Flight Test Journal
777-200LR Flight Test Journal

• Thanks for riding with us
  

  Joe Kranak, Chief Engineer, Test and Validation, 747, 767, 777

  Well, it's been quite a ride.

  When we published the first entry for this journal back on May 20, we started by saying that "time flies." It certainly has. Flight testing the 777-200LR over the past few months has been both eventful and rewarding.

  The Flight Test Program and this journal have both covered a lot of territory. And while our support of the test program presented a fairly typical challenge from a technical standpoint, we "broke new ground" with the publication of our journal. For the first time at Boeing, it provided the men and women who test and certify our products the opportunity to share their skill and enthusiasm for their profession directly with you. We hope that you found their stories of interest.

  

  The 777-200LR and this Flight Test Journal have covered a lot of territory during the past seven months. We hope you have enjoyed the ride.

  The -200LR itself was also a major focus of our writings, and for good reason. Following its highly successful stop at the Paris Air Show and ensuing 24-city "Going the Distance" world tour, the Worldliner made headlines around the world by setting a world distance flight record of 11,664 nautical miles (21,601 kilometers) in 22 hours 42 minutes without refueling. From the terrific sendoff that the crew and passengers received in Hong Kong to the reception that was waiting in London - and the two sunrises in between - it is the type of memory that remains with one forever.

  While conducting the -200LR Flight Test Program, we also supported the Quiet Technology Demonstrator-2 (QTD2) research testing as well as the certification testing of the 777-300ER Enhanced version, and its entry into commercial service. Our airline customers are already realizing the benefits of the 777-300ER enhancements, while it will take a little longer before the benefits of the technologies tested on the QTD2 are incorporated.

  You may recall that we also pointed out some of the "turbulence" encountered along the way: uncooperative weather in California, a disruptive runway project at Boeing Field, a bird strike in Moses Lake that required repair, and having to wait until September to do our cross-wind autoland testing (and then having to commute between Iceland and Ireland to get it done because a movie crew had reserved all of the local accommodations).

  In our view, the highs definitely outnumbered the lows. Some of the facts associated with what was accomplished include:

  • From first flight to last flight, the 777-200LR test program and World Tour consumed 423 flow days.
  • The two 777-200LRs in the test fleet accumulated 886 flight hours on 328 flights, and 318 ground hours of testing.
  • In addition, 27.8 miles of instrumentation wiring were fabricated and installed and 73 terabits (that's 73 followed by 12 zeros) of data were recorded and analyzed.
  • During the test program and associated World Tour and world-record flight, 33 cities were visited (many more than once).
  • An estimated 50,000 visitors took the opportunity to see our airplanes.
  • More than 70 authors helped produce about 50 entries for our journal.

  So, with this entry, we are closing the final chapter of the 777-200LR Flight Test Journal. Since publication of this journal has been somewhat of an experiment, we'd like to ask you for your comments - what you liked and didn't like, where we hit the mark and where we missed it. We've spent the last seven months sharing our passion for airplanes with you. Now, it's your turn. Please share your thoughts with us at bcaflighttest@pss.boeing.com.

  It has definitely been quite a ride, and we're glad you were able to come along.

• Stamp of approval
  

  Tim Braxmeyer, Maintenance Planning/Quality Supervisor

  John Malone, Flight Test Quality Supervisor

  In the 777-200LR Flight Test Program, Quality Assurance was the group responsible for developing and verifying compliance to airplane inspection programs supporting both airplanes - WD001 and WD002. We tailored the maintenance and inspection to match the actual flight test operational environment for each airplane. For WD001, testing was intensive and aggressive, while the majority of the WD002 airplane test program was basically straight and level flight operations. These are the same type of maneuvers you'd expect in service, so our oversight didn't need to be as intensive.

  WD001's testing was far more stringent and included the "work horse" type of systems and procedures, like with stability and control and auto-lands - the testing that can be pretty hard on the airplane. Tests are rated at different "risk levels" with the highest-risk tests performed off-site at remote locations, such as Edwards Air Force Base, located 100 miles north of Los Angeles, Calif. Many tests also can be weather and condition dependent, which requires traveling to remote areas, like Iceland for crosswinds or Australia for heat. Typically, we develop a thorough pre-flight, post-flight and servicing regiment that we put the airplanes through every night to prepare for the next day's test.

  Quality management ensures that type-certified and developmental airplane parts used in flight test are operated in accordance with appropriate established standards. We operate the type-certified systems, parts and components much like an airline. We release the routine scheduled maintenance requirements and exercise unscheduled maintenance for events such as hard or overweight landings, engine chops, blown tires, brake fires, bird strikes or lightning strikes, just to name a few. We do a lot of tests for conditions that will rarely occur to an aircraft in service. For instance, the aircraft will take off at maximum gross weight and the crew will intentionally turn off an engine. The aircraft will prove that with an engine out in this condition it still has the ability to take off and climb.

  

  If you look at the big picture of the 777 program, there really isn't a break in quality involvement from one derivative to the next. In getting ready to flight test the -200LR, we started with lessons learned and all of our experience from past models. In this case, the last program was the -300ER. We are always asking the question, "How can we do things a little better?"

  There is a big difference with quality management in a flight test environment compared to an airline's in-service fleet. We use cutting-edge technology everyday. For example, we'll discover there's a problem with a system under development, like if the nose-wheel doors are coming apart in flight. Quality works with manufacturing and engineering during the redesign and manufacturing stages to develop testing procedures that maintain the safe operation of the airplane. The engineering doesn't exist yet to explain the procedure; we have to work it out.

  In flight test we want things to fail safely. This environment is where we test to define the parameters and ring out the aircraft problems before type certification. Engineering sets the performance parameters and standards and then develops the testing requirements needed to demonstrate the airplanes capabilities. Quality works with maintenance and engineering to complete the test and demonstrate final compliance.

  It's extraordinary playing a part in the continued development of our products. To us, the wonderful part of our work is that the job description can change daily. It is a very fluid, dynamic environment that is so unique in the aviation world. We take a great deal of pride in testing a new model aircraft that symbolizes the talent of so many great minds working toward one goal. We know it's the best job there is at Boeing.

• Where it all comes together
  

  George Trampus, 777 Flight Deck Crew Operations Model Focal

  The flight deck is where all of the airplane information comes together and is displayed so the pilot can operate the airplane safely and efficiently. My group's main focus is the flight crew interface. We work with the pilots to generate the requirements for the flight deck and make sure all the crew interfaces are integrated. As model focal for the 777, I am the primary contact between the program, chief pilots and the Flight Crew Operations (Ops) Integration group. My primary responsibility is to facilitate communications and to act as the problem manager for specific issues.

  On a brand new airplane model, Flight Crew Ops gets heavily involved early in the program to ensure that everything the pilot interface