Let's hope.

But reason for skepticism remains. Here are a couple relevant passages from a major article last week in the Wall Street Journal , the full text of which is probably hiding behind the Journal's subscription firewall:

When the Chicago aerospace giant set out four years ago to build the fuel-sipping jet, it figured the chief risk lay in perfecting a process to build much of the plane from carbon-fiber plastic instead of aluminum. Boeing focused so hard on getting the science right that it didn't grasp the significance of another big change: The 787 is the first jet in Boeing's 91-year history designed largely by other companies.

To lower the $10 billion or so it would cost to develop the plane solo, Boeing authorized a team of parts suppliers to design and build major sections of the craft, which it planned to snap together at its Seattle-area factory. But outsourcing so much responsibility has turned out to be far more difficult than anticipated.

The supplier problems ranged from language barriers to snafus that erupted when some contractors themselves outsourced chunks of work. An Italian company struggled for months to gain approval to build a fuselage factory on the site of an ancient olive grove. The first Dreamliner to show up at Boeing's factory was missing tens of thousands of parts, Boeing said.

That's not entirely comforting. This softens the blow a bit, however:

The 787 is a hit with airlines. Boeing has 762 orders from 52 carriers for the plane, which will carry between 225 and 300 passengers. The combination of lightweight materials and fuel-efficient engines is expected to make it 20% cheaper to fly and a third less costly to maintain than older jets. Boeing says it has sold out of delivery slots until almost 2014, making it critical to get the jet into production without further setbacks.

If the company can get the production issues worked out, it has a highly popular and profitable product on its hands.