandcourier.com/business/boeing-s-first---dreamliner-moves-into-final-assembly/article_783a3a74-b70e-11e6-a5c8-4be7d9a0bb2d.html |title= Boeing's first 787-10 Dreamliner moves into final assembly |author= David Wren |date= November 30, 2016 |work= Charleston Post and Courier}}</ref> it is the first Boeing airliner assembled exclusively there.<ref name=AvWeek9Jun2017/> The first −10 was rolled out on February 17, 2017.<ref>{{cite press release |url= http://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=129854 |title= Boeing Debuts 787-10 Dreamliner |date= February 17, 2017 |publisher= Boeing}}</ref> The variant's first flight took place on March 31, 2017, and lasted 4 hours and 48 minutes.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-achieves-first-flight-of-charleston-built-787-435771/ |title= Boeing achieves first flight of Charleston-built 787-10 |date= March 31, 2017 |author= Stephen Trimble |work= FlightGlobal}}</ref>

<!--flight-tests-->
The first test 787-10 aircraft is engaged in [[flight envelope]] expansion work and the second joined the program in early May 2017, while the third with a passenger [[aircraft cabin|cabin]] interior to test the uprated environmental control system and Trent [[fuel economy in aircraft|fuel-burn performance]] was scheduled to join in June.<!--<ref name=AvWeek9Jun2017/>--> The −10 was scheduled to appear at the 2017 [[Paris Air Show]].<ref name=AvWeek9Jun2017>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show-2017/civil-aviation-programs-watch#slide-4-field_images-1639711 |title= Civil Aviation Programs To Watch |date= June 9, 2017 |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>  The second −10 is being used to prove the [[GE Aviation]] engines and the third made its first flight on June 8, 2017, when the [[flight-test]] programme was 30% complete.<ref>{{cite news |work= Flightglobal |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/paris-boeing-completes-a-third-of-787-10-testing-438330/ |author= Max Kingsley-Jones |title= Boeing completes a third of 787-10 testing |date= June 18, 2017}}</ref> Boeing finished final assembly and painting of the first production 787-10 in October 2017, before its certification.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/picture-boeing-rolls-out-first-787-10-built-for-cus-441773/ |title= Boeing rolls out first 787-10 built for customer |date= October 3, 2017 |author= Stephen Trimble |work= Flightglobal}}</ref> The last stages of flight tests focused on [[fuel economy in aircraft|fuel burn]] validation and revised [[Fly-by-wire|flight control software]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://aviationweek.com/new-civil-aircraft/boeing-targets-787-10-test-completion-december |title= Boeing Targets 787-10 Test Completion In December |date= November 22, 2017 |author= Guy Norris |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>{{update-inline|date=January 2024}}

[[File:Boeing787-10(9V-SCK).jpg|thumb|The 787-10 began commercial service on April 3, 2018, with [[Singapore Airlines]]]]
<!--emirates-order-->
At the start of the November 2017 [[Dubai Air Show]] the 787-10 had 171 orders; Emirates committed to 40 787-10s, in two- and three-class cabins for 240 to 330 passengers, to be delivered from 2022 and with conversion rights to the smaller 787-9.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/dubai-emirates-set-to-push-787-10-backlog-over-200-443163/ |title= Emirates set to push 787-10 backlog over 200 |date= November 12, 2017 |author= David Kaminski Morrow |work= Flightglobal}}</ref><ref name=wsj-airbus>{{cite news |last1=Wall |first1= Robert |last2= Parasie|first2=Nicolas|date=November 12, 2017 |title=Emirates Airline Orders 40 Boeing 787 Dreamliners |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/emirates-airline-orders-40-boeing-787-dreamliners-1510482526 |work=[[The Wall Street Journal]] |location=New York City, New York, United States |access-date=November 13, 2017 |url-access= subscription}}</ref>  These aircraft are adapted for 7–8.5 hour missions, in a 280-seat three–class layout.<ref name=AvWeek14nov2017>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/emirates-dismisses-a380plus-concept-negotiations-continue |title= Emirates Dismisses A380plus Concept As Negotiations Continue |date= November 14, 2017 |author= Jens Flottau |work= Aviation Week}}</ref> Emirates' [[Tim Clark (airline executive)|Tim Clark]] was doubtful it would meet its [[MTOW]] for the [[payload-range]] required with initial {{cvt|70,000|-|72,000|lbf|kN}} thrust engines, but with the current {{cvt|76,000|lbf|kN}} turbofans and the −9 early margins gave the −10 "stellar economics".<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/dubai-emirates-faith-in-787-10-closes-window-to-a3-443270/ |title= Emirates' faith in 787-10 closes window to A350 |date= November 14, 2017 |author= David Kaminski Morrow |work= Flightglobal}}</ref> By early 2019, Emirates was considering canceling its 787-10 order, due to engine margins being insufficient for the hot Dubai weather, in favor of the [[Airbus A350]] (which would also replace its last [[Airbus A380]] order).<ref>{{cite news |url= https://leehamnews.com/2019/02/04/pontifications-787-10-engines-too-small-for-emirates/ |title= 787-10 engines too small for Emirates |author= Scott Hamilton |date= February 4, 2019 |work= Leeham News}}</ref> At the 2019 Dubai Air Show, Emirates placed an order for 30 787-9 aircraft rather than the 787-10.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/dubai-emirates-to-take-30-787-9s-and-trims-777x-dea-462424/|title=DUBAI: Emirates to take 30 787-9s and trims 777X deal|last=Kaminski-Morrow|first=David|date=November 20, 2019|website=Flightglobal.com|language=en-GB|access-date=November 27, 2019}}</ref>

<!-- certification & EIS -->
In January 2018, the −10 was certified by the [[FAA]] after testing for 900 flight hours.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-approves-787-10-for-airworthiness-445088/ |title= FAA approves 787-10 for airworthiness |date= January 22, 2018 |author= Stephen Trimble |work= Flightglobal}}</ref>  Boeing received its production certificate on February 15.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-receives-787-10-production-certificate-445969/ |title= Boeing receives 787-10 production certificate |date= February 16, 2018 |work= Flightglobal}}</ref> It was first delivered to launch customer Singapore Airlines on March 25, 2018.<ref>{{cite press release |url= http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-03-25-Boeing-Delivers-Worlds-First-787-10-Dreamliner-to-Singapore-Airlines,1 |title= Boeing Delivers World's First 787-10 Dreamliner to Singapore Airlines |date= March 25, 2018 |publisher= Boeing}}</ref> Fitted with 337 seats, 36 in business and 301 in economy,<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/picture-sia-787-10-will-make-may-debut-to-osaka-445713/ |title= SIA 787-10 will make May debut to Osaka |date= February 8, 2018 |author= Firdaus Hashim |work= Flightglobal}}</ref> the −10 began commercial service on April 3, 2018.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://australianaviation.com.au/2018/06/singapore-airlines-takes-its-first-boeing-787-10/ |title=Singapore Airlines takes delivery of its first Boeing 787-10 |date=June 3, 2018 |work=Australian Aviation |access-date=June 17, 2018 |language=en-US}}</ref>

<!--modifications-->
The 8.7% fuselage stretch from the −9 to the −10 likely increased empty weight at a lower rate than the 7.4% growth from the −8 to the −9 due to the 10.7% stretch.<ref name=Flight28mar2018/> Software changes increased the [[tailplane]] effectiveness to avoid modifying it.<!--<ref name=Flight28mar2018/>--> With the same wing but a longer fuselage than the −9, the [[Wing flutter|flutter]] margin was reduced for the −10 but to avoid stiffening the wing or adding [[wingtip]] counterweights for commonality, software oscillates the [[Elevator (aeronautics)|elevators]] in the flaps up vertical mode suppression system (F0VMS), similar to the vertical gust load alleviation system.<ref name=Flight28mar2018>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-boeing-787-10-technical-description-and-cu-446856/ |title= Boeing 787-10 technical description and cutaway |date= March 28, 2018 |author= Stephen Trimble |work= Flightglobal}}</ref>

To replace [[Air New Zealand]]'s 777-200 fleet, Boeing wants to increase the 787-10 [[maximum takeoff weight|MTOW]] by over {{convert|13,000|lb|t}} to {{convert|572,000|lb|t}} with some reinforcements and updated fuel systems.<!--ref name=TAC30may2019-->
This would allow more range, such as the {{cvt|5,600|nmi}} trip from Auckland to Los Angeles with no passenger restrictions and some cargo.<!--ref name=TAC30may2019-->
The increased performance could trickle down to the 787-9, allowing Auckland to New York flights.<ref name=TAC30may2019>{{cite news |url= https://theaircurrent.com/aircraft-development/boeing-chases-range-frontier-on-787-and-777x-to-win-air-new-zealand-qantas-deals/ |author= Jon Ostrower |work= The air current |date= May 30, 2019 |title= Boeing chases range frontier on 787 and 777X to win Air New Zealand, Qantas deals}}</ref>

===BBJ 787===
[[File:Lufthansa Technik VIP & Executive Jet Solutions (4340689370).jpg|thumb|[[Lufthansa Technik]] model of 787 VIP interior]]

The 787-8 and −9 are offered as [[Boeing Business Jet]]s, the first offering {{convert|2,415|ft2|m2|abbr=on}} of floor space and a range of {{convert|9,945|nmi|km mi|abbr=on}}), the other {{convert|2,775|ft2|m2|abbr=on}} and {{convert|9,485|nmi|km mi|abbr=on}}, both with 25 passengers.<!--<ref name=BBJ/>-->
Through June 2018, fifteen have been ordered, twelve delivered and four were in service.<ref name=BBJ>{{cite web |url= https://www.boeing.com/commercial/bbj |title= Boeing Business Jets |date= June 2018 |publisher= Boeing}}</ref>

===Experimental===
{{Main|ecoDemonstrator}}
Two 787 aircraft have been used in Boeing's [[ecoDemonstrator]] program which aims to develop technology and techniques to reduce the [[environmental effects of aviation]]. The testing involves many partner organisations including engine and systems manufacturers, [[NASA]], academic, research, and regulatory institutions. The program started in 2011 with a different airframe being used each year.<ref name="Backgrounder 22">{{cite web |title=Backgrounder: The Boeing ecoDemonstrator Program (June 2022) |url=https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/principles/environment/pdf/BKG-ecoDemonstrator_2022.pdf |website=Boeing |access-date=21 November 2022}}</ref>

In 2014, the fourth prototype 787-8 was used for tests including use of [[sustainable aviation fuel]], [[ceramic matrix composite]] engine exhaust nozzles, and systems for improved [[air traffic control]] (ATC) communications and closer landing approach spacing.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Boeing ecoDemonstrator 787 Tests Innovations for More Efficient Air Travel |url=https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2014-11-17-Boeing-ecoDemonstrator-787-Tests-Innovations-for-More-Efficient-Air-Travel |publisher=Boeing |access-date=2024-01-06|date=November 17, 2014}}</ref>  In 2020 a new 787-10 took part in the program, including intensive noise reduction trials, and including text-based ATC communications and cabin hygiene and cleansing tests related to the [[COVID-19 pandemic]]. After removal of the test equipment, the aircraft was delivered to [[Etihad Airways]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Etihad ecoDemonstrator Programme |url=https://www.etihadaviationgroup.com/en-ae/sustainability/flying-towards-zero-emissions/ecodemonstrator |website=Etihad Aviation Group |access-date=21 November 2022}}</ref>

In April 2023, Boeing announced the [[ecoDemonstrator Explorer]] program, which would run alongside the ecoDemonstrator program. The first Explorer program in 2023 tested international route planning (trajectory-based operations – a major aim of the FAA's [[Next Generation Air Transportation System|NextGen project]]) and maximization of [[sustainable aviation fuel]] use for a planned 10% fuel efficiency gain, using a 787-10.<ref name="Flight2023-4" >{{cite web |last1=Hemmerdinger |first1=Jon |title=Boeing adds 787-10 to 2023 ecoDemonstrator technology programme |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/boeing-adds-787-10-to-2023-ecodemonstrator-technology-programme/153068.article |website=FlightGlobal |publisher=DVV Media |access-date=29 April 2023 |date=28 April 2023 }}</ref><ref name="FG 15-6-23" >{{cite web |last1=Waldron |first1=Greg |title=ANSPs demonstrate trajectory-based operations in Asia-Pacific |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/aerospace/ansps-demonstrate-trajectory-based-operations-in-asia-pacific/153710.article |website=FlightGlobal |publisher=DVV Media |access-date=17 November 2023 |date=15 June 2023}}</ref>

==Operators==
{{Main|List of Boeing 787 operators}}
[[File:Japan Airlines, JA838J, Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner (29904520725).jpg|thumb|[[Japan Airlines]] 787-8 applying [[reverse thrust]] on a wet runway]]<!--possible merge with [[List of Boeing 787 orders and deliveries]]-->

There are 1,006 Boeing 787 aircraft in airline service {{as of|2022|2|lc=on}}, comprising 377 787-8s, 568 787-9s and 61 787-10s, with outstanding orders for further 481 aircraft.<ref name=O_D_summ/><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.planespotters.net/operators/Boeing/787?refresh=1|title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner Operators|website=www.planespotters.net|access-date=August 25, 2019}}</ref> {{as of|2019|08}}, the largest operators are [[All Nippon Airways]] (77), [[United Airlines]] (63), [[Japan Airlines]] (47), and [[American Airlines]] (46).<ref name="FG_WAC_2019p42">Thisdell and Seymour ''Flight International'' July 30 – August 5, 2019, p. 42.</ref>

===Orders and deliveries===
{{Main|List of Boeing 787 orders and deliveries}}
[[File:B-1168@PEK (20190529145346).jpg|thumb|The 787th Boeing 787, operated by China Southern Airlines, with special markings.]]
In September 2011, the 787 was first officially delivered to launch customer All Nippon Airways.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightstory.net/20110826/boeing-787-dreamliner-date-for-first-delivery |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner – Date for First Delivery |author=Michael |publisher=Flight Story |date=August 26, 2011 |access-date=August 26, 2011 |archive-date=July 9, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150709054920/http://www.flightstory.net/20110826/boeing-787-dreamliner-date-for-first-delivery |url-status=dead }}</ref> {{as of|2018|December}}, the top five identified 787 customers are [[American Airlines]] with 89 orders (37 -8s and 52 -9s), All Nippon Airways with 83 orders (36 -8s, 44 -9s and three −10s), [[International Lease Finance Corporation|ILFC]] (an aircraft leasing company) with 74 orders (23 -8s and 51 -9s), and [[United Airlines]] (12 -8s, 38 -9s and 21 -10s) and [[Etihad Airways]] (41 -9s, 30 -10s), both with 71 orders.

On December 13, 2018, the 787th Boeing 787 was delivered to [[AerCap]]. By then the 787 had flown 300 million passengers on 1.5 million flights and opened 210 new nonstop routes.<ref name=Boeing13dec2018>{{cite press release |url= https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-12-13-Boeing-Delivers-the-787th-787-Dreamliner |title= Boeing Delivers the 787th 787 Dreamliner |publisher= Boeing |date=December 13, 2018}}</ref> The 1000th Dreamliner, a 787-10 for [[Singapore Airlines]], made its maiden flight on April 3, 2020.<ref name=1000th>{{cite web |url= https://www.instagram.com/p/B-iOk6UBeAQ/ |title= Maiden flight of the 1000th production Boeing 787 Dreamliner |author= Gary Eaton |date= April 3, 2020}}</ref>
{{trim|{{#section-h:List of Boeing 787 orders and deliveries|Orders and deliveries by type and year}}}}

== Accidents and incidents ==
<!-- Only accidents or notable aviation incidents. See [[WP:WikiProject Aircraft/page content#Accidents and incidents]] for project guidelines for inclusion, and also [[WP:AIRCRASH]], [[WP:NOTNEWS]] and [[WP:RECENT]]. Minor incidents may be candidates for removal.-->
[[File:ANA 787s grounded at HND.jpg|thumb|Three 787s of All Nippon Airways sit grounded at [[Haneda Airport|Tokyo Haneda International Airport]] in late January 2013.]]

The Boeing 787 has been involved in seven [[aviation accidents and incidents|accidents and incidents]] {{as of|2023|11|df=US|lc=y}}, with zero fatalities and no [[Hull loss|hull losses]].<ref name="ASNstatistics">{{cite web |title=Boeing 787 Accident Statistics |url=https://aviation-safety.net/database/types/Boeing-787/statistics |access-date=January 1, 2024 |publisher=Aviation Safety Network}}</ref><ref name="ASNdatabase">{{cite web |title=Boeing 787 occurrences |url=http://aviation-safety.net/database/types/Boeing-787/database |access-date=January 1, 2024 |publisher=[[Aviation Safety Network]]}}</ref>

===Operational problems===
A Japan Airlines (JAL) 787 experienced a fuel leak on January 8, 2013, and its flight from Boston was canceled.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-japan-airlines-idUKBRE9070T320130109 |title=Two Boeing 787 incidents raise concerns about jet |date=January 9, 2013 |work=[[Reuters]] |access-date=January 9, 2013}}</ref>  On January 9, [[United Airlines]] reported a problem in one of its six 787s with the wiring near the main batteries. Soon, the U.S. [[National Transportation Safety Board]] opened a safety probe.<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323482504578229800636659218 |title=U.S. Opens Dreamliner Safety Probe |date=January 9, 2013 |work=[[The Wall Street Journal]] |access-date=January 9, 2013}}</ref> Fuel leaks also occurred on January 11, 2013<ref>{{cite news |title=U.S. to review Dreamliner amid two more mishaps in Japan |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-dreamliner-problems-cracked-window-oil-leak-amon-latest-787-woes-20130111,0,7434634.story |work=Chicago Tribune |access-date=January 11, 2013 |date=January 11, 2013 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130215171709/http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-11/business/chi-dreamliner-problems-cracked-window-oil-leak-amon-latest-787-woes-20130111_1_dreamliners-japanese-carrier-orders-review |archive-date=February 15, 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> and on January 13, 2013, at [[Narita International Airport]] outside [[Tokyo]]. The aircraft reportedly was the same one that had a fuel leak on January 8.<ref>{{cite news|title=Japan Airlines Reports New Fuel Leak in Boeing 787 |url=https://news.yahoo.com/japan-airlines-reports-fuel-leak-boeing-787-145953197--finance.html |agency=Associated Press |work=Yahoo! News |date= January 14, 2013 |access-date= September 27, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=JAL's grounded Dreamliner jet leaks fuel in tests |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-dreamliner-test-idUSBRE90C09520130113 |work=Reuters |date=January 13, 2013 |access-date=January 13, 2013 |archive-date=February 16, 2013 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130216173859/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/13/us-boeing-dreamliner-test-idUSBRE90C09520130113 |url-status=live}}</ref> Japan's transport ministry also launched an investigation.<ref>{{cite news|last=Mukai |first=Anna |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-15/japan-sets-up-team-to-probe-dreamliner-fuel-leak-as-faa-reviews.html |title=Japan to Investigate Boeing 787 Fuel Leak as FAA Reviews |publisher=Bloomberg |date=January 15, 2013 |access-date=January 20, 2013}}</ref>

On January 11, 2013, the FAA completed a comprehensive review of the 787's critical systems including the design, manufacture, and assembly. The Department of Transportation secretary [[Ray LaHood]] stated the administration was "looking for the root causes" behind the recent issues. The head of the FAA, Michael Huerta, said that so far nothing found "suggests [the 787] is not safe."<ref>{{cite news|title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner to be investigated by US authorities |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jan/11/boeing-787-dreamliner-us-investigation |work=The Guardian |access-date=January 11, 2013 |location=London |first=Gwyn |last=Topham |date=January 11, 2013}}</ref>

On July 12, 2013, a fire started on an empty [[Ethiopian Airlines]] 787 parked at [[Heathrow Airport]] before it was extinguished by the airport fire and rescue service. No injuries were reported.<ref name=BBC_Ethiopian_fire>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23294760 |title= Heathrow shut after Boeing Dreamliner 787 fire |work= BBC News |date=July 12, 2013 |access-date=July 12, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_07_12_2013_p0-596731.xml |title= Ethiopian 787 In Heathrow Fire Incident |work= Aviation Week |date= July 12, 2013 |access-date= July 12, 2013 |archive-date= November 3, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131103110819/http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_07_12_2013_p0-596731.xml |url-status= dead }}</ref> The fire caused extensive heat damage to the aircraft.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/other/310829-fire-on-dreamliner-not-seen-as-linked-to-recent-battery-troubles |last=Goad |first=Ben |title=British investigators: No evidence Dreamliner fire related to batteries |newspaper=The Hill |date=July 13, 2013 |access-date=July 13, 2013}}</ref>  The FAA and NTSB sent representatives to assist in the investigation.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/12/world/europe/uk-heathrow-airplane-fire/ |last=Martinez |first=Michael |title=Fire, 'technical issue' on two Dreamliners raise new worries |publisher=CNN |date= July 12, 2013 |access-date=July 12, 2013}}</ref> The initial investigation found no direct link with the aircraft's main batteries.<ref name="Batteries 'not linked' to 787 fire">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23302722 |title=Batteries 'not linked' to 787 fire |publisher=BBC |date=July 13, 2013 |access-date=July 13, 2013}}</ref> Further investigations indicated that the fire was due to lithium-manganese dioxide batteries powering an [[emergency locator transmitter]] (ELT).<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/18/heathrow-fire-boeing-dreamliner-battery "Heathrow fire on Boeing Dreamliner 'started in battery component'"]. Guardian newspaper, July 18, 2013.</ref> The UK [[Air Accidents Investigation Branch]] (AAIB) issued a special bulletin on July 18, 2013, requesting the US FAA ensure that the locator is removed or disconnected in Boeing 787s and to review the safety of lithium battery-powered ELT systems in other aircraft types.<ref>{{cite web |title=Special Bulletin S5/2013 – Boeing 787, ET-AOP |publisher=[[Air Accidents Investigation Branch]] |date=July 18, 2013 |url=http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/S5-2013%20ET-AOP.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130804234614/http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=%2FS5-2013%20ET-AOP.pdf |archive-date=August 4, 2013 |url-status=dead |df=mdy |access-date=May 7, 2017}}</ref> On August 19, 2015, the Associated Press reported that the fire was started by a short circuit caused by crossed wires located under the battery. The Air Accidents Investigation Branch's investigators recommended that "the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, together with similar bodies in Europe and Canada, should conduct a review of equipment powered by lithium metal batteries to ensure they have 'an acceptable level of circuit protection.'"<ref>{{cite news|title=UK: 2013 Dreamliner fire caused by crossed wires |url=https://news.yahoo.com/uk-2013-dreamliner-fire-caused-crossed-wires-033215256.html|agency=Associated Press|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305145155/http://news.yahoo.com/uk-2013-dreamliner-fire-caused-crossed-wires-033215256.html|archive-date=March 5, 2016|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

On July 26, 2013, ANA said it had found wiring damage on two 787 locator beacons. United Airlines also reported that it had found a pinched wire in one 787 locator beacon.<ref>[http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-boeing-dreamliner-qatar-idUKBRE96P12C20130727 "Qatar grounds a 787 as glitches pile up on Boeing jet"]. Reuters, July 27, 2013.</ref>  On August 14, 2013, the media reported a fire extinguisher fault affecting three ANA airplanes, which caused the fire extinguishers to discharge into the opposite engine from the one requested.<ref name="Fire Extinguisher Fault">{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-14/ana-finds-wiring-defects-in-dreamliners-as-jal-plane-scraps-trip.html |title=Boeing 787 Hit by Setback With Fire-Extinguisher Wiring Flaw |author1=Kiyotaka Matsuda |author2=Robert Wall |name-list-style=amp |work=Bloomberg |date= August 14, 2013 |access-date= August 16, 2013}}</ref> The fault was caused by a supplier assembly error.<ref>{{cite news |title=Boeing Traces Improperly Assembled Engine-Fire Extinguishers to Supplier's Bottles |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324823804579015742142122488 |work=The Wall Street Journal |author= Ostrower, Jon |date= August 16, 2013 |access-date= August 16, 2013}}</ref>

On September 28, 2013, [[Norwegian Long Haul]] decided to take one of its two 787s in its fleet at the time out of service after the two aircraft broke down on more than six occasions in September.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-norwegian-dreamliner-idUSBRE98R06E20130928 |title=Norwegian Air takes Dreamliner out of service after breakdowns |last=Koranyi |first=Balazs |author2=Lawson, Hugh |date=September 28, 2013 |work=Reuters |access-date=September 28, 2013 |archive-date=September 28, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928120415/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/28/us-boeing-norwegian-dreamliner-idUSBRE98R06E20130928 |url-status=live}}</ref> The company planned to lease an [[Airbus A340]] for its long-haul operations while the 787 is returned to Boeing for repair.<ref>[https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/norwegian-airline-returns-new-dreamliner-after-repeated-breakdowns-1.1543916 Norwegian airline returns new Dreamliner after repeated breakdowns]. ''The Irish Times''</ref>{{clarify|Vague issue(s) involving 2–3 aircraft several years ago. This does not seem significant long term as written.|date=May 2019}}

On November 22, 2013, Boeing issued an advisory to airlines using [[General Electric GEnx]] engines on 787 and 747-8 aircraft to avoid flying near high-level [[thunderstorms]] due to an increased risk of icing on the engines. The problem was caused by a buildup of ice crystals just behind the main fan causing a brief loss of thrust on six occasions.<ref>"[https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-ge-notify-airlines-engine-094401702.html Boeing warns of engine icing risk on 747-8s, Dreamliners]" Yahoo! Finance (October 15, 2013). Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref>

On January 21, 2014, a [[Norwegian Air Shuttle]] 787 experienced a fuel leak which caused a 19-hour delay to a flight from Bangkok to Oslo.<ref name="businessweek1">[http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-01-22/why-is-the-787-dreamliner-such-a-hassle-for-norwegian-air Boeing 787 Dreamliners Disrupt Norwegian Air Shuttle's Operations] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140124034926/http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-01-22/why-is-the-787-dreamliner-such-a-hassle-for-norwegian-air |date=January 24, 2014}}. Businessweek (January 22, 2014). Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref> The leak became known to pilots only after it was pointed out by concerned passengers.<ref>[http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/01/21/Passengers-alert-planes-cabin-crew-to-fuel-leaking-from-wing/UPI-43731390321026/?spt=rln&or=1 Bangkok to Oslo flight halted after fuel seen leaking from wing]. UPI.com. Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref> It was found later that a faulty valve was responsible.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/boeing787-norwegian-idUSL2N0KW02320140122 UPDATE 1-Fuel leak on Boeing 787 delays Norwegian Air flight] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150928172231/http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/22/boeing787-norwegian-idUSL2N0KW02320140122 |date=September 28, 2015}}. Reuters (January 21, 2014). Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref> This fuel leak is one of numerous problems experienced by Norwegian Air Shuttle's 787 fleet.<ref name="businessweek1"/> Mike Fleming, Boeing's vice president for 787 support and services, subsequently met with executives of Norwegian Air Shuttle and expressed Boeing's commitment to improving the 787's dispatch reliability, "we're not satisfied with where the airplane is today, flying at a fleet average of 98 percent...The 777 today flies at 99.4 percent...and that's the benchmark that the 787 needs to attain."<ref>Koranyi, Balazs. (January 24, 2014) [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-dreamliner-idUSBREA0N0F320140124 Boeing says Dreamliner reliability 'better, but not satisfactory'] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150928194205/http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/24/us-boeing-dreamliner-idUSBREA0N0F320140124 |date=September 28, 2015}}. Reuters. Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref><ref>Treloar, Stephen. (January 24, 2014) [http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2022745412_boeingdreamlinerxml.html 787 Dreamliner's reliability needs to improve further, Boeing exec says |Business & Technology]. The Seattle Times. Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref>

In March 2016 the FAA accelerated the release of an airworthiness directive in response to reports indicating that in certain weather conditions "erroneous low airspeed may be displayed..." There was concern "abrupt pilot control inputs in this condition could exceed the structural capability of the airplane."  Pilots were told not to apply "large, abrupt control column inputs" in the event of an "unrealistic" drop in displayed airspeed.<ref>{{cite web |author1=STEPHEN TRIMBLE |title=Boeing, FAA warn 787 pilots of bad airspeed data |url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-faa-warn-787-pilots-of-bad-airspeed-data-423735/ |website=Flightglobal.com |date=March 31, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author1=Michael Kaszycki |title=Federal Aviation Administration,Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes |url=http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf/0/024d507c0b79612986257f88004e8ecd/$FILE/2016-07-10.pdf |website=rgl.faa.gov}}</ref>

On April 22, 2016, the FAA issued an airworthiness directive following a January 29 incident in which a [[General Electric GEnx]]-1B PIP2 engine suffered damage and non-restartable power loss while flying at an altitude of 20,000 feet. The damage is thought to have been caused by a fan imbalance resulting from fan ice shedding.<ref>{{cite web |author1=LAURA LORENZETTI |title=FAA Says Boeing 787 Dreamliners Have 'Urgent Safety Issue' |url=http://fortune.com/2016/04/25/boeing-dreamliner-safety-issue/ |website=Fortune }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Federal Aviation Administration-14 CFR Part 39 |url=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/04/23/2016-08-12.pdf |website=i2.cdn.turner.com}}</ref>

On June 18, 2021, a British Airways 787-8, registration G-ZBJB, spontaneously suffered a [[nose gear]] collapse at London Heathrow Airport while stationary at Stand 583. Photographs circulated after the incident showed the aircraft resting on its nose, with some damage to its nose gear door.<ref>{{cite web|last=Noëth|first=Bart|date=2021-06-18|title=British Airways Boeing 787-8 suffers nose gear collapse at London Heathrow |url=https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/international-airlines-group-iag/british-airways/boeing-787-8-suffers-nose-gear-collapse-at-stand-583-london-heathrow/|access-date=2021-06-18|website=Aviation24.be|language=en-GB}}</ref> No passengers were on board, and the flight was in the process of being loaded with cargo for a cargo-only flight from Heathrow to Frankfurt Airport at the time of the incident. The incident is currently being investigated by the UK's [[Air Accidents Investigation Branch]] (AAIB).<ref>{{cite web|last=Fleming|first=Eleanor|date=2021-06-18|title=Aviation authority to investigate BA plane nose gear collapse |url=https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/aaib-investigate-british-airways-787-20851986|access-date=2021-06-18|website=SurreyLive}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Schlappig|first1=Ben|date=2021-06-18|title=British Airways 787 "Collapses" At Heathrow |url=https://onemileatatime.com/news/british-airways-787-collapses/|access-date=2021-06-18|website=One Mile at a Time|language=en-US}}</ref>

===Lithium-ion battery problems===
{{Main|Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems}}
[[File:Mike Bauer 787 010813.JPG|thumb|The Aft Electronics Bay that held the JAL 787 battery that caught fire]]
[[File:Boeing Dreamliner battery original and damaged.jpg|thumb|Japan Airlines 787 battery comparison; Left: typical original battery. Right: damaged battery.]]

On January 16, 2013, [[All Nippon Airways]] Flight NH-692, en route from [[Yamaguchi Ube Airport]] to [[Tokyo Haneda]], had a battery problem warning followed by a burning smell while climbing from Ube about {{convert|35|nmi}} west of [[Takamatsu, Japan]]. The aircraft diverted to Takamatsu and was evacuated via the slides; three passengers received minor injuries during the evacuation. Inspection revealed a battery fire. A similar incident in a parked [[Japan Airlines]] 787 at [[Boston, Massachusetts|Boston]]'s [[Logan International Airport]] within the same week led the [[Federal Aviation Administration]] to ground all 787s.<ref name="avherald1">{{cite web |url=http://avherald.com/h?article=45c377c5&opt=0 |title=Accident: ANA B788 near Takamatsu on January 16, 2013, battery problem and burning smell on board |work=Aviation Herald |access-date= February 8, 2013}}</ref> On January 16, 2013, both major Japanese airlines ANA and JAL voluntarily grounded their fleets of 787s after multiple incidents involving different 787s, including emergency landings. At the time, these two carriers operated 24 of the 50 787s delivered.<ref>{{cite news |title=Japanese airlines ground Boeing 787s after emergency landing |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-ana-idUSBRE90F01820130116 |work=Reuters |date=January 16, 2013 |access-date=January 16, 2013 |archive-date=November 15, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151115005809/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/16/us-boeing-ana-idUSBRE90F01820130116 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=787 emergency landing: Japan grounds entire Boeing Dreamliner fleet |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jan/16/787-emergency-landing-grounds-787 |work=The Guardian |date= January 16, 2013 |access-date= January 16, 2013 |location=London |first=Justin |last=McCurry}}</ref>  The grounding reportedly cost ANA some 9&nbsp;billion yen (US$93 million) in lost sales.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-30/boeing-dreamliner-grounding-to-hurt-ana-japan-airlines-sales.html |title=Boeing Dreamliner Grounding Hurts ANA, Japan Airlines Sales |last1=Cooper |first1= Chris |last2=Matsuda |first2= Kiyotaka |date=May 1, 2013 |work= [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |access-date=May 27, 2013 |location=Tokyo}}</ref>

On January 16, 2013, the FAA issued an [[emergency airworthiness directive]] ordering all American-based airlines to ground their Boeing 787s until yet-to-be-determined modifications were made to the electrical system to reduce the risk of the battery overheating or catching fire.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14233 |title= Press Release |publisher=Federal Aviation Administration |date=January 16, 2013 |access-date=January 17, 2013}}</ref> This was the first time that the FAA had grounded an airliner type<!--type or model, not individual plane--> since 1979.<ref name=bbcBat1>{{cite news|title=Dreamliner: Boeing 787 planes grounded on safety fears |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21054089 |work= News |publisher=BBC |access-date=January 17, 2013 |date=January 17, 2013}}</ref>  Industry experts disagreed on consequences of the grounding: Airbus was confident that Boeing would resolve the issue<ref>{{cite news |format= video |url= https://www.bloomberg.com/video/airbus-ceo-confident-boeing-will-find-fix-for-787-b1zkhgggTB6DE6nv47gJNQ.html |title= Airbus CEO 'Confident' Boeing Will Find Fix for 787 |newspaper= [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |date= January 17, 2013}}</ref> and that no airlines will switch plane type,<ref>{{cite news |first1= Robert |last1= Wall |first2= Andrea |last2= Rothman|title=Airbus Says A350 Design Is 'Lower Risk' Than Troubled 787 |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-17/airbus-says-a350-design-lower-risk-than-troubled-boeing-787.html |work= [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |url-access=subscription |access-date=January 17, 2013 |date= January 17, 2013|quote= 'I don't believe that anyone's going to switch from one airplane type to another because there's a maintenance issue,' Leahy said. 'Boeing will get this sorted out.' <!--no archive-->}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.thestar.com/business/2013/01/17/boeing_787_dreamliner_design_riskier_than_our_plane_airbus.html|title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner design riskier than our plane: Airbus &#124; The Star|newspaper=The Toronto Star|date=January 17, 2013}}</ref><!--Airbus is very much an industry expert entity, and appears neutral on this issue. If Airbus said something negative, that would be non-NPOV. But they don't.--> while other experts saw the problem as "costly"<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.bloomberg.com/video/-big-cost-seen-for-boeing-dreamliner-grounding-GidF~fWxREqPxG4JCh3dKw.html |title= 'Big Cost' Seen for Boeing Dreamliner Grounding |newspaper= [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]] |date= January 17, 2013}}</ref> and "could take upwards of a year".<ref>{{cite news |last= White |first= Martha C |url= http://business.time.com/2013/01/17/is-the-dreamliner-becoming-a-financial-nightmare-for-boeing/ |title= Is the Dreamliner Becoming a Financial Nightmare for Boeing? |newspaper= [[Time (magazine)|Time]] |date= January 17, 2013}}</ref>

The FAA also conducted an extensive review of the 787's critical systems. The focus of the review was on the safety of the [[Lithium-ion battery#Safety|lithium-ion batteries]]<ref name=bbcBat1/> made of [[lithium cobalt oxide]] (LiCoO<sub>2</sub>). The 787 battery contract was signed in 2005,<ref name=gs2005/> when this was the only type of lithium aerospace battery available, but since then newer and safer<ref>{{cite web |last=Dudley |first=Brier |title=Lithium-ion batteries pack a lot of energy — and challenges |url=http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020149254_787batteryexplainerxml.html |work=The Seattle Times|access-date=January 24, 2013|date=January 17, 2013 |quote=iron phosphate "has been known to sort of be safer."}}</ref> types (such as [[Lithium iron phosphate battery|LiFePO<sub>4</sub>]]), which provide less reaction energy with [[Lithium iron phosphate battery#Safety|virtually no cobalt content]] to avoid cobalt's [[Thermal runaway#Batteries|thermal runaway]] characteristic, have become available.<ref name=tuCo>{{cite magazine|last=Dalløkken|first=Per Erlien|title=Her er Dreamliner-problemet|url=http://www.tu.no/industri/2013/01/17/her-er-dreamliner-problemet|magazine=[[Teknisk Ukeblad]]|access-date=January 17, 2013|language=no|date=January 17, 2013|archive-date=January 16, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160116142356/http://www.tu.no/industri/2013/01/17/her-er-dreamliner-problemet|url-status=dead}} [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=no&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tu.no%2Findustri%2F2013%2F01%2F17%2Fher-er-dreamliner-problemet English translation]</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Energy storage technologies – Lithium |url=http://www.securaplane.com/products/energy-storage-technologies |publisher=[[Meggitt|Securaplane]] |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref> FAA approved a 787 battery in 2007 with nine "special conditions".<ref name=faa9>{{cite web |type= PDF |title=Special Conditions: Boeing Model 787-8 Airplane; Lithium Ion Battery Installation |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2007-10-11/pdf/E7-19980.pdf|publisher=[[FAA]] / [[Federal Register]] |access-date= January 30, 2013|date=October 11, 2007|quote=NM375 Special Conditions No. 25–359–SC}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first1= Alwyn |last1= Scott |first2= Mari |last2= Saito |title=FAA approval of Boeing 787 battery under scrutiny |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/faa-approval-boeing-787-battery-under-scrutiny-1C8087461 |work= [[NBC News]] |agency= [[Reuters]] |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref>  A battery approved by FAA<!--unclear if it is the same battery as the one approved in 2007--> (through Mobile Power Solutions) was made by Rose Electronics using Kokam cells;<ref name= supIv>{{cite web |last1= Supko |last2= Iverson|title=Li battery UN test report applicability |url=http://cdn.nextgov.com/media/gbc/docs/pdfs_edit/012213bb1b.pdf |publisher= nextgov.com|access-date=January 23, 2013|year=2011}}</ref> the batteries installed in the 787 are made by Yuasa.<ref name= meggitt />

On January 20, the NTSB declared that overvoltage was not the cause of the Boston incident, as voltage did not exceed the battery limit of 32 V,<ref>{{cite web |last=Nantel |first=Kelly |title=NTSB Provides Third Investigative Update on Boeing 787 Battery Fire in Boston |url=https://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130120.html |publisher=[[NTSB]] |date=January 20, 2013 |access-date=January 21, 2013}}</ref> and the charging unit passed tests. The battery had signs of [[short circuit]]ing and thermal runaway.<ref>{{cite web |title= Press Release |url=https://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130124.html |publisher= [[NTSB]] |date=January 26, 2013 |access-date=January 24, 2013}}</ref> Despite this, by January 24, the NTSB had not yet pinpointed the cause of the Boston fire; the FAA would not allow U.S.-based 787s to fly again until the problem was found and corrected. In a press briefing that day, NTSB Chairwoman [[Deborah Hersman]] said that the NTSB had found evidence of failure of multiple safety systems designed to prevent these battery problems, and stated that fire must never happen on an airplane.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/business/the-ntsb-sees-lengthy-inquiry-into-787-dreamliner.html |title=Protracted Fire Inquiry Keeping 787 on Ground |first1=Matthew |last1= Weld |first2= Jad |last2= Mouwad |work= The New York Times |date=January 25, 2013 |access-date=January 26, 2013}}</ref>

The [[Japan Transport Safety Board]] (JTSB) said on January 23 that the battery in ANA jets in Japan reached a maximum voltage of 31 V (below the 32 V limit like the Boston JAL 787), but had a sudden unexplained voltage drop<ref name=mitra>{{cite web |last=Mitra-Thakur |first=Sofia |title=Japan says 787 battery was not overcharged |url=http://eandt.theiet.org/news/2013/jan/japan-plane.cfm |work=[[Engineering & Technology]] |date=January 23, 2013 |access-date=January 23, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130125005653/http://eandt.theiet.org/news/2013/jan/japan-plane.cfm |archive-date=January 25, 2013 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> to near zero.<ref name=concern/> All cells had signs of thermal damage prior to runaway.<ref>{{cite web |last=Hradecky|first=Simon|title=ANA B788 near Takamatsu on January 16, 2013, battery problem and burning smell on board |url= http://avherald.com/h?article=45c377c5 |work= Aviation Herald |access-date=February 6, 2013|date=February 5, 2013}}</ref> ANA and JAL had replaced several 787 batteries before the mishaps.<ref name=concern>{{cite news |first1= Christopher |last1= Drew |first2= Hiroko |last2= Tabuchi |author2-link=Hiroko Tabuchi |first3= Jad |last3= Mouawad |title=Boeing 787 Battery Was a Concern Before Failure |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/business/boeing-aware-of-battery-ills-before-the-fires.html |work= The New York Times|access-date= January 30, 2013|date=January 29, 2013}}</ref>  {{as of|2013|January|29|df=US}}, JTSB approved the Yuasa factory [[quality control]]<ref>{{cite news |last= Tabuchi |first=Hiroko |author-link=Hiroko Tabuchi |title=No Quality Problems Found at Battery Maker for 787 |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/business/global/boeing-787-batteries-pass-inspection-in-japan.html |work= The New York Times|access-date= January 30, 2013|date=January 28, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|first1=Chris |last1=Cooper |first2=Kiyotaka |last2=Matsuda |title=GS Yuasa Shares Surge as Japan Ends Company Inspections |url=http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-01-27/gs-yuasa-shares-surge-as-japan-ends-probe-of-787-battery-maker |work=[[Bloomberg BusinessWeek]] |access-date=January 29, 2013 |date=January 28, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140823220152/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-01-27/gs-yuasa-shares-surge-as-japan-ends-probe-of-787-battery-maker |archive-date=August 23, 2014 |df=mdy}}</ref> while the NTSB examined the Boston battery for defects.<ref>{{cite web|last=Knudson|first=Peter|title=NTSB issues sixth update on JAL Boeing 787 battery fire investigation |url=https://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130129b.html|publisher=[[NTSB]]|access-date=January 29, 2013|date=January 29, 2013}}</ref> The failure rate, with two major battery thermal runaway events in 100,000 flight hours, was much higher than the rate of one in 10 million flight hours predicted by Boeing.<ref name="avherald1" />

The only American airline that operated the Dreamliner at the time was United Airlines, which had six.<ref>{{cite web |title=FAA grounding all Boeing 787s |url=http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/faa-grounding-all-boeing-787s/nTyfB/ |publisher=KIRO TV |access-date=January 16, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130119022332/http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/faa-grounding-all-boeing-787s/nTyfB/ |archive-date=January 19, 2013 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Chile's [[Directorate General of Civil Aviation (Chile)|Directorate General of Civil Aviation]] (DGAC) grounded LAN Airlines' three 787s.<ref>{{cite news|title=LAN suspende de forma temporal la operación de flota Boeing 787 Dreamliner|url=http://www.latercera.com/noticia/negocios/2013/01/655-504140-9-lan-suspende-de-forma-temporal-la-operacion-de-flota-boeing-787-dreamliner.shtml|access-date=January 16, 2013|newspaper=La Tercera|date=January 16, 2013|archive-date=January 17, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130117172340/http://www.latercera.com/noticia/negocios/2013/01/655-504140-9-lan-suspende-de-forma-temporal-la-operacion-de-flota-boeing-787-dreamliner.shtml|url-status=dead}}</ref> The Indian [[Directorate General of Civil Aviation (India)|Directorate General of Civil Aviation]] (DGCA) directed Air India to ground its six Dreamliners. The Japanese Transport Ministry made the ANA and JAL groundings official and indefinite following the FAA announcement.<ref name="DGCA India">{{cite news |title= DGCA directs Air India to ground all six Boeing Dreamliners on safety concerns |url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/dgca-directs-air-india-to-ground-all-six-boeing-dreamliners-on-safety-concerns/articleshow/18056887.cms |access-date= January 17, 2013 |newspaper=The Economic Times |date=January 17, 2013}}</ref> The [[European Aviation Safety Agency]] also followed the FAA's advice and grounded the only two European 787s operated by [[LOT Polish Airlines]].<ref>{{cite news |title=European safety agency to ground 787 in line with FAA |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/boeing-787-easa-idUSL6N0AM0E020130117 |work=Reuters |date=January 16, 2013 |access-date=January 17, 2013 |archive-date=March 20, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130320172357/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/17/boeing-787-easa-idUSL6N0AM0E020130117 |url-status=live}}</ref> Qatar Airways grounded their five Dreamliners.<ref>{{cite news|title=Qatar Airways grounds Boeing Dreamliner fleet |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/qatar-boeing-idUSL6N0AM64J20130117|work=Reuters|date=January 17, 2013|access-date=January 17, 2013|archive-date=March 20, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130320172301/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/17/qatar-boeing-idUSL6N0AM64J20130117|url-status=live}}</ref> Ethiopian Airlines was the final operator to temporarily ground its four Dreamliners.<ref name= Reuters_others_ground/>  By January 17, 2013, all 50 of the aircraft delivered to date had been grounded.<ref name=Reuters_others_ground>{{cite news |title= U.S., others ground Boeing Dreamliner indefinitely |url= https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-dreamliner-idUSBRE90F1N820130117 |work= Reuters |date= January 16, 2013 |access-date= January 17, 2013 |archive-date= January 20, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130120121411/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/17/us-boeing-dreamliner-idUSBRE90F1N820130117 |url-status= live}}</ref><ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21041265 Boeing 787 Dreamliner: The impact of safety concerns]. BBC News. January 17, 2013. Retrieved January 17, 2013.</ref> On January 18, Boeing halted 787 deliveries until the battery problem was resolved.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21095056 |work=BBC News |title= Dreamliner crisis: Boeing halts 787 jet deliveries |location= UK |date=January 1, 1970 |access-date=January 20, 2013}}</ref>

On February 7, 2013, the FAA gave approval for Boeing to conduct 787 test flights to gather additional data.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/faa-approves-test-flights-for-boeing-787/ |title=FAA approves test flights for Boeing 787 |work= [[The Seattle Times]] |date= February 7, 2013 |access-date= September 27, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_02_07_2013_p0-546746.xml |title= FAA Gives All Clear For 787 Test Flights |work= Aviation Week |date= February 7, 2013 |last= Norris |first= Guy |access-date= February 9, 2013 |archive-date= May 20, 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130520162137/http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_02_07_2013_p0-546746.xml |url-status= dead }}</ref>  In February 2013, FAA oversight of the 787's 2007 safety approval and certification was under scrutiny.<ref>{{cite news |date=February 22, 2013 |url=http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/boeing-787-s-battery-woes-put-us-approval-under-scrutiny-113012300143_1.html |title=Boeing 787's battery woes put US approval under scrutiny |work=Business Standard |access-date=February 22, 2013}}</ref> On March 7, 2013, the NTSB released an interim factual report about the Boston battery fire on January 7, 2013. The investigation<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AIR1401.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141226193538/https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AIR1401.aspx |archive-date=2014-12-26 |title=Auxiliary Power Unit Battery Fire Japan Airlines Boeing 787-8, JA829J |website=National Transportation Safety Board}}</ref> stated that "heavy smoke and fire coming from the front of the [[Auxiliary power unit|APU]] battery case." Firefighters "tried fire extinguishing, but smoke and flame (flame size about 3 inches) did not stop".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/DCA13IA037-interim-factual-report.pdf |title= Interim factual report |website=National Transportation Safety Board |date= March 7, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url= http://business.time.com/2013/03/07/boeing-787-battery-fire-was-difficult-to-control/ |title= NTSB Report Details: Boeing 787 Battery Fire Was Difficult to Control |newspaper= Time |date= March 7, 2013 |url-status= dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130309200816/http://business.time.com/2013/03/07/boeing-787-battery-fire-was-difficult-to-control/ |archive-date=March 9, 2013}}</ref>

Boeing completed its final tests on a revised battery design on April 5, 2013.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.frequentbusinesstraveler.com/2013/04/airlines-prepare-to-relaunch-their-dreamliners-ana-qatar-united-schedule-first-flights/ |title=Airlines Prepare to Relaunch Their Dreamliners: ANA, Qatar, United Schedule First Flights |newspaper= Frequent Business Traveler}}</ref>  The FAA approved Boeing's revised battery design with three additional, overlapping protection methods on April 19, 2013.<ref name="Drew-2013" /> The FAA published a directive on April 25 to provide instructions for retrofitting battery hardware before the 787s could return to flight.<ref>{{cite web |last= Yeo |first= Ghim-Lay |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-approves-787-battery-changes-384924/ |title=FAA approves 787 battery changes |work= Flight International |date= April 19, 2013 |access-date= April 19, 2013}}</ref><ref name=BBC_787_returns/> The repairs were expected to be completed in weeks.<ref name="Drew-2013">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/20/business/faa-endorses-boeing-remedy-for-787-battery.html |work= The New York Times |title=Boeing Fix for Battery Is Approved by FAA |date= April 20, 2013 |first1=Christopher |last1=Drew |first2=Jad |last2=Mouawad}}</ref> Following the FAA approval in the U.S. effective April 26,<ref name="gates">{{cite web |last=Gates |first=Dominic |title=Grounding order formally lifted for Boeing 787 |url=http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/apr/25/grounding-order-formally-lifted-boeing-787/ |work= [[The Seattle Times]]/The Columbian |access-date=May 1, 2013}}</ref> Japan approved resumption of Boeing 787 flights in the country on April 26, 2013.<ref>{{cite news |title= Japan OKs 787s to fly again |url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/travel/japan-dreamliner-flights/ |publisher= CNN |date= April 26, 2013 |access-date= April 26, 2013}}</ref> On April 27, 2013, Ethiopian Airlines took a 787 on the model's first commercial flight after battery system modifications.<ref name=BBC_787_returns>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22315317 |title= Boeing 787 Dreamliner returns to service in Ethiopia flight |work= BBC News |date= April 27, 2013}}</ref><ref name="gates" />

On January 14, 2014, a battery in a JAL 787 emitted smoke from the battery's protection exhaust while the aircraft was undergoing pre-flight maintenance at [[Narita International Airport|Tokyo Narita Airport]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25737515 |title=Boeing 787 aircraft grounded after battery problem in Japan |work=BBC News |date= January 14, 2014 |access-date= January 16, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/no-damage-to-jal-787-in-battery-incident-394850/ |title=No damage to JAL 787 in battery incident |work=Flight International |date= January 15, 2013 |access-date= January 16, 2014}}</ref> The battery partially melted in the incident;<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/01/16/us_safety_authorities_on_boeings_case_787_batteries_fail/|title=Boeing bent over for new probe as 787 batteries vent fluid, start to MELT|first=Iain|last=Thomson|date=January 16, 2014|website=www.theregister.co.uk}}</ref> one of its eight [[lithium]]-ion cells had its relief port vent and fluid sprayed inside the battery's container.<ref>Ostrower, John, "JAL reports malfunction in battery on Boeing 787", ''The Wall Street Journal'', January 15, 2014, p. B1.</ref> It was later reported that the battery may have reached a temperature as high as {{cvt|660|C|F|order=flip}}, and that Boeing did not understand the root cause of the failure.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/10654333/Temperature-in-failed-Dreamliner-battery-hit-660-Celsius.html Temperature in failed Dreamliner battery hit 660 Celsius]. ''The Daily Telegraph''. Retrieved March 13, 2014.</ref>

The NTSB criticized the FAA, Boeing, and battery manufacturers for the faults in a 2014 report.<ref name=knud>Knudson, Peter. "[https://www.ntsb.gov/news/2014/141201.html NTSB Recommends Process Improvements for Certifying Lithium-ion Batteries as it Concludes its Investigation of the 787 Boston Battery Fire Incident]" ''[[NTSB]]'', December 1, 2014. Retrieved December 2, 2014.</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Hemmerdinger |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-faults-boeing-faa-and-contractors-for-787-battery-406624/ |title=NTSB faults Boeing, FAA and contractors for 787 battery fire |work=[[Flightglobal]] |date=December 1, 2014 |access-date=December 2, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141202232521/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-faults-boeing-faa-and-contractors-for-787-battery-406624/ |archive-date=December 2, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Hemmerdinger |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/temperature-in-787-battery-cells-spikes-in-cold-conditions-ntsb-406629/ |title=Temperature in 787 battery cells spikes in cold conditions: NTSB |work=[[Flightglobal]] |date=December 1, 2014 |access-date=December 2, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141202233105/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/temperature-in-787-battery-cells-spikes-in-cold-conditions-ntsb-406629/ |archive-date=December 2, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Hemmerdinger |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-787-battery-report-details-quality-concerns-at-gs-406632/ |title=NTSB 787 battery report details quality concerns at GS Yuasa |work=[[Flightglobal]] |date=December 1, 2014 |access-date=December 2, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141202233953/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-787-battery-report-details-quality-concerns-at-gs-406632/ |archive-date=December 2, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> It also criticized the [[General Electric|GE]]-made flight data and cockpit voice recorder in the same report.<ref>{{cite news |last=Hemmerdinger |first=Jon |url=http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-details-issues-with-787-flight-and-data-recorder-406665/ |title=NTSB details issues with 787 flight and data recorder |work=[[Flightglobal]] |date=December 2, 2014 |access-date=December 2, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141202233409/http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ntsb-details-issues-with-787-flight-and-data-recorder-406665/ |archive-date=December 2, 2014 |url-status=live}}</ref> The [[housing (engineering)|enclosure]] Boeing added is {{cvt|185|lb}} heavier, negating the lighter battery potential.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/lithium-ion-batteries-prove-value-a350 |title= Lithium-ion Batteries Prove Value On A350 |date= June 27, 2017 |author= Thierry Dubois |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology}}</ref>

==Aircraft on display==
[[File:FLIGHT OF DREAMS4.jpg|thumb|N787BA, the first prototype aircraft, on display in the "Flight of Dreams" building at [[Chubu Centrair Airport]], [[Nagoya]]]]
All three prototype 787-8s are preserved in museums.
* N787BA (ZA001) – [[Chubu Centrair Airport]] in [[Nagoya, Japan]]—first prototype aircraft<ref>{{cite web|title=Boeing donates the first 787-8 prototype (N787BA, ZA001) to Nagoya, Japan |date=June 22, 2015 |url=http://worldairlinenews.com/2015/06/22/boeing-donates-the-first-787-8-prototype-n787ba-za001-to-nagoya-japan |publisher=World Airline News|access-date=January 7, 2016}}</ref>
* N787EX (ZA002) – [[Pima Air & Space Museum]] in [[Tucson, Arizona]], United States—second prototype aircraft<ref>{{cite web |title=DREAMLINER |url=http://pimaair.org/aircraft-by-name/item/787-8-dreamliner |publisher=Pima Air & Space Museum |access-date=January 7, 2016 |archive-date=January 19, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160119075934/http://www.pimaair.org/aircraft-by-name/item/787-8-dreamliner |url-status=dead }}</ref>
* N787BX (ZA003) – [[Museum of Flight]] in [[Seattle, Washington]], United States—third prototype aircraft<ref>{{cite web |title=Boeing 787 Dreamliner |url=http://www.museumofflight.org/content/boeing-787-dreamliner |publisher=The Museum of Flight |access-date=April 5, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Museum Opens World's First Boeing 787 Dreamliner Exhibit Nov 8 |url=http://www.museumofflight.org/content/museum-opens-worlds-first-boeing-787-dreamliner-exhibit-nov-8 |publisher=The Museum of Flight |date= November 3, 2014 |access-date= November 8, 2014}}</ref>

==Specifications==
[[File:Boeing 787-800 Dreamliner v1.0.png|thumb|right|Schematic of the Boeing 787-8: side, top, front, cross-section views]]
{{sticky header}}
{| class="wikitable sortable sticky-header" style="text-align: center;"
|-
|+ 787 characteristics<ref name=787_Airport_report>{{cite web |url= https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/787.pdf |title= 787 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning |publisher= Boeing Commercial Aircraft |date= February 2023}}</ref>
! scope="col" | Model
! scope="col" | 787-8
! scope="col" | 787-9
! scope="col" | 787-10
|-
! scope="row" | Cockpit crew
| colspan="3" | Two
|-
! scope="row" | Seating, 2-[[airline seat|class]]
| 242: 24J @85" + 218Y @32"
| 290: 28J @85" + 262Y @32"
| 330: 32J @85" + 298Y @32"
|-
! scope="row" | Seating, 1-class
| Max. 359, exit limit 381
| Max. 406, exit limit 420
| Max. 440, exit limit 440
|-
! scope="row" | Length
| {{cvt|186|ft|1|in|2}}
| {{cvt|206|ft|1|in|2}}
| {{cvt|224|ft|2}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Wing]]<ref name=EASAtcds/>
| colspan="3" | {{#expr:197.25/(246.9/12)round2}} aspect ratio, {{cvt|{{#expr:197.25*246.9/12round0}}|sqft|sqm|0}} area, 32.2° [[swept wing|wing sweep]]<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.lissys.uk/samp1/ |title= Boeing 787 -8 (Dreamliner) sample analysis |publisher= Lissys Ltd |date= 2006}}</ref>
|-
! scope="row" | [[Wingspan]]<ref name=EASAtcds/>
| colspan="3" | {{cvt|197|ft|3|in|2}} span, {{convert|20.58|ft|m}} mean chord
|-
! scope="row" | Height<ref name=787_Airport_report/>
| {{cvt|55|ft|6|in|2}}
| colspan="2" | {{cvt|55|ft|10|in|2}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Fuselage]]
| colspan="3" | Cabin width: {{cvt|5.49|m|ftin|sigfig=3|order=flip}};<ref name=FG070707>{{cite news |url= https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/everything-about-the-boeing-787-dreamliner-209212/ |title= Everything about the Boeing 787 Dreamliner |work= [[Flightglobal]] |date= July 7, 2007}}</ref> <br />External width: {{cvt|18|ft|11|in|2}} Height: {{cvt|19|ft|6|in|2}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Cargo aircraft|Cargo]] capacity
| {{convert|4,826|ft3|m3|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}} <br />{{#expr:16+12}} [[LD3]] or {{#expr:5+4}} (88×125) pallets
| {{convert|6,090|ft3|m3|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}} <br />{{#expr:20+16}} LD3 or {{#expr:6+5}} (96×125) pallets
| {{convert|6,722|ft3|m3|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}} <br />{{#expr:22+18}} LD3 or {{#expr:7+6}} (96×125) pallets
|-
! scope="row" | [[Maximum takeoff weight]]
| {{convert|502,500|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{convert|561,500|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{convert|560,000|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
|-
! scope="row" | Maximum [[payload]]
| {{convert|90,500|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{convert|116,000|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{formatnum:{{#expr:425000-298700}}}}&nbsp;lb / {{formatnum:{{#expr:192777-135500}}}}&nbsp;kg<!--MZFW-OEW-->
|-
! scope="row"| [[Operating empty weight]]
| {{convert|264,500|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{convert|284,000|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
| {{convert|298,700|lb|kg|abbr=on|disp=x| / |}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Fuel tank|Fuel capacity]]
| 33,340 US gal / 126,206 L <br />223,378&nbsp;lb / 101,323&nbsp;kg
| colspan="2" | 33,384 US gal / 126,372 L <br />223,673&nbsp;lb / 101,456&nbsp;kg
|-
! scope="row" | [[Speed]]
| colspan="3" | Max.: {{cvt|0.90|Mach|altitude_ft=40,000|knots km/h|0}};<ref name=EASAtcds>{{cite web |url= https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/TCDS%20EASA%20IM%20A%20115%20B787%20Iss%2019%20-%2016%20Nov%202017.pdf |title= Type certificate data sheet for Boeing 787 |date= November 16, 2017 |publisher= EASA |access-date= January 10, 2018 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180111052820/https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/TCDS%20EASA%20IM%20A%20115%20B787%20Iss%2019%20-%2016%20Nov%202017.pdf |archive-date= January 11, 2018 |url-status=dead |df= mdy-all}}</ref> <br />Cruise: {{cvt|0.85|Mach|altitude_ft=40,000|knots km/h|0}}
|-
! scope="row" | Range{{efn|Typical seating}}<ref name=characteristics>{{cite web |url= http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/by-design/#/all-model-performance-summary |title= 787 performance summary |publisher= Boeing}}</ref>
| {{cvt|7355|nmi|-1}}
| {{cvt|7635|nmi|-1}}
| {{cvt|6430|nmi|-1}}
|-
! scope="row" | Takeoff{{efn|At maximum takeoff weight, International Standard Atmosphere, sea-level, hi thrust.}}
| {{cvt|8500|ft}}
| {{cvt|9300|ft}}
| {{cvt|9100|ft}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Ceiling (aeronautics)|Ceiling]]<ref name=EASAtcds2>{{cite web |url= https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDS%20EASA%20IM%20A%20115%20B787%20Iss%2024%20-%2028%20Oct%2019.pdf |title= Updated EASA Type certificate data sheet for Boeing 787 |date= October 28, 2019 |publisher= EASA |access-date= November 30, 2019 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20191231040400/https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDS%20EASA%20IM%20A%20115%20B787%20Iss%2024%20-%2028%20Oct%2019.pdf |archive-date= December 31, 2019 |url-status= dead}}</ref>
| colspan="2" | {{cvt|43,100|ft|sigfig=3}}
| {{cvt|41,100|ft|sigfig=3}}
|-
! scope="row" | [[Jet engine|Engines]] (×2)
| colspan="3" | [[General Electric GEnx|General Electric GEnx-1B]] or [[Rolls-Royce Trent 1000]]
|-
! scope="row" | [[Thrust]] (×2)
| {{cvt|64000|lbf|kN}}
| {{cvt|71000|lbf|kN}}
| {{cvt|76000|lbf|kN}}
|}
{{notelist}}
{{externalimage |topic=Boeing 787 cutaway |float=right |image1=[https://www.flickr.com/photos/flightglobal/15849702316/ Cutaway drawing] from ''[[Flight International]]''}}

==See also==
{{Portal|United States|Aviation}}
{{aircontent
|see also= <!-- other related articles that have not already linked: -->
* [[Competition between Airbus and Boeing]]
|related= <!-- designs that were developed into or from this aircraft: -->
* [[Boeing Business Jet]]
* [[Boeing Sonic Cruiser]]
* [[Boeing 747-8]]
* [[Boeing 777X]]
|similar aircraft= <!-- aircraft that are of similar role, era, and capability this design: -->
* [[Airbus A330neo]]
* [[Airbus A350]]
* [[CRAIC CR929]]
|lists= <!--
relevant lists that this aircraft appears in: -->
* [[List of jet airliners]]
<!--
See [[WP:Air/PC]] for more explanation of these fields. -->
}}
<!-- ==Footnotes==
{{Reflist|group=note}}-->

==References==

===Citations===
{{reflist}}

===Bibliography===
* {{cite book |last1= Norris |first1= Guy |first2= Mark |last2= Wagner |title= Boeing 787 Dreamliner |publisher= Zenith Press |year= 2009 |location=Minneapolis |isbn= 978-0-7603-2815-6}}
* {{cite magazine|last1=Thisdell |first1=Dan |last2=Seymour |first2=Chris|title=World Airliner Census |magazine=[[Flight International]]| date=August 5, 2019 |volume=196 |issue=5697 |pages=24–47|issn=0015-3710}}

== External links ==
{{Commons and category|Boeing 787|Boeing 787}}
<!-- Before inserting additional external link(s), please read [[WP:ELMINOFFICIAL]] and comply with the instructions laid down. Thank you! -->
* {{Official website}}
* {{cite news |url= http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/aviation-week-evaluates-boeing-787 |title= Aviation Week Evaluates Boeing 787 |author= Fred George |work= Aviation Week & Space Technology |date= December 10, 2012}} and {{cite video |url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s9ynMnPdCQ | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211028/-s9ynMnPdCQ| archive-date=2021-10-28|title= Aviation Week Pilot Report: Flying the Boeing 787 |author= [[Aviation Week]] |website= Youtube |date= December 7, 2012}}{{cbignore}}
* {{cite web |url= https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/media/787_Report_Final.pdf |title= Boeing 787-8 Design, Certification, and Manufacturing Systems Review |author= Boeing 787-8 Critical System Review Team |publisher= Federal Aviation Administration |date= March 19, 2014}}
* {{cite video |url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvkEpstd9os | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211028/rvkEpstd9os| archive-date=2021-10-28|title= Al Jazeera Investigates – Broken Dreams: The Boeing 787 |author= [[Al Jazeera English|Al Jazeera]] |website= Youtube |date= September 10, 2014}}{{cbignore}}
* {{cite web |url= https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/65542825/TGCTOC/sample-wmcab.pdf |title= Boeing 787 Dreamliner Program Briefing |publisher= Teal Group |date= February 2015 |author= Richard Aboulafia |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160616192345/https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/65542825/TGCTOC/sample-wmcab.pdf |archive-date= June 16, 2016 |df= mdy-all}}
* {{cite video |url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYbM-3E11Qo | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211028/KYbM-3E11Qo| archive-date=2021-10-28|title= Boeing Prepares the 787-9 Dreamliner for the 2015 Paris Air Show |author= [[Boeing]] |website= Youtube |date= June 11, 2015}}{{cbignore}} Steep climb after takeoff.
* {{cite video |url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJZk9vNS8NE | archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211028/SJZk9vNS8NE| archive-date=2021-10-28|title=Building the 787-9 Dreamliner |author= [[British Airways]] |website= Youtube |date= September 30, 2015}}{{cbignore}} Construction time-lapse.
* {{cite web |url= http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/e8c1d10aac39aa908625822000772368/$FILE/T00021SE_Rev_27.pdf |title= Type Certificate data sheet T00021SE |date= January 19, 2018 |publisher= FAA |access-date= February 16, 2018 |archive-date= September 11, 2020 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200911160620/https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/e8c1d10aac39aa908625822000772368/$FILE/T00021SE_Rev_27.pdf |url-status= dead }}
* {{cite news |url= https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/review-celebrating-eleven-years-of-boeing-787-dreamliner/ |title= Review: Celebrating Eleven Years of Boeing 787 Dreamliner |date= July 8, 2018 |work= Airways International |access-date= July 9, 2018 |archive-date= July 9, 2018 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180709153715/https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/review-celebrating-eleven-years-of-boeing-787-dreamliner/ |url-status= dead}}

{{Boeing airliners}}
{{Boeing 7x7 timeline}}
{{Boeing model numbers}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Boeing 787 Dreamliner| ]]
[[Category:Boeing aircraft|787]]
[[Category:Twinjets]]
[[Category:Low-wing aircraft]]
[[Category:2000s United States airliners]]
[[Category:Aircraft first flown in 2009]]
{{Навигационная таблица/Портал/Английская Википедия}}
[[Категория:Английская Википедия]]
[[Категория:Википедия]]
[[Категория:Статья из Википедии]]
[[Категория:Статья из Английской Википедии]]