RPM,
The potential for hidden damage in composites is great, but from everything I've read it is in actual practice no worse than the potential for hidden cracks in metal structures. Every year you read about an aluminum plane that came apart in flight, and in the end they found either a hidden crack, or a known crack that was improperly repaired. How often do you hear about airplane crashes caused by delaminated composites? I haven't personally read a single one, although that doesn't mean anything because there just aren't very many large composite airframes out there yet.
We spend millions of dollars each year on NDI (Non Destructive Inspection)tests and equipment, to detect hidden damage in metal airplanes. That should tell you something about how inherently "safe" making planes out of aluminum is. Composites are no different. They just need different NDI technology and different maintenance techniques. Different is not always bad, but it sure is scary to people who are either ignorant or who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
I would be VERY suprised if Boeing isn't participating with industry partners already on developing the technology and products required to safely inspect and maintain the 787. I know that industry groups are already working on 787 quick fix kits and maintenance resource sharing, so I'm pretty comfortable about assuming that 787 operators will be able to inspect the airframe and composite parts for hidden damage. That's one nice thing about properly designed composites - they don't rip like aluminum does so hidden damage may not result in a critical failure prior to detection like it can with hidden aluminum cracks. The key is to develop the right inspection technology and come up with the appropriate inspection cycle that will catch new damage before it grows bad enough to be a safety problem.
That's no different from aluminum airframe maintenance.
