Questions about 787 deserve answers

Young journalists are usually advised against writing stories that pose more questions than they answer.

The theory behind that advice is that you don't want readers to wind up puzzled or angry by a story if you can help it. If you don't know something, you're supposed to say so.

If you're starting to pick up your phone to remind me that I've written a few columns that have left you puzzled and confused, don't bother. I know I haven't always followed that advice, but I believe it to be a good idea, and not just for journalists.

I wish managers at the Boeing Co. would include the idea of not leaving people with too many unanswered questions as part of their communications strategy. Their recent stories about what's going on with the 787 have me so confused that my head hurts.

Just to recap: In announcing the Dreamliner's latest delay last week, Boeing officials said they'd discovered some weak spots where the wings and fuselage are joined that need to be reinforced.

The work, which they said was limited and manageable, is expected to postpone the first flight and the first deliveries by several months.

The decision came just a few days after Boeing's top management declared at the Paris Air Show that the company would meet its promise to put the plane in the air for the first time by June 30.

In announcing the delay decision, officials acknowledged that they've known of the problem for a month; they just didn't think it was that serious.

That leaves me wondering:

Is the problem serious or not?

Did Scott Carson, the chief executive of Boeing's Commercial Airplanes Division, know about the problem when he continued to promise the company would meet its latest deadline? If not, why was the boss in the dark? If so, what changed between the few days when he said everything was fine and when the delay was announced?

I don't mean to pick on Boeing.

The Wall Street Journal noted last week that computer models don't always pick up problems in new aircraft made with composite materials because they can react differently as they move in flight. That's apparently especially true if other materials are joined with composites. In this case, the area includes aluminum and titanium.

Jets are complex machines. Unexpected things happen with new ones.

So I have no problem with the company holding back on its first flight to ensure everything goes well and remains safe.

But I think it's a mistake for Boeing to say one thing one day and another the next and expect people not to wonder what the heck is going on. By people, I mean investors, customers, suppliers and others who have a stake in the process and a right to know what's happening.

These people have been hearing about delays for two years, each one laden with promises that they would be the last; that things were now on the right track. The latest delay is the fifth major one in the 787 program.

What Boeing needs to do is to start backing up its promises if it wants to have any hope of re-establishing confidence among its buyers and backers. What it should have done this time was to tell people a month ago that it had a problem and was dealing with it, rather than not saying anything and hoping its workers could make the problem go away.

That's not a new idea.

Both Carson and Boeing Chief Executive Jim McNerney have talked about the importance of being transparent, of letting people know what's happening with the program. It's time for them to actually start doing that rather than leaving everybody with a lot of unanswered questions.



Mike Benbow: 425-339-3459; benbow@heraldnet.com.