ANA Finds Damaged Battery Wires on Boeing Locator Beacons

TOKYO — Japan’s ANA Holdings Inc, which operates the world’s biggest fleet of Boeing Co Dreamliners, said it found damage to the battery wiring on two 787 locator beacons during checks after the devices were identified as the likely cause of a fire on another aircraft in London this month.

The damage was slight, but the beacons have been sent to the manufacturer, Honeywell International Inc, for inspection and the airline has informed local aviation regulators, an ANA spokesman, Ryousei Nomura, said.

British investigators probing the fire aboard an Ethiopian Airlines Dreamliner at Heathrow airport are focusing a possible pinched wire on an emergency beacon and on condensation in the plane, which has higher humidity levels than other aircraft.

ANA has taken the built-in locator beacons out of its eight domestically operated Dreamliners with the permission of local regulators and has inspected and put back those on its 12 787s that fly international routes.

The beacons are designed to guide rescuers to downed aircraft, although in most cases close radar tracking and eyewitness reports allow air traffic controllers to pinpoint crash sites.

Also Friday, Qatar Airways said that it had taken one of its Dreamliners out of service following what it described as a minor technical issue, as pressure mounted on the plane maker over possible new electrical problems with the advanced jet.

The airline and Boeing declined to give further details.

According to Web-tracking service Flightaware, the Qatar Airways aircraft, registered as A7-BCB, has not flown since Sunday, an unusually long downtime for a long-haul jet designed to save on fuel bills.

Qatar Airways confirmed an aircraft had been taken out of service, but said no flights had been canceled as a result.

Boeing 787 Catches Fire in London

It was not immediately clear what caused the fire or how serious the repercussions would be. But investors, mindful that hazards with the jet’s batteries had led to the grounding of the entire fleet from January to April, reacted nervously, sending Boeing’s shares down 4.7 percent.

Smoke came from the plane, named the Queen of Sheba, eight hours after it had been parked in a remote space at Heathrow and about four and a half hours before it was scheduled to depart for Ethiopia. No passengers were on the plane, which was connected to an external ground power source, according to people briefed on the incident.

It was also not clear if any maintenance was under way or how long the fire had been burning, though it was intense enough to burn through its carbon-composite skin on the top of the fuselage near the tail.

That area was not next to either of the plane’s new lithium-ion batteries, which caught fire or emitted smoke in two earlier incidents that led to the grounding of the first 50 787s. Unless they were charging, aviation experts said, the batteries would not have been in use if the plane were connected to ground power.

A team of British safety investigators began examining the plane shortly after the fire was put out. But no one involved — the investigators, Boeing, the airline or the airport — commented on the possible cause of the fire.

Other experts said that some of the plane’s wiring, and the oxygen systems for passengers, would have passed through the damaged area, which was above the rear galley. It was also possible the fire migrated from another part of the plane, they said.

Richard L. Aboulafia, an aviation consultant at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va., said the possibilities ranged from “something pretty benign,” like a lit cigarette or a coffee machine left on, to a serious flaw in the plane’s new electrical system, which includes other innovative components besides the batteries. Or, he said, it could be something “not as easy or as terrible,” like a component that was installed incorrectly.

The Heathrow incident was not the only problem aboard a 787 on Friday. Thomson Airways, a charter airline, said that one of its Dreamliner planes traveling from Manchester Airport in England to Orlando-Sanford International Airport in Florida had to turn back “as a precautionary measure.”

The fire on the Ethiopian 787 forced Heathrow Airport to temporarily suspend arrivals and departures while fire crews responded to the incident at 4:36 p.m. local time. Once the fire was extinguished around 6 p.m., the runways reopened.

Friday’s incidents took place about two months after the 787 Dreamliners returned to the skies after being grounded over the battery problems. One of the new lithium-ion batteries caught fire on a 787 parked at a Boston airport on Jan. 7, and another began smoking in midflight nine days later, forcing a 787 to make an emergency landing in Japan.

Regulators lifted the grounding orders after Boeing came up with a plan to refit the first 50 to 60 of the new jets with more insulation between the battery cells and a new system for venting smoke or hazardous gases out of the planes. Ethiopian Airlines has four 787s, and the one that had the fire at Heathrow was the first 787 to return to service at any airline after the grounding ended.

Boeing said that while the planes were grounded, it also made changes in electrical components that had failed on occasion since the planes began to fly in late 2011.

At Heathrow, television video and photographs showed fire damage near the base of the vertical stabilizer, with fire-retardant foam having been sprayed on the area. That would be the first time a fire had burned through the 787’s carbon-composite skin, raising questions about its fire-retardant properties.

Investigation Continues Into Fire on Boeing 787

Britain’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, which is responsible for investigating civil aviation incidents, said the airliner, operated by Ethiopian Airlines, had been moved to a secure hangar and that a full investigation was under way.

In addition to the British investigators leading the inquiry, a team from Boeing was on site along with representatives from the airline and from two American government agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board.

The fire, which broke out Friday, caused no injuries or significant damage but did disrupt travel in Britain and elsewhere. Heathrow airport said that around 40 flights had been canceled on Saturday as it cleared its backlog of delays after planes were left in the wrong location.

But the repercussions for Boeing could be more significant. Investors, mindful that hazards with the jet’s batteries had led to the grounding of the entire fleet from January to April, reacted nervously, sending Boeing’s shares down 4.7 percent on Friday.

Smoke came from the plane, named the Queen of Sheba, eight hours after it had been parked in a remote space at Heathrow and about four and a half hours before it was scheduled to depart for Ethiopia. No passengers were on the plane, which was connected to an external ground power source, according to people briefed on the incident.

It was also not clear if any maintenance was under way or how long the fire had been burning, though it was intense enough to burn through its carbon-composite skin on the top of the fuselage near the tail.

That area was not next to either of the plane’s new lithium-ion batteries, which caught fire or emitted smoke in two earlier incidents that led to the grounding of the first 50 787s. Unless they were charging, aviation experts said, the batteries would not have been in use if the plane were connected to ground power.

A team of British safety investigators began examining the plane shortly after the fire was put out. But no one involved — the investigators, Boeing, the airline or the airport — commented on the possible cause of the fire.

Other experts said that some of the plane’s wiring, and the oxygen systems for passengers, would have passed through the damaged area, which was above the rear galley. It was also possible the fire migrated from another part of the plane, they said.

Richard L. Aboulafia, an aviation consultant at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va., said the possibilities ranged from “something pretty benign,” like a lit cigarette or a coffee machine left on, to a serious flaw in the plane’s new electrical system, which includes other innovative components besides the batteries. Or, he said, it could be something “not as easy or as terrible,” like a component that was installed incorrectly.

The Heathrow incident was not the only problem aboard a 787 on Friday. Thomson Airways, a charter airline, said that one of its Dreamliner planes traveling from Manchester Airport in England to Orlando-Sanford International Airport in Florida had to turn back “as a precautionary measure.”

The fire on the Ethiopian 787 forced Heathrow Airport to temporarily suspend arrivals and departures while fire crews responded to the incident at 4:36 p.m. local time. Once the fire was extinguished around 6 p.m., the runways reopened.

Friday’s incidents took place about two months after the 787 Dreamliners returned to the skies after being grounded over the battery problems. One of the new lithium-ion batteries caught fire on a 787 parked at a Boston airport on Jan. 7, and another began smoking in midflight nine days later, forcing a 787 to make an emergency landing in Japan.

Stephen Castle reported from London, and Christopher Drew from New York. Jad Mouawad contributed from New York.

Airbus Unveils Jet and Broadens Rivalry With Boeing

There was a lot more riding on it than the multinational crew of two test pilots and four engineers.

The new aircraft carries the burden of dispelling Airbus’s reputation for cross-cultural and industrial dysfunction, which caused costly delays in the introduction of the company’s previous plane, the A380 superjumbo. And in the wake of last year’s failed merger of the plane maker’s parent, European Aeronautic Defense and Space, and the British military contractor BAE Systems, Airbus is betting its future more heavily on the success of commercial jets like the A350.

It is no coincidence that Airbus showed off the A350 — a twin-engine wide-body jet meant to compete with Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner and 777 — as the global aviation industry assembled for the biennial Paris Air Show, scheduled to open Monday at Le Bourget Airport north of the French capital. As always at the show, which is the world’s largest aerospace bazaar, any announcements by other industry players will be undercard matches compared with the main event of Airbus vs. Boeing.

While both aircraft makers are going into the show with order books for commercial airliners fat enough to keep their assembly lines humming for much of the next decade, military budgets are shrinking in the United States and Europe, the two biggest spenders on military planes.

Few, if any, major announcements for military orders are expected at the show, and belt-tightening at the Pentagon means that the turnout of American military contractors will be among the lowest in recent memory. Northrop Grumman, for example, will be absent, and the delegations from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing’s defense and security division, among others, will be much smaller than in years past.

And this year’s show may be relatively subdued in terms of new commercial jet order announcements as well, given the uncertain near-term outlook for airline profits and economic growth, particularly in emerging markets.

But on Friday the spotlight was on Toulouse-Blagnac Airport, about a 90-minute flight south of Paris, where, precisely at 10 a.m., the A350 lifted effortlessly from the sun-dappled runway. The purr of the plane’s two Rolls-Royce engines was momentarily drowned out by the cheers and whistles of a throng of Airbus employees, well-wishers and members of the news media who had gathered — camera phones at the ready — to capture the moment.

The distinctive curled tips of the carbon-fiber wings glinted briefly before the jet slipped into the clouds.

Judith Lindner, a 36-year-old quality control technician from an Airbus factory in Stade, Germany, whooped as the jet sailed past, jabbing her thumb in the air.

“What a tremendous thrill — fantastic,” Ms. Lindner said, adding that she had helped inspect the vertical stabilizer on the plane’s tail. “I feel such a mix of pride and relief.”

Analysts said the value of a well-timed and well-executed A350 debut could not be overestimated. Some said they still expected Airbus to try to maintain the public relations momentum by staging an A350 flyby sometime during the weeklong show in Paris.

It would be hard for Airbus to find a bigger stage. Show organizers said they expected the chalets and exhibition halls of the air show to be filled with more than 2,200 companies from more than 40 countries. As many as 350,000 visitors from the aerospace industry, as well as the public, are expected over the course of the week.

Even Boeing executives acknowledged that the timing of the A350 flight was likely to steal much of the American company’s thunder at the event.

“I know they work hard to keep the home fans entertained,” Randy Tinseth, Boeing’s head of marketing, said at a briefing on Tuesday in Paris.

Not so long ago, Airbus’s prospects did not look nearly as bright. It was struggling to roll out its last big-bet plane: the twin-deck A380. Miscommunication in the design, manufacturing and installation of electrical cables resulted in a series of missteps in the mid-2000s that delayed the A380’s first delivery by three years. The debacle prompted a management reshuffle in 2006 and more than $6 billion in losses.

Airbus executives say they are determined not to repeat the experience.

Boeing Is Moving Ahead With Updated 777

The company plans to add lightweight carbon-composite wings and new engines to the popular model to take advantage of technologies that it developed for its 787 Dreamliner and to cut fuel usage by perhaps 20 percent.

Boeing’s board approved the move to offer customers details about the capabilities and pricing of the plane. The decision suggests that the long-awaited redesign is close to becoming a reality.

Once several customers sign up, Boeing officials will go back to the board later this year for formal approval and money to start the project, known as the 777X.

Karen R. Crabtree, a Boeing spokeswoman, said any deals made now would be contingent on the board’s authorization of the plane.

“We have made great progress in our development work and have begun to discuss additional technical, pricing and schedule details with customers regarding the 777X, continuing to target entry into service near the end of the decade,” she said in statement. She added, “The timing of a decision to launch the program will depend on market response during this next phase of our discussions about the airplane.”

The 777, first flown in commercial service in 1995, holds a sweet spot in the growing commercial plane market. With only two engines, the various versions of the jet can carry more than 300 passengers over long distances, making it an economical workhorse for many airlines.

The move to upgrade the planes is an important moment for Boeing as it tries to retain its recent dominance in sales of twin-engine planes, which represent the vast middle of the size range for commercial jetliners.

Airlines are returning Boeing’s innovative 787 jets, which rely extensively on composite parts, to service after hazards with the lithium-ion batteries led to a three-month grounding. The 787s carry up to 250 people.

Airbus, Boeing’s main rival, is building the A350-XWB, its first jet making substantial use of composite parts, to compete with the 787 and the larger 777. Boeing also plans to build two larger versions of the 787.

Boeing would like to deliver the first of two new models of the 777 to customers by 2019.

The first model would probably seat about 400 people, while the second would hold about 350 passengers and might be ready in 2021.

Boeing has already said that General Electric will be the sole supplier of new, more fuel-efficient engines for the plane.

The airline Emirates, in particular, has pushed Boeing to move ahead with the 777, and hinted in early March that a decision was near.

Boeing Jet Returns to the Air, but It’s Only a Start

“We kept on checking the voltage again and again, because we were so nervous,” he said in an interview after the 787 jet landed at Haneda Airport in Tokyo, apparently without incident. “Everything was fine, absolutely fine.”

Mr. Ogami may have gotten over his own jitters, but he and his colleagues at All Nippon, the largest operator of Boeing’s 787 batteries, now must convince an uneasy public of the reliability of the jets — most of which were grounded for three months because of concerns that the batteries crucial to the planes’ sophisticated electrical systems might catch fire.

Even as Boeing and the operators of its Dreamliners move swiftly toward getting the jets back in the air, they now face the delicate task of selling passengers on the idea that the jet is safe, even though engineers have still not figured out what exactly caused batteries to burn on two separate planes earlier this year.

In the past week, regulators in the United States, Europe and Japan — all of which grounded the 787 fleet after those incidents — signed off on fixes to the batteries proposed by Boeing.

Smaller airlines are already moving ahead in reintroducing the jet to their fleets, including Ethiopian Airlines, which used a 787 on Saturday on a two-hour commercial flight from Addis Ababa, the Ethiopian capital, to Nairobi.

But the resumption of 787 flights at All Nippon and Japan Airlines, which together own nearly half the 50 Dreamliner jets Boeing has delivered so far, will prove the real test of whether the modified batteries will eliminate further mishaps.

So both Japanese airlines are being cautious about bringing the Dreamliners back into service, saying they hope to resume scheduled commercial flights only in June. That will give them more time to conduct test flights, retrain their crew and to educate the public about the safety of the improved batteries. (All Nippon said it might introduce Dreamliners on some flights before June, however.)

“It’s up to us to explain how we’ve made these planes safer,” Shinichiro Ito, chief executive of All Nippon and Mr. Ogami’s boss, said at a press conference after flying on the test jet, together with executives from Boeing. “We won’t decide to resume commercial flights until we’re sure our passengers are comfortable with boarding a 787.”

The other airlines that already own 787s are all eager to resume service, although the timing varies. United has scheduled its 787s to start flying domestic routes on May 31 and plans to begin international flights on June 10, from Denver to Tokyo and Houston to London. The airline will then fly its 787s in August from Houston to Lagos, as well as from Los Angeles to Shanghai and Tokyo.

LOT, the Polish national airline, plans to begin commercial 787 flights on June 5 between Warsaw and Chicago. Later, it expects to fly its planes to New York, Toronto and Beijing.

Air India said it hoped to have flights by mid-May. The other airlines that own 787s are Qatar Airlines and LAN of Chile.

But it is in Japan where the 787 has a particularly difficult task in winning back confidence. The Japanese public has been subject to intense coverage of what first appeared to be teething problems of Boeing’s next-generation 787 jet: a cracked cockpit window and a fuel leak.

Then a battery fire on a parked Japan Airlines jet in Boston in January, followed closely by a meltdown of batteries aboard a domestic All Nippon flight, catapulted the story into the nation’s top headlines.

The All Nippon incident, which prompted an emergency landing, has been particularly damaging to the 787’s image in Japan. All day, TV stations played footage of the incident, emergency chutes splayed on the tarmac, with testimony from distressed passengers to boot.

“I was terrified. I didn’t feel alive,” Masaaki Ishikawa, a 40-year-old office worker, told the Sankei newspaper at the time.

Now, some Japanese are understandably worried.

Boeing Secures $15.6 Billion Order From Ryanair

The agreement is valued at $15.6 billion at current list prices, although Ryanair, as most large customers, received a significant discount. Neither company provided the final sale price.

The big order offers a respite for Boeing, which has been struggling with battery problems that have grounded its innovative 787 jets since mid-January.

The deal provides the company a smooth transition in the production and sales of its 737s before it brings out a new version of its single-aisle plane with a more fuel-efficient engine. That plane, known as the 737 Max, is scheduled to come into service in 2017.

The agreement, signed in New York, will allow Ryanair, Europe’s leading low-cost carrier, to increase its fleet to 400 planes. Ryanair’s capacity will grow by 25 percent to 100 million passengers a year by 2018.

“This is a huge deal for the Boeing Company,” Ray Conner, the president and chief executive of Boeing’s commercial airplane division, said in a news conference in New York. “We’ve been talking about this for quite some time.”

The deal for Boeing comes after a spate of orders for the rival A320 from Airbus, which sold 400 planes in past weeks to Lufthansa, Turkish Airlines and Indonesia’s Lion Mentari Airlines. That last order, for 234 planes announced on Monday, has a list price value of $24 billion – the largest single order of Airbus jets, by both value and number of planes.

Ryanair is one of the few airlines with an all-Boeing fleet. The companies had failed to reach a deal in 2009 for new planes, and Ryanair said it had considered the Airbus A320 and even looked at China’s C919, a new entrant in the commercial plane business, possibly to add pressure on Boeing.

But Michael O’Leary, the chief executive of Ryanair, said the airline saw significant growth opportunities in Europe as other carriers cut back service.

Ryanair’s last big order with Boeing was in 2005, and its last plane was delivered at the end of 2012.

The new planes, all 737-800s with room for 189 passengers, are scheduled to be delivered between the end of 2014 and 2018.

“There is a pressing need for us,” Mr. O’Leary said at the news conference. “This makes it easier for Boeing to negotiate with us and to squeeze us for slightly higher prices.”

The carrier got a significant discount on its last 737 purchase and the new agreement has similar terms, said Mr. O’Leary. “That’s code for ‘We’re paying slightly higher prices because he’s bigger than me,'” said Mr. O’Leary, who was sitting by Mr. Conner and joked constantly at the signature ceremony about the price paid. Ryanair is renowned for its low-fare, bare-bones service.

“Fifteen billion dollars, and all I get is a pen,” Mr. O’Leary said. Then, as photographers snapped pictures of the two men, he added, “As you can see, this is a check for the Ray Conner vacation fund.”

Mr. Conner, who has spent much of the last two months heading the effort to fix the 787’s battery and shuttling around the world to reassure customers about the 787, responded: “I need a vacation after a while here.”

Boeing Closer to Answer on 787s, but Not to Getting Them Back in Air

Ray LaHood, the transportation secretary, made it clear on Friday that a rapid outcome was unlikely, saying that 787s would not be allowed to fly until the authorities were “1,000 percent sure” they were safe.

“Those planes aren’t flying now until we have a chance to examine the batteries,” Mr. LaHood told reporters. “That seems to be where the problem is.”

The Federal Aviation Administration on Wednesday took the rare step of grounding Boeing’s technologically advanced 787s after a plane in Japan made an emergency landing when one of its two lithium-ion batteries set off a smoke alarm in the cockpit. Last week at Boston’s Logan Airport, a battery ignited in a parked 787.

The last time the government grounded an entire fleet of airplanes was in 1979, after the crash of a McDonnell Douglas DC-10.

The grounding comes as the United States is going through a record stretch of safe commercial jet flying: It has been nearly four years since a fatal airline crash, with nearly three billion passengers flying in that period. The last airliner crash, near Buffalo, came after a quiet period of two and a half years, which suggests a declining crash rate.

Investigators in Japan said Friday that a possible explanation for the problems with the 787’s batteries was that they were overcharged — a hazard that has long been a concern for lithium-ion batteries. But how that could have happened to a plane that Boeing says has multiple systems to prevent such an event is still unclear.

Given the uncertainty, it will be hard for federal regulators to approve any corrective measures proposed by Boeing. To lift the grounding order, Boeing must demonstrate that any fix it puts in place would prevent similar episodes from happening.

The government’s approach, while prudent, worries industry officials who fear it does not provide a rapid exit for Boeing.

The F.A.A. typically sets a course of corrective action for airlines when it issues a safety directive. But in the case of the 787, the government’s order, called an emergency airworthiness directive, required that Boeing demonstrate that the batteries were safe but did not specify how.

While the government and the plane maker are cooperating, there are few precedents for the situation.

“Everyone wants the airplane back in the air quickly and safely,” said Mark V. Rosenker, a former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. “But I don’t believe there will be a corner cut to accomplish that. It will happen when all are confident they have a good solution that will contain a fire or a leak.”

Boeing engineers, Mr. Rosenker said, are working around the clock. “I bet they have cots and food for the engineers who are working on this,” he said. “They have produced a reliable and safe aircraft and as advanced as it is, they don’t want to put airplanes in the air with the problems we have seen.”

The government approved Boeing’s use of lithium-ion batteries to power some of the plane’s systems in 2007, but special conditions were imposed on the plane maker to ensure the batteries would not overheat or ignite. Government inspectors also approved Boeing’s testing plans for the batteries and were present when they were performed.

Even so, after the episode in Boston, the federal agency said it would review the 787’s design and manufacturing with a focus on the electrical systems and batteries. The agency also said it would review the certification process.

The 787 has more electrical systems than previous generations of airplanes. These systems operate hydraulic pumps, de-ice the wings, pressurize the cabin and handle other tasks. The plane also has electric brakes instead of hydraulic ones. To run these systems, the 787 has six generators with a capacity equivalent to the power needed by 400 homes.

Nicola Clark and Christopher Drew contributed reporting.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 19, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the response of regulators after small cracks were found in the wings of the Airbus A380, and the year those cracks were found. Regulators required inspections, followed by fixes; they did not order the plane grounded. And the discovery was made in 2012, not two years ago.

Boeing 787 at Boston Airport Returns to Gate After Fuel Leak

The 787 in the previous incident experienced an electrical fire Monday at Logan, said Richard Walsh, a Massport spokesman. That plane also was operated by Japan Airlines.

The plane leaking fuel had left the gate in preparation for takeoff on a flight to Tokyo when the spill of about 40 gallons was discovered, Walsh said. No fire or injuries occurred, he said.

The Dreamliner was towed back to the gate, where passengers disembarked and were waiting for a decision on the status of the flight, he said.

"The airline will make that determination," Walsh said.

A Japan Airlines spokeswoman, Carol Anderson, said the plane returned to the gate because of a mechanical issue, but said exact details were yet to be confirmed.

Boeing said it was aware of the issue and was working with its customer. Boeing stock dropped 3.8 percent to $73.24 in afternoon trading, following a 2 percent decline on Monday.

Separately, the Wall Street Journal, citing a source, reported that United Airlines found a wiring problem on one of its 787s, an issue that affects the same electrical system that caused the fire aboard a Japan Airlines 787 in Boston on Monday.

United spokeswoman Christen David said United inspected its 787s after the Boston fire incident, but she declined to discuss the findings, or to confirm the Journal report.

The Journal reported that the airline found improperly installed wiring in electrical components associated with the auxiliary power unit.

U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday that the battery in the auxiliary power unit aboard the Japan Airlines jet had "severe fire damage" and that surrounding damage was limited to components and structures within about 20 inches. It said the power unit was operating when the fire was discovered.

The agency sent one investigator on Monday and added two more on Tuesday. The Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing, the Japan Transport Safety Board and Japan Airlines also are involved in the probe.

The NTSB said Tuesday's fuel leak would not warrant an investigation because there was no accident.

The leak comes after the FAA in December ordered inspections of all 787s after fuel leaks were found on two aircraft operated by foreign airlines. The leaks stemmed from incorrectly assembled fuel line couplings, which could result in loss of power or an engine fire, the FAA said.

Walsh, the Massport spokesman, said the leak in Boston was noticed at 12:25 p.m. ET Tuesday, as JAL flight 007 was taxiing toward the runway for takeoff. Crews used an absorbent to soak up the spilled fuel, Walsh said.

Some analysts had raised concerns about Boeing's 787 after the electrical fire onboard the JAL jet on Monday. Today's fuel leak caused further alarm about the impact on public perception of Boeing and the Dreamliner.

"We're getting to a tipping point where they go from needing to rectify problems to doing major damage control to the image of the company and the plane," said Richard Aboulafia, a defense and aerospace analyst with Teal Group, a consulting firm based in Fairfax, Virginia.

"While they delivered a large and unexpected number of 787s last year, it's possible that they should have instead focused on identifying glitches and flaws, rather than pushing ahead with volume production," he said.

Aboulafia said there is still no indication that the plane itself is flawed.

"It's just a question of how quickly they can get all the onboard technologies right, and whether or not the 787 and Boeing brands will be badly damaged," he said.

(Reporting by Alwyn Scott in New York and Karen Jacobs in Atlanta.; Editing by Steve Orlofsky, Cynthia Osterman, Andrew Hay and Gunna Dickson)

Europe to Seek Sanctions Against U.S. Over Boeing Subsidies

The European Commission, the E.U. executive, said it was seeking the sanctions to compensate for the impact of illegal subsidies to Boeing that it said gave Boeing an unfair advantage over its European archrival, Airbus. The move, which follows a similar trade threat against Europe made by Washington this year, is the latest salvo in a seven-year battle over aircraft subsidies.

A World Trade Organization appellate body affirmed in March that Boeing had received at least $5 billion in improper subsidies from the U.S. government to develop the 787 Dreamliner and other aircraft. But in a separate case, the organization found that Airbus had benefited from four decades of improper subsidies from European governments. The W.T.O. ordered both sides to end the subsidies.

In a statement, the European Commission said it had decided to ask the W.T.O. for permission to impose trade sanctions after reviewing a list of remedies submitted this week by the U.S. Trade Representative — remedies the commission said were insufficient.

The commission said it had acted because ‘‘the United States had not lived up to its obligation to remove its illegal subsidies in the aircraft sector, as required by the W.T.O. rulings that clearly condemned U.S. subsidies to Boeing.’’

In a statement, the W.T.O. said that the European request was expected to be formally submitted at a meeting of the organization’s dispute settlement body on Oct. 23.

The W.T.O. has also concluded that Airbus, a unit of European Aeronautic Defense & Space, received $15 billion in loans from European governments at below-market interest rates, as well as several billion dollars in grants to build the A380 superjumbo and five other best-selling models.

The trade panel did not quantify the savings from the lower interest rates, but said that without the loans, Airbus could not have introduced many of its models when it did.

In April, Washington rejected the European Union’s list of remedies to eliminate the subsidies to Airbus that the W.T.O. had deemed illegal. The U.S. government said it would seek the trade body’s approval to impose $7 billion to $10 billion in retaliatory measures. A W.T.O panel was expected to rule on that request around the end of this year.

On Sunday, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative said Washington had eliminated certain payments that Boeing had been receiving from the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. A number of tax breaks and beneficial funding programs to Boeing had also been removed, the trade representative said. The European Commission said Tuesday, however, that these steps did not fully offset the adverse trade effects to Airbus.

Charlie Miller, a Boeing spokesman, said he was not surprised by the Union’s move but declined to offer further comment.

Nkenge Harmon, a spokeswoman for the U.S. trade office, said Washington remained ‘‘confident’’ that the remedies announced Sunday had brought the United States into ‘‘ full compliance’’ with its W.T.O. obligations.

In a document filed with the W.T.O., the European Commission did not specify what form its sanctions would take. It said a list would be drafted ‘‘in due course’’ and did not say what type of goods and services might be targeted.

In a statement, Airbus said it was grateful to the European Commission for ‘‘taking consequential action’’ on its behalf but stressed that it was still prepared to seek a negotiated settlement of the dispute.

‘‘We regret that Boeing continues a legal battle that should have long been resolved by a mutual agreement,’’ said Maggie Bergsma, an Airbus spokeswoman. ‘‘We made offers time and again, but are ready to fight it through if the other side wishes to do so.’’

Trade experts said they hoped the two sides would eventually return to the negotiating table.

‘‘Given the size of damage claims on both sides, my guess is that the case will become the lead item for U.S.-E.U. trade negotiations in 2013,’’ Gary Clyde Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, said by e-mail.

Some observers noted that the Union’s move came just two weeks after Airbus’s parent company, EADS, announced that it was in talks about a possible $49 billion merger with BAE Systems of Britain. The combined company would eclipse Boeing as the world’s largest defense and aerospace group.

But while the timing was perhaps politically awkward, few analysts expected the latest trade flare-up to influence U.S. regulators charged with reviewing the combination of EADS and BAE.

‘‘I’d rather hope that all of these decisions are in the hands of independent authorities,’’ said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace consultant at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia. ‘‘Right now, I don’t think it matters. Both sides are going to continue doing exactly what they want to support their industries in economic times like these.’’