Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/3797158/

Topic: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2008-01-16 06:12:22 and read 23042 times.

Quote:
EVERETT, Jan. 16, 2008 -- Boeing [NYSE:BA] today announced that first flight of the 787 has been moved from the end of the first quarter of this year to around the end of the second quarter to provide additional time to complete assembly of the first airplane. Deliveries are now expected to begin in early 2009, rather than late 2008.

"The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "However, we continue to be challenged by start-up issues in our factory and in our extended global supply-chain."

Carson said that while solid progress has been made on the assembly of Airplane #1, the rate at which jobs are being completed has not improved sufficiently to maintain the current schedule.

"Our revised schedule is based upon updated assessments from the 787 management team of the progress we have made and the lessons we have learned to date. This includes our experience on the factory floor completing production work on the airplane that was originally intended to be done by our suppliers," Carson said.

Over the next several weeks, Boeing will be working with its customers and suppliers to assess the specific impacts of the schedule change on the 787's flight test program and entry into service. This effort will include an assessment of supplier progress in meeting their commitments to deliver more complete assemblies on subsequent airplanes.

"We are deeply disappointed by what this delay means for our customers, and we are committed to working closely with them as we assess the impact on our delivery schedules," Carson said.

Under 787 Vice President and General Manager Pat Shanahan, who assumed leadership of the 787 program last October, Boeing has provided additional resources to more effectively manage the 787 global supply chain. The company has assembled a team of experienced executives, business managers and planning specialists that will be based at the supplier partners, as well as in its own final assembly facility.

"We have brought together the right skills and leadership from around the company to ensure a successful start-up of our global production system," said Shanahan. "We have put the people, structure and processes in place to execute our plan and we will take additional steps to strengthen our team if needed. We have made significant progress in reducing parts shortages, improving fastener availability and achieving static and systems test milestones. We are focused on getting the 787 flying, certified and delivered to our customers."

Boeing's 2008 financial guidance will be updated with the impact of these changes when the company holds its fourth-quarter 2007 earnings conference call on January 30. There will be no impact from the schedule change on 2007 financial results and the company does not expect the impact on 2008 earnings guidance to be significant. Financial guidance for 2009 now will be provided when the company issues its first quarter 2008 earnings report in late April, which will follow the assessment of the impact of 787 schedule changes. The company continues to expect strong earnings per share growth in 2009. The outlook for the company's defense business and in-production commercial airplane programs remains very strong.

Boeing will hold a conference call with Scott Carson and Pat Shanahan to discuss the 787 schedule changes today at 11:00 a.m. EST, 8:00 a.m. PST. The call will be accessible by clicking here.

[Edited 2008-01-16 06:14:59]



[Edited 2008-01-16 06:18:44]

[Edited 2008-01-16 06:19:13]

Topic: RE: Boeing Shifts Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Zeke
Posted 2008-01-16 06:15:36 and read 23054 times.

link for above is http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q1/080116a_nr.html

the 787 Conference Call Webcast http://phx.corporate-ir.net/playerlink.zhtml?c=85482&s=wm&e=1743044

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2008-01-16 06:23:11 and read 22972 times.

This was expected, but since the other thread with the WSJ article, that was only based on rumors, whereas this is the official statement from Boeing. That is why I believe this is not a double thread.

I hope Boeing are able to deliver as many planes as their original schedule, although I guess, they are not able to peak production rates just yet. They better get it right this time

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Lotsamiles
Posted 2008-01-16 06:36:20 and read 22855 times.



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "However, we continue to be challenged by start-up issues in our factory and in our extended global supply-chain."

No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Iloveboeing
Posted 2008-01-16 06:38:38 and read 22838 times.



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 2):
I hope Boeing are able to deliver as many planes as their original schedule, although I guess, they are not able to peak production rates just yet. They better get it right this time

Me too. I don't know if it was Boeing or not, but I heard some suggesting that the suppliers build factories around the Everett plant, so it would lessen logistics. I think that would be a great idea and the state of Washington would love it because it would create a ton of new jobs.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2008-01-16 06:41:24 and read 22804 times.



Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 3):
No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".

What known design problems?

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
Me too. I don't know if it was Boeing or not, but I heard some suggesting that the suppliers build factories around the Everett plant, so it would lessen logistics. I think that would be a great idea and the state of Washington would love it because it would create a ton of new jobs.

That could be a good idea. I know that for the detailed designing Washington State does not have enough engineers. But for production I guess that will not be the same kind of problem

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-16 06:44:20 and read 22746 times.

Boeing haven't really told us very much there. Hopefully, there will be more meat at the conference call.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2008-01-16 06:58:20 and read 22589 times.

Having been involved in designing radically new products myself, I can attest to the fact that management dictated schedules are nothing more than WAG's, and if they actually get met it is usually due to extraordinary dedication on the part of the workers and very good luck. Previous Boeing new products since the 747 have been more evolutionary than revolutionary, and so there was much more relevant experience to base the schedules on. With the 787 there have obviously been many more unexpected problems encountered, as well as the issue of many more major suppliers. The result is what we see now in delays. But while it is obviously costing Boeing a lot more (in both money and time) than expected to get the 787 into production, it has also sold far better than expected, and therefore Boeing will end up faring very well once it does get in service. Boeing is in much better financial shape now than when they spent more than the net worth of the company in developing the 707, and again on the 747, so in the end they should be in very good shape indeed. All of us enthusiasts are disappointed in the delays, but everyone should agree that it is far more important to get it right than get it on time.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Slz396
Posted 2008-01-16 07:02:42 and read 22535 times.

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 7):
Boeing haven't really told us very much there. Hopefully, there will be more meat at the conference call.

In fact I doubt it....

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Boeing today announced that first flight of the 787 has been moved from the end of the first quarter of this year to around the end of the second quarter to provide additional time to complete assembly of the first airplane.

In short, they don't know it will be ready in 3 months....

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Over the next several weeks, Boeing will be working with its customers and suppliers to assess the specific impacts of the schedule change on the 787's flight test program and entry into service

This is even more important as it means that just as I have been expecting, even if first flight happens in June, the later milestones will have to be moved to the right more than just by 3 months as basically not enough test planes will be flying to complete the condensed flight schedule... Boeing will likely have to revert to a standard test schedule, given the shortage of test planes, and as such EIS will take a second more serious hit.

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Boeing's 2008 financial guidance will be updated with the impact of these changes when the company holds its fourth-quarter 2007 earnings conference call on January 30. There will be no impact from the schedule change on 2007 financial results and the company does not expect the impact on 2008 earnings guidance to be significant. Financial guidance for 2009 now will be provided when the company issues its first quarter 2008 earnings report in late April, which will follow the assessment of the impact of 787 schedule changes

No impact on 2007, obviously.
Minor impact on 2008, as this was already covered last time.
The big issue is going to be 2009, but guess what, it will take them 3 months to figure out the impact, meaning they need 3 months to see how many 787s they are actually just going to be able to deliver that year at best... Note how this 3 months period keeps popping up: first delay announced about 3 months ago, now a new delay of 3 months, Boeing will only know the real impact of the problems in 3 months... Anybody gets the impression that for the past 3 months there hasn't been much progress booked?   

With all the outsourcing on the 787, Boeing is just a customer waiting for its shipments really and simply doesn't know when it will get them so it seems. Hence this very fuzzy, but not really reassuring statement.

[Edited 2008-01-16 07:10:47]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-16 07:18:31 and read 22318 times.

So in the "making lemonade out of lemons" department, let's look at the positives...

By having the suppliers deliver just the raw fuselage barrels and wings for ZA001, Boeing is able to build a complete 787 from the ground up. So the Type and Production Certificates will cover every model because Boeing will be able to show how to build a 787 from the ground up and prove it can be done using ZA001. I think this is why Boeing keeps working on it, rather then towing it down to the Museum of Flight as a permanent static display and use ZA002 as the first 787.

Boeing is now also able to write a "787 Assembly for Dummies" picture book and send it off to the contractors, who can follow along and build the rest of the planes. And they have also been able to train a group of machinists on how to build a 787 from a kit. Those machinists can train other machinists so, if necessary, Boeing can quickly have a ready-to-go workforce if they need to intervene with a supplier or two, or help a new supplier take over for one who will be given the boot.

Airbus "benefited" from having the A380 fall during a huge order boom, so they were able to convert penalties to orders. Boeing has likely been doing some of that last year and will be doing it in earnest this year. And if Boeing just needs to provide cash to the customers, that's not a terrible thing since it binds them even tighter to their 787 orders and away from the A350.

While earnings for the next year or two will take a hit just as Airbus' did because of the A380 delays, Boeing's stronger margins and widebody deliveries along with less planned 787 deliveries (and those deliveries at the lowest margins) will insulate much of that for 2008. 2009 will be when it really hits home, but by 2010-2011 production should be at the planned rate, so the duration of the weakness will be less then Airbus, which needed more time to reach their full production rate.

I'm hoping Boeing has scrapped any plans for a 787HGW and is instead looking at Y3. I still think a 250t 787-10 makes sense, but a true 10-abreast Y3 will be a better 777 replacement and expansion platform and could EIS as early as 2020. It can bracket the A350-900 and A350-1000 as well as a hypothetical A350-1100. It would replace the 747-8I (leaving just the freighter) and provide a nice bridge to the A380-800. It would also, with Y1, give Boeing a complete modern product line with no real gaps between ~150 and ~450 passengers.

And it might just earn Boeing some sympathy with the KC-45A RFP (the original deal was designed in part to help Boeing weather the 50% drop in commercial aviation production after 9/11).

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Slz396
Posted 2008-01-16 07:28:57 and read 22205 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
"making lemonade out of lemons"

I noticed too you have been making a lot of lemonade recently.

You hopefully have a school or something like that next door, because otherwise you'll be drinking of it till the 787 finally takes to the skies.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
By having the suppliers deliver just the raw fuselage barrels and wings for ZA001, Boeing is able to build a complete 787 from the ground up. So the Type and Production Certificates will cover every model because Boeing will be able to show how to build a 787 from the ground up and prove it can be done using ZA001. I think this is why Boeing keeps working on it, rather then towing it down to the Museum of Flight as a permanent static display and use ZA002 as the first 787.

I don't know if this is true.

Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it. If the FAA would certify the production process used, Boeing would have to build all 787s this way: meaning getting only empty hulls delivered to them and fitting them themselves. I thought the entire fast production concept of the 787 depended on them getting everything delivered to them pre-fitted?

Depending on how soon Boeing get's the parts delivered fully fitted as previously planned, they may have no option but to seek individual certification for the first planes (just like Airbus did on the A380).

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: JAAlbert
Posted 2008-01-16 07:35:29 and read 22157 times.

Well so much for the notion that Boeing can build a 787 in three days! I think this must be the slowest production line ever!  duck 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Starrion
Posted 2008-01-16 07:46:47 and read 22049 times.

Given the amount of the delay wouldn't it have made more sense to pull the prototype out of the way and complete LN002 instead? If the delivery and assembly can be completed in a couple of weeks, that would be a hell of a lot more effective than disassembling and reassembling LN001....

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2008-01-16 07:57:22 and read 21973 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Boeing is now also able to write a "787 Assembly for Dummies" picture book and send it off to the contractors, who can follow along and build the rest of the planes.

Stitch! You really made me smile while reading your post  Smile

It is exaggerated, but at the same time there is some truth in it and a bit of irony,

So keep up the spirit!

Continuing what you said, do some of you believe that it would have been cheaper for Boeing either to send back the unfinished sections rather than finish them indoors?

Anyone know if the second 787 will be pre assembled like it was intended?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Slz396
Posted 2008-01-16 07:59:11 and read 21951 times.

Quoting Starrion (Reply 16):
Given the amount of the delay wouldn't it have made more sense to pull the prototype out of the way and complete LN002 instead? If the delivery and assembly can be completed in a couple of weeks, that would be a hell of a lot more effective than disassembling and reassembling LN001....

On the flightblogger site, there is an indirect reference to the fact that LN2 might be taking to the sky first indeed, however, this will not solve the problem, it will just make one specific delay less long: that of the first flight.

For certification, Boeing still needs several airworthy planes and since production is also having severe problems, they can't just add another prototype in between so they definitely need to complete LN1 too unless they want to turn flight testing into something which will span 12 months at least!

Besides, it is not like LN2 is ready to go within weeks either.

[Edited 2008-01-16 08:14:39]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-16 08:03:33 and read 21908 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
I noticed too you have been making a lot of lemonade recently.

I got really bloody tired of constantly defending the A380 and the A380 program from spurious, baseless, and ignorant claims. I'm trying to save myself some of the effort when it comes time to doing so with the 787, but if Airbus fans like yourself are bound and determined to make Boeing fans pay for their slander, then I likely just won't bother.

Boeing will have the last laugh when ZA007 enters service with NH just as Airbus did when MSN003 was handed over to SQ.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it.

They have said they will, which is why they keep fighting to get ZA001 done. It would have been far easier to scrap her and start with ZA002, which is already more complete at the sub-assembly level.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-16 08:10:36 and read 21807 times.



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Having been involved in designing radically new products myself, I can attest to the fact that management dictated schedules are nothing more than WAG's, and if they actually get met it is usually due to extraordinary dedication on the part of the workers and very good luck.

I'd prefer to think that a complex programme like this would have a formal process for identifying, mitigating, and retiring risks to both cost and schedule. WAG should be an exaggeration  Smile

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Previous Boeing new products since the 747 have been more evolutionary than revolutionary,

However, when too many things change at once, the experience that people have in order to construct the risk management structure proves to have gaps in it which catch the project unawares.

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Slz396
Posted 2008-01-16 08:12:31 and read 21789 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
if Airbus fans like yourself are bound and determined to make Boeing fans pay for their slander, then I likely just won't bother.

Just pointing out that you will have a hard time finding any sign of huge schadenfreude in any of my posts on this. I tend to limit myself trying to come up with a reasonable forward looking statement which does not suffer from the Boeing 'all is well up here' sentiments.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
They have said they will, which is why they keep fighting to get ZA001 done

Given the fact the production process of ZA001 is very different than what the serial production should normally look like, I have a strong impression Boeing is just preparing for the case they learn their subcontractors are unable to deliver pre-fitted parts for a loooong time to come.

Better have a production certificate 'old style' too then, but needless to say they can then forget about the 3-day assembly time, with great consequences to the customers lined up on the order list!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: NYC777
Posted 2008-01-16 08:38:32 and read 21639 times.

Here's a syopsis of Boeing's conference calltoday. Please add inany information that I might have missed:

Boeing January 16th Conference Call

FF at end of 2nd quarter 2008
• First deliveries moved into early 2009
• Tested technology and plan and it continues to be validated
• Fasteners are no longer a pacing issue
• Good progress on LN 1 and getting production back in sequence.
• Travel work is the issue
• Working with suppliers to reduce the amount of traveled work
• The assessment (undertaken with suppliers and customers) will be done at the end of 1st quarter 2008 at which time they’ll have more detailed delivery and flight test schedule
• Credibility is being tested on this program say Carson
• Supply chain holding up the program? – LN 1 is pacing item to first flight – underestimated how long it would take to complete someone else’s work. Thought they could accommodate the traveled work from others but were wrong.
• Problems with the systems, what are the long poles for first flight? – Travel work is the long pole. System components – several thousand system components that go into activating the airplanes (computers, actuators, pumps, generators)…need 27 more parts and will have all 27 parts by Monday. What’s the maturity of those system components? Tests are being done on the components. Need another 20 system parts to get through taxi tests. Get the traveled work completed.
• How confident are you that parts are going to come in? Parts are not pacing item. Fasteners shortages are done to a few hundred. Thought that they would turn the corner in December with structural completion. That is the pacing item so that they could start system and wiring installation.
• Power on delayed to end of March? Yes, Will LN 2 make first flight? Doubt it...it’s not the plan. Production schedule…no definitive schedule...no 109 deliveries by end of 2009. Still working through the numbers by end of March 2009.
• Is the delay getting the parts to spec? 1st airplane will get its full complement of parts, static and fatigue will not. Not a rate production issue but a work sequence issue.
• No obstacles in working with the FAA. Can do a significant amount of work with FAA certification with out the airplane flying.
• Can see a path forward based on the work down and the reduction of parts shortages. Wiring bundles are done and in a few weeks will be installed in LN 1.
• What about the other airplanes after LN 1? – Won’t comment on other airplanes until after the assessment. Assessment is going to be critical for flight test and production ramp up.
• No technology issues with the program

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 08:44:38 and read 21593 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it. If the FAA would certify the production process used, Boeing would have to build all 787s this way: meaning getting only empty hulls delivered to them and fitting them themselves.

That's not how production certificates work. The production certificate certifies the processes of the OEM, not the individual steps taken to build a particular airplane. Boeing just has to show that the processes used on LN1 produced an airplane that conforms to the type design and that the processes they will use on LN2+ will do the same. There's no requirement that LN1 and LN2 be produced the same way, otherwise Boeing would have to get a new production certificate every time they changed something in their production lines (which happens all the time).

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: DAYflyer
Posted 2008-01-16 08:57:09 and read 21562 times.

 brokenheart   mad   mad 

This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Davescj
Posted 2008-01-16 09:19:13 and read 21209 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Those machinists can train other machinists so, if necessary, Boeing can quickly have a ready-to-go workforce if they need to intervene with a supplier or two, or help a new supplier take over for one who will be given the boot.

They have said different suppliers will be used in the future. Though I agree with others -- I wonder if Boeing would bring more production to WA. I'm sure they'd be able to get some massive tax deal if they did. And WA would love to have more well paying jobs (obviously).

My question -- how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380? Also, will this impact (in a negative way) a new plane/redesigned 737?

Dave

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-16 09:26:54 and read 21054 times.



Quoting Davescj (Reply 27):
how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380?

Mud-slinging? Don't confuse the dregs of A.net with Boeing or Airbus. Other than Randy's Blog and Leahy, these are two professional companies that engage in the design and manufacture of Aerospace Products.

Mud-slinging is for the lowlifes of Aviation Forums.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Cloudyapple
Posted 2008-01-16 09:32:09 and read 20934 times.

Time to talk about compensation!

Airbus lost big bucks for its 2 year delay on the A380 with fewer than 200 orders.

Boeing has 4 times the backlog and half the delay approximately. Any guesstimate of the compensation payable?

Will they play the same card Airbus did by offering steep discounts on further purchases from carriers to whom compensation is due?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2008-01-16 09:37:08 and read 20819 times.

Conference call was REALLY straightforward. No sugar coating.

109 deliveries by YE2009 will not happen. Assembly chain is now critical path issue, not fasteners, not parts, NOT STRUCTURE, NOT SYSTEMS (sorry CaptainX).

Certification is still going on with FAA while on the ground, but obviously flight hours become the critical path item in the end (in other progams, that isn't always the case.)

Sounds like the revolutionary, risk sharing, cost saving global assembly system is biting them in the ass. Wonder if after penalties and deferred revenue if the savings are lost.

Expect 797 not to be built this way, and if Y3 ever gets built, NOT to be built this way.

Would assume 787-10 launch isn't pending...

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 26):
This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.

Carson says as much. He says credibility is being tested in the program.

So EIS delay is now 8 months and counting... tick, tock.

I'm just annoyed because I wanted to go up to Seattle for FF and it keeps getting put off!!!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Ken777
Posted 2008-01-16 09:43:29 and read 20661 times.

The question I have is how "normal production schedules" are going with Boeing's suppliers? The planning goes rather deep - like to the delivery of the raw materials for the composite parts. Are companies that are on schedule, like Spirit, continuing to ramp up their production so they are ready to meet Boeing's needs?

While getting the fist plane out the door and ready to fly is causing a bottleneck it would be interesting to know how Boeing and the suppliers are going to move when the bottleneck is cleared up.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: BrianDromey
Posted 2008-01-16 09:45:05 and read 21489 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Boeing is now also able to write a "787 Assembly for Dummies" picture book and send it off to the contractors, who can follow along and build the rest of the planes. And they have also been able to train a group of machinists on how to build a 787 from a kit. Those machinists can train other machinists so, if necessary, Boeing can quickly have a ready-to-go workforce if they need to intervene with a supplier or two, or help a new supplier take over for one who will be given the boot.

I think this is a very valid point. It might not have been the original plan but Boeing has gained a lot of intimate experience with the 787. It will probably help Boeing sort out kinks further back the line.
Stitch - I have enjoyed your reasonably balanced commentary on the 787 and A380 programmes. Its nice to see that at least some posters are able to question/query things in a rational way and not resort to childish mud-slinging.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 23):
FF at end of 2nd quarter 2008

Key word "ABOUT". Boeing has not said much concrete today. They do seem to be at pains to stress it is a supply problem, and not their fault or not their design fault. Its a but churlish, IMHO. I think Boeing are using sub conractors as an easy out clause. Boeing did, afterall, select these companies.

Quoting Davescj (Reply 27):
I wonder if Boeing would bring more production to WA. I'm sure they'd be able to get some massive tax deal if they did. And WA would love to have more well paying jobs (obviously).

I guess anything is possible! I would have thought it unlikely though, because Boeing seem pretty determined to stick with their guns. If they were serious about moving things in-house I think they might have given signals that we will move component X in-house after Y airframes. Instead we have seen Boeing say, "we're looking elsewhere".

Quoting Davescj (Reply 27):
how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380? Also, will this impact (in a negative way) a new plane/redesigned 737?

I think this is a valid point. Airbus certainly lost major credibility, and it took major groveling to (partially???) restore that credibility. Airbus does build good jets currently, and so does Boeing. I think the airlines can accecpt delays, its how the manufacturers handle them that matters, and I don't really see a difference in the handling between A380 delay and 787 delay.

Currently the mushroom adage comes to mind. Lead me to THINK that boeing may be having trouble themselves in hammering down definate dates. They must have taken serious note of what happened in Toulouse.

Brian.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Observer
Posted 2008-01-16 09:45:48 and read 21485 times.

Two podcasts on topic:

After the conference call

http://airinsight.podOmatic.com/entry/eg/2008-01-16T09_14_15-08_00
10 minutes

After the press release
http://airinsight.podOmatic.com/entry/2008-01-16T06_22_49-08_00
6 min

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-16 09:48:48 and read 21430 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 30):
109 deliveries by YE2009 will not happen. Assembly chain is now critical path issue, not fasteners, not parts, NOT STRUCTURE, NOT SYSTEMS (sorry CaptainX).

Surprise, surprise.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 30):
Sounds like the revolutionary, risk sharing, cost saving global assembly system is biting them in the ass. Wonder if after penalties and deferred revenue if the savings are lost.

I think the unions have themselves a handy bargaining card now.

Two years ago, the company I interned at wound up giving LM grief over delayed bulkhead shipments for BF-1 (F-35B). Can't build a plane when your suppliers aren't delivering parts. Important to note though, that suppliers can't build parts when the drawings for them aren't released yet...

Not saying this is the case with the 787. That these suppliers are slow could be for different reasons altogether. But I'd imagine a trend back towards in-house manufacturing.

Wonder if Airbus is paying attention. They've begun the move to offload work on subcontractors. All fine and dandy as long as it's done right.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: DBCC
Posted 2008-01-16 10:43:03 and read 20481 times.

Global supply chain problems?

I though that the main problems are with the parts from the suppliers in the US (i.e. local), and not the stuff that is shipped thousands of miles.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 10:51:49 and read 20375 times.



Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 20):
how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380?

Boeing didn't actually sling any mud, nor will Airbus sling any over the 787 delays. They're both very much in a "There but for the grace of god go I" situation. A & B fanboys, and the press, on the other hand...

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 20):
Also, will this impact (in a negative way) a new plane/redesigned 737?

So far, probably not much. 737 replacement is in a very different design phase, so it shouldn't be pulling on the same resources as 787.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 26):
They do seem to be at pains to stress it is a supply problem, and not their fault or not their design fault. Its a but churlish, IMHO. I think Boeing are using sub conractors as an easy out clause.

I think they point they were trying to get across is that it's a problem with the production line, not the airplane design. Thanks to all the new technology, I think Boeing is hypersensitive to any suggest that there's a design flaw.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 26):
Quoting Davescj (Reply 27):
I wonder if Boeing would bring more production to WA. I'm sure they'd be able to get some massive tax deal if they did. And WA would love to have more well paying jobs (obviously).

I guess anything is possible! I would have thought it unlikely though, because Boeing seem pretty determined to stick with their guns.

I think this was in reference to statements Mike Bair made after he left the 787 program regarding bringing suppliers closer. The suggestion wasn't to bring the work back in-house at Boeing, but to physically colocate the suppliers with Boeing so that it would be easier for Boeing to monitor and help them if that became necessary. It's a lot easier to troubleshoot when you drive down the road instead of flying to Italy.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Nycbjr
Posted 2008-01-16 10:58:17 and read 20231 times.

someone mentioned the possibility of NW canceling its order earlier in this thread (or the other one).. anyone want to comment or confirm the rumor?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PlaneInsomniac
Posted 2008-01-16 11:49:01 and read 19497 times.



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
"The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson

I am not entirely sure whether this is such a clever thing to say at all. While I absolutely believe this to be true, actually spelling it out in a press conference could make it sound almost desperate.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Manfredj
Posted 2008-01-16 11:49:54 and read 19493 times.



Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
Well so much for the notion that Boeing can build a 787 in three days! I think this must be the slowest production line ever!

Non-sense talk. You ever tell your boss you'll have a report for him, and not be able to deliver it in time because of outside factors? I think we all have.

I think someone summed it up in the sister thread this morning. I would rather have the airplane a few months late then get it early with major faults...end of story.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 11:51:32 and read 19473 times.



Quoting DBCC (Reply 29):
I though that the main problems are with the parts from the suppliers in the US (i.e. local), and not the stuff that is shipped thousands of miles.

Most of the stuff goes thousands of miles regardless of who built it. For example, the raw carbon fiber comes from a plant in Washington, get shipped half way around the world to become barrels and wings and such, then flies back "home" to Washington. Thanks to the "stuffing" of sections at remote assembly sites around the world, even a part made in Everett's back yard may travel a long way before it ends up in final assembly.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 474218
Posted 2008-01-16 12:00:34 and read 19248 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 24):
109 deliveries by YE2009 will not happen.

That was (and is) never going to happen on one production line.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
Well so much for the notion that Boeing can build a 787 in three days!

The plan was to move the production line every three days, not build a 787 in three days.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: R2rho
Posted 2008-01-16 12:07:04 and read 19170 times.

Everybody saw this one coming.

(sigh)... has Boeing learned nothing from Airbus and their mistakes? And why the hurry to do everything so quickly, setting themselves impossible goals and targets for an aircraft that introduces so much new technology and so many new production methods? Well, I hope the Airbus bashers realize that yes, this can and does happen to everybody, even the infallible Boeing. And I hope the Boeing bashers keep it cool and we can all have a civilized discussion.

Looks like we'll see the 787 and the A400M racing to see which flies first! Big grin

...but the Superjet will have beaten them both by then  Wink

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Checksixx
Posted 2008-01-16 12:10:32 and read 19091 times.



Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 20):
This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.

No it doesn't...at all. They're being open and honest about a MINOR delay. Also, anyone comparing them to Airbus is not up to par on either company. Now when/if they announce a delay of a year or more, then you could compare them to Airbus.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2008-01-16 12:14:21 and read 19037 times.



Quoting R2rho (Reply 36):

(sigh)... has Boeing learned nothing from Airbus and their mistakes?

As I see it both sides have made mistakes, but they are very different ones. Boeing has been overly optimistic about implementing new technology; Airbus made a fundamental error that IMHO was due primarily to poor management (not insisting that EVERYONE use the same software version-very basic to anyone familiar with computers). The point is that as long as human beings do things they will have problems, make mistakes, and underestimate what things are going to take to get done. Managers seem to be optimistic by nature; that's how they got to be managers. If they say this can't be done, or it will take twice as long as others think it will, they don't get promoted. If they say it can be done faster than their superiors think and then do it, they get promoted. If they then promise and don't deliver, they get demoted (ask Mike Bair about that.) Life goes on.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Glideslope
Posted 2008-01-16 12:17:07 and read 19029 times.

Boeing made a HUGE mistake letting Alan go. Carson is not up the task in the least. If he were, things with Mike Baire would have never be let to get so out of control.

What we are seeing is Pat Shanahan trying to sweep up all the crap, and Carson doing Photo Ops.

If I were Carson I'd be darn concerned of having my ass handed to me soon. Jim McNerney is from the Jack Welsh school of responsibility. If I were Jim I'd can Carson today.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 12:22:51 and read 18904 times.



Quoting 474218 (Reply 35):

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
Well so much for the notion that Boeing can build a 787 in three days!

The plan was to move the production line every three days, not build a 787 in three days.

Given that there are three line positions, doesn't that work out to the same thing? Not counting time spend before final assembly, obviously.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 38):
Boeing has been overly optimistic about implementing new technology

So far, it hasn't been the technology that's been the problem. Fasteners, travelled work, systems integration...those are all common to any airplane program. The degree of outsourcing of pre-assembly responsibility is the big new thing that seems to be tripping up the works, but that doesn't really seem to be a technology issue.

Quoting Glideslope (Reply 39):
Boeing made a HUGE mistake letting Alan go.

What were they going to do, chain him to his desk? Alan didn't get picked for CEO. If you're CEO of Boeing Commercial and an engineering-type-guy, there aren't many spots left to go up to. I suppose Boeing could have tried to buy him out, but do you really want your CEO to be a guy who doesn't want to be there?

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-16 12:36:54 and read 18661 times.



Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 26):
Stitch - I have enjoyed your reasonably balanced commentary on the 787 and A380 programmes.

Thank you.

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 26):
Key word "ABOUT". Boeing has not said much concrete today. They do seem to be at pains to stress it is a supply problem, and not their fault or not their design fault. Its a but churlish, IMHO. I think Boeing are using sub conractors as an easy out clause. Boeing did, afterall, select these companies.

I really don't think it is a case of Boeing trying to shift the blame to the suppliers and away from themselves. Boeing has consistently stated they take full responsibility for the delays and they are the ones will will handle any issues with the customers for late delivery. NH is not discussing delivery with Spirit or Alenia. They are discussing it with Boeing. Boeing also refuses to publicly point out the specific suppliers having issues nor are they specifically detailing what those problems are.

However, the problem IS with the suppliers - namely they are not providing Boeing with parts to a level Boeing planned for and Boeing is now trying to completely overhaul their production process to address. And due diligence requires Boeing to explain to investors and analysts why ZA001 and her sisters are still in pieces and not in the air per the original and subsequently revised schedules. Boeing cannot say "we have issues, we're working on them, you'll know they're fixed when the plane is in service". That is far too vague and would inspire SIGNIFICANTLY less confidence in customers, investors and analysts.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 28):
I think the unions have themselves a handy bargaining card now.

The only way that would happen would be for Boeing to assume sole control of the entire production process and build them from the outside-in like they do every other plane. And if they do that, they are totally shafted, since 787 production rates would be much lower then planned and the existing backlog would be pushed back into the 2020s.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 28):
Wonder if Airbus is paying attention. They've begun the move to offload work on subcontractors. All fine and dandy as long as it's done right.

Unlike Boeing, Airbus has been building planes this way - large pre-fabbed sections sent for quick final assembly - for decades.

It would be one thing if the 787 was being built like a 767 or 777 and was running close to a year late. That would truly show a complete and total breakdown in project management because there would be no reason for it to be late since it's just like every other Boeing plane before it.

But this is totally new ground for Boeing and for the suppliers. They thought it would be so much quicker they could compress the timelines to push ahead. And when the plane became the #4 best-selling widebody commercial airliner in history soon after ATO, they likely compressed them even more to try and score every order they could. But the suppliers were not ready in time and Boeing tried to cover them, but they were not in a position to do so and now the works are snafu'd until enough time passes that they can get everything back to the original plan.

Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 32):


Quoting OyKIE:
"The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson.

I am not entirely sure whether this is such a clever thing to say at all. While I absolutely believe this to be true, actually spelling it out in a press conference could make it sound almost desperate.

A twelve-month delay because they are working on fixing the assembly process is far less damning then a six-month delay because a major system or structure failed and had to be re-designed.

In the former, you know that once you have it corrected, production will proceed smoothly and the planes that are completed will be airworthy with a solid dispatch reliability record.

In the latter, if you had one major problem, that means there may be others you haven't found yet. So even if smooth production starts earlier, you begin to worry about airworthiness and dispatch reliability.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 474218
Posted 2008-01-16 12:42:04 and read 18532 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 40):
Given that there are three line positions, doesn't that work out to the same thing? Not counting time spend before final assembly, obviously.

No it doesn't mean the same time. If and when everything is up and running as planned, each aircraft will stay in each position for three days. I think there a actually four positions in final assembly alone, so final assembly will take at least 12 days. A 787 will be built every three day but it takes longer than three days to build each one.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-16 12:55:40 and read 18306 times.

The positive thing for me was that they refrained from providing a new guidance on production ramp-up and deliveries until they have a clear assessment of the situation. First step towards restoring credibility.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 797charter
Posted 2008-01-16 13:15:12 and read 18202 times.

Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 3):
No mention of the known design problems



Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 32):


Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
"The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson

I am not entirely sure whether this is such a clever thing to say at all. While I absolutely believe this to be true, actually spelling it out in a press conference could make it sound almost desperate.



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 5):


Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 3):
No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".

What known design problems?

I have never heard of any fundamental design issues - what are they referring to???

        

Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 31):
someone mentioned the possibility of NW canceling its order earlier in this thread (or the other one).. anyone want to comment or confirm the rumor?

Will never happen - NW has some early positions worth gold.         


BTW I am personally very disappointed over the delay, - I am going to Portland i May, and was planning a visit in Seattle to see the first few 787's flying around as mad Bees... 



Regards

Steen  

[Edited 2008-01-16 13:17:14]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ComairGuyCVG
Posted 2008-01-16 13:39:15 and read 17707 times.

Looks like the standard 6 month (or more) delay of a new airliner is coming right on schedule.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Dougbr2006
Posted 2008-01-16 13:46:31 and read 17579 times.



Quoting Starrion (Reply 12):
Given the amount of the delay wouldn't it have made more sense to pull the prototype out of the way and complete LN002 instead? If the delivery and assembly can be completed in a couple of weeks, that would be a hell of a lot more effective than disassembling and reassembling LN001....

Would not exactly be good propaganda if the roll out aircraft doesn't take to the skies first, plus, what is the order and function of each aircraft in the flight test programme. I would think that LN001 is also having to be fitted with many additional sensors for recording parameters of the flights, test consoles, heaps of test wiring for the sensors, have you ever seen the inside of a test aircraft, it is usually full of equipment and ballast, perhaps that aircraft needs some stronger floor structure etc to carry all the cabin weight. Is LN002 really that far ahead, during the call they stated that the wiring harnesses are not yet fitted in LN001, though they are confident that sufficient testing on the ground has been done to eliminate wiring errors etc. If the first aircraft has no wiring well will LN002. In what condition did LN002's sections arrive, were they stuffed or not, listening to the conversation it seemed that they still don't have production standard sections being delivered yet.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 18):
How confident are you that parts are going to come in? Parts are not pacing item. Fasteners shortages are done to a few hundred. Thought that they would turn the corner in December with structural completion. That is the pacing item so that they could start system and wiring installation.

Is he talking about LN001 or is the fastener problem really still there but aircraft LN001 will have enough to hold it together for the first flights.

The conversation in general was cagey, in the least vague to the point that they still don't have a schedule for events to happen for sure, they are still discussing it with suppliers and customers, they seemed less confident than the last delay issue conference call.

I would not be surprised if we get a further delay when ramp up is supposed to happen, in my opinion, I think Boeing are delaying in hope that the suppliers can get it right before a production aircraft is started, but that just my 10c worth.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: RedChili
Posted 2008-01-16 13:49:49 and read 17557 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 40):
Given that there are three line positions, doesn't that work out to the same thing? Not counting time spend before final assembly, obviously.

I believe this means that final assembly will take nine days. The airplane enters the first position, spends three days there, goes to the second position for three more days, then three additional days at the third position, and then roll out. In this way, one new 787 will roll out every three days, but each airplane will spend nine days in final assembly.

And something entirely different:

The following quotes made me think:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...a-first-step-in-the-long-road.html

Quote:
Basing the program over the next year around flight testing and certification rather than jumping ahead to production ramp up, allows the aircraft, the processes and the management of the supply chain to mature into on a smaller scale that sets Boeing up for long term success with its production ramp up.

If the ramp up had continued as planned, any design modifications that would have come out of flight testing would have had to be applied to already complete aircraft waiting for certification on the flight line in Everett or stored in the desert.

http://www.reuters.com/article/blogB...tWidgetId=B7gSUbux1hpbz8uOa7TWsLnV

Quote:
Still, all of the airframe suppliers are working on shipsets for the start of the full production run even as the nagging headache of missing parts keeps them from shipping the test flight airplanes.

That means all are well along on shipsets No. 7 and beyond. In fact, Spirit Aerosystems, the Wichita-based company that’s building the 787’s cockpit first fuselage section, and Alenia, the Italian supplier making the rest of the forward fuselage, are already up to shipset No. 18.

Shipset completion isn’t uniform across the board, but at least some work is underway to those levels.

It seems to me that under the October 2007 plan, Boeing put a huge emphasis on ramping up production as soon as possible. They were even planning to have around a dozen airplanes ready for delivery almost as soon as the 787 would be certified. As Flightblogger explains, this is a very risky thing to do, and Boeing could end up having to do travel work on a dozen 787s whenever flight testing demands a design modification.

But it appears that Boeing is now much more realistic, and that they are more focused on getting the plane certified before ramping up production. IMHO, this is good for Boeing. It probably means an EIS delay of a year or so, but after that, production ramp-up should be smoother.

But does this mean that the contractors will stop working on the shipsets beyond ZA006 that they are currently on?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Lotsamiles
Posted 2008-01-16 13:55:13 and read 17463 times.



Quoting 797charter (Reply 44):
what are they referring to???

Certain systems hardware is being redesigned and the associated code is being re-written to this day. How Boeing plans to install these parts on Monday is a mystery.

Again, this will be corrected fairly soon (not a "fundamental" problem as others hint about) but I question why Boeing fails to mention the fact that they don't yet have all the designs finalized.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 14:01:29 and read 17372 times.



Quoting 474218 (Reply 42):
Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 40):
Given that there are three line positions, doesn't that work out to the same thing? Not counting time spend before final assembly, obviously.

No it doesn't mean the same time. If and when everything is up and running as planned, each aircraft will stay in each position for three days. I think there a actually four positions in final assembly alone, so final assembly will take at least 12 days. A 787 will be built every three day but it takes longer than three days to build each one.

Ah, there's the problem...I thought they were shifting line positions every day. Thank you for the clarification.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-16 14:13:38 and read 17240 times.



Quoting 474218 (Reply 42):
If and when everything is up and running as planned, each aircraft will stay in each position for three days. I think there a actually four positions in final assembly alone, so final assembly will take at least 12 days. A 787 will be built every three day but it takes longer than three days to build each one.

The original concept was to complete final assembly of a 787 in three days - total. Later Boeing stated that at the beginning of the learning curve it would take longer and that they planned to achieve 6 days per aircraft until 2010.
The final assembly line has four position, position #4 is supposed to serve as an overflow for work not having been completed on position #3. There is a thorough description somewhere, I think it was either FLIGHT or DesignNews....

Contrary to what has been said earlier on Anet, the positions can only be used in sequence, not in parallel.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Oldtimer
Posted 2008-01-16 14:17:03 and read 17107 times.

Stitch

Thank you for your balanced posts in this thread. I cannot say I have always agreed with all your posts on the threads I have read over the years, but you do try very hard to be balanced and anti-bashing.

Over my 40+ years within the aircraft industry, Royal Air Force, Airlines and Manufacturing, I have worked on and with many types of aircraft. All had their foibles and some worse than others, but all were aircraft and I am an aircraft fan, otherwise why would I have wasted those 40 plus years of my life.
Boeing and Airbus are both great manufacturers, both have and will still make mistakes, but long live both of them to continue the good work of keeping our interest of aviation alive.

Oldtimer

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-16 14:23:02 and read 16999 times.

I'll light a candle for all you sentimental guys, okay?

 candle 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: PITIngres
Posted 2008-01-16 15:01:47 and read 16585 times.



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 7):
Having been involved in designing radically new products myself, I can attest to the fact that management dictated schedules are nothing more than WAG's, and if they actually get met it is usually due to extraordinary dedication on the part of the workers and very good luck.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
'd prefer to think that a complex programme like this would have a formal process for identifying, mitigating, and retiring risks to both cost and schedule. WAG should be an exaggeration

In the real world, things aren't that nice and neat. The fact that you don't know what you don't know is fatal to any notion that a large project of this sort can be planned in its entirety. In addition, it turns out that if you plan in sufficient detail to get a really good estimate, you've spent almost as much time on planning as you would have just doing a throwaway -- and then all you have is a plan, still subject to those nasty unknowns.

Managers hate to hear that sort of thing, but that's just too bad, because that's life.

Now, I'll grant you that WAG might be a bit of an exaggeration. Usually a good project manager has some feel for how long something will take, especially if a similar project has been done before. Also, there DO need to be controls and contingency plans. Alas, sometimes the contingency plan reads "try to work harder, nothing else we can do!"

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
So the Type and Production Certificates will cover every model because Boeing will be able to show how to build a 787 from the ground up and prove it can be done using ZA001. I think this is why Boeing keeps working on it, rather then towing it down to the Museum of Flight as a permanent static display and use ZA002 as the first 787.

I sort of wondered why they stuck with it. I figured it was the in for a penny, in for a pound effect, but you're probably right about it being a production validation effort. I don't doubt for a moment that when the empty barrel first arrived, there were meetings discussing whether to stuff it, or throw the darn thing in the bay. Once they got serious about stuffing it themselves, I suspect they were committed almost no matter what.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: AndesSMF
Posted 2008-01-16 15:06:05 and read 16529 times.



Quoting PITIngres (Reply 53):
Usually a good project manager has some feel for how long something will take, especially if a similar project has been done before

Key words used: similar project

This has never been done before, and it was a very aggressive (still is?) schedule. Not only was it a new airplane design, it came with new materials and new manufacturing and assembly processes.

I would say that Airbus is closely watching to apply lessons learned to the A350.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-16 15:43:39 and read 16217 times.



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 37):
No it doesn't...at all. They're being open and honest about a MINOR delay.

A minor delay? In the space of a little over three months, we've gone from "on track", through a six-month delay, and now have an additional three-month delay. On the original timeline, nine months represents a bit more than a "minor" delay.

Quoting Dougbr2006 (Reply 46):
The conversation in general was cagey, in the least vague to the point that they still don't have a schedule for events to happen for sure, they are still discussing it with suppliers and customers, they seemed less confident than the last delay issue conference call.

Agreed. The biggest problem that I see after the PR and conference call is that Boeing doesn't seem to be completely clear on exactly where they are and what the exact schedule is. It would not be surprising to hear of another delay. Their performance today doesn't seem to be filling folks with confidence that everything is now on track. They're saying it will take them another two months to work out how many planes they can deliver in 2009.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ScrubbsYWG
Posted 2008-01-16 15:56:20 and read 16202 times.

i think one of the biggest problems is it is tough to estimate the amount of time a task will take when you have never done it before. Sure, boeing has built airplanes before, but the 787 is quite different from previous models, and their estimation of time to complete the now well known travel work is not great.

And for those saying boeing will in the future bring back a lot of work to washington i think are jumping ahead too much. I have faith that boeing will figure this out and will build lots and lots of planes using this method. I can't see boeing building everything in house.

by the way, i got a sneak peak at the design for the 737RS. Like the 787, it seems to use materials that haven't really been used in planes of this type and is very light weight.

Check it out:

Big version: Width: 648 Height: 486 File size: 53kb

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-16 16:49:37 and read 15635 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 55):

Agreed. The biggest problem that I see after the PR and conference call is that Boeing doesn't seem to be completely clear on exactly where they are and what the exact schedule is.

That's because they're not exactly clear on where they are and what the exact schedule is. That's an unknowable quantity...it drives people, especially financial people, nuts because they can't accept that something with so much money involved isn't planned to the last nickel and the last second, but that's the truth. Projects this large have too many variables to be planned, scheduled, and monitored to the degree that you're suggesting.

Even on the longest running commercial program at Boeing (737), they don't know the delivery date on any particular aircraft for certain until a few weeks ahead and even then it sometimes gets missed.

Same thing happens at Airbus, by the way...it's a characteristic of large projects, not a Boeing thing.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ER757
Posted 2008-01-16 16:51:18 and read 15626 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
but by 2010-2011 production should be at the planned rate,

Based on what's taken place thus far, this is a pretty optimistic premise. I do hope you are right, but at this point, there's nothing I can see that would lead me to similar optimism on ever getting up to the originally planned production rate. I fear that it was as overly-optimistic as the original EIS date.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 24):
I'm just annoyed because I wanted to go up to Seattle for FF and it keeps getting put off!!!

Don't worry, we'll save you a spot along the fence!  Wink

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 28):
I think the unions have themselves a handy bargaining card now.

 checkmark 

I for one am really disappointed with Boeing. In hightsight, which is always 20/20 of course, they were much too ambitious with the timeline for this project. It is clearly too late to re-write the past, but looking back, if they had added a year to the timeline originally announced, would they have lost many sales? I think most everyone would answer with a resounding "no." So why paint yourself into a corner like they did?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: PITIngres
Posted 2008-01-16 17:19:10 and read 15375 times.



Quoting ER757 (Reply 58):
I for one am really disappointed with Boeing. In hightsight, which is always 20/20 of course, they were much too ambitious with the timeline for this project. It is clearly too late to re-write the past, but looking back, if they had added a year to the timeline originally announced, would they have lost many sales? I think most everyone would answer with a resounding "no." So why paint yourself into a corner like they did?

Uh, because they thought they could make it? Maybe with a few minor hitches? I'm sure that if they really thought the original schedule was a stretch they would have padded it. (Maybe they did!)

I've been in projects that ran over like this. You start out by giving your best guess; let's say 6 months, but you're not sure, it might be 12. The sales and marketing types piss and moan because they need a date to tell people. So, I say 12 months, but no, that's too long, can we say 9? and I say sure, whatever. Notice, now, I thought 6 months was doable, 9 was plausible, and 12 was pretty safe.

Then after 3 months it's becoming apparent that we are not making it, and creepy-crawly things are still slithering out from every newly overturned rock. Stuff that was supposed to "just work" just doesn't. So then there's the big meeting, and they ask what's the new date, and I say I dunno. At this point it will be done when it's done. They say well, ok, we have to tell the customers something, I say I dunno. They say how about adding 2 months, do you think you can catch up, how far behind are you? I say I dunno, sure, whatever, tell them another 2 months.

At 6 months we have a pretty good grip on the scope, the unknowns have become mostly-knowns, and it's just a simple matter of programming. Lots of it. I tell the boss and sales-marketing types that we'll be done at the 13 month mark, 14 at the outside, and there is more pissing and moaning because I lied (!!) to them last time, and now it's longer, and what are they going to tell the customers, and much wringing of hands etc etc.

And guess what? We were done a couple weeks into the 13th month. Had the project been initially estimated at 14 months, it never would have been started in the first place because, geez, 14 months is a long time.

Now, a few of us got together and did a project post-mortem. (This wasn't a huge project manpower-wise, just complicated.) We could see pretty much exactly where we went wrong with the estimates and the project plan. The interesting thing is, we all agreed that even with 100% perfect knowledge of the project state *as of that point*, we would have made *exactly the same decisions*. It would have taken a message from the future to do it differently.

So, sometimes even well-run projects end up flailing around. Maybe Boeing is screwing this thing up, maybe they aren't, but it's pretty darn hard to tell the difference from the outside. If you try to front-load too much, either the project never starts or people think you are padding just to make yourself look good.

Been there, done that!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-16 18:08:28 and read 14986 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 55):
The biggest problem that I see after the PR and conference call is that Boeing doesn't seem to be completely clear on exactly where they are and what the exact schedule is. It would not be surprising to hear of another delay. Their performance today doesn't seem to be filling folks with confidence that everything is now on track. They're saying it will take them another two months to work out how many planes they can deliver in 2009.

I believe Boeing does have a pre-scheduled pattern to when they do these calls, so if a call falls before they're fully ready to disclose (for whatever reasons), then they kind of have to punt it to the call scheduled when they will be ready to do so.

Are they telling us everything? No. If somebody doesn't ask about something bad (that they are not required to disclose), are they going to offer it? Probably not. But I honestly don't feel a sense of deliberate obfuscation on their part - NOT that you are implying or hinting to anything remotely like that, please understand. It's just a general comment on my part on the situation.

The situation is still evidently fluid, if for no other reason then they first have to determine how many planes they can deliver in 2009 and then start talking to the customers. Those customers have their own original and contingency plans, and delays by Boeing can affect them. EK, for example, evidently could have gotten their first A380 earlier then plan, but they already planned for the date so it would mess them up if they got it earlier, so they'll wait and now QF will get the early slot because they can take their bird ahead of schedule.

Quoting ER757 (Reply 58):
Based on what's taken place thus far, (full production by 2010-2011) is a pretty optimistic premise. I do hope you are right, but at this point, there's nothing I can see that would lead me to similar optimism on ever getting up to the originally planned production rate. I fear that it was as overly-optimistic as the original EIS date.

While the issues with the first birds should not be taken in a vacuum, neither should they be applied to all future birds, either. Those birds are the exception, not the rule. The suppliers will not forever be behind because they continue to gain experience and comfort with what is required of them. Some of the suppliers have completed components and smaller sub-assemblies for somewhere between 10 and 20 787s. So the supply chain is starting to fill with completed product, which will mean less time needed at PAE to put it all together. It will take Boeing longer then planned to reach peak production, but they will reach it and "sooner" rather then "later". And once they reach it, they can start whittling down that backlog.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Beta
Posted 2008-01-16 18:28:02 and read 14819 times.

Majorly disappointed in Boeing! These setbacks make ones appreciate even more what a monumental effort and achievement Joe Sutter and his teams did in the 60s. I'm sure in the end Boeing will produce one fine airplane in the 787, just as Airbus did with the A380.
One thing: if Boeing bets the company on the B787, then it's disappointing that they put a B team in place to run it. Scott Carson has to go; he's been given chances again and again, and has proven unsuccessful. He should be going back to his old job of selling Boeing aircrafts, which he did very successfully, and hence where his talents lie. But he's clearly not risen to the challenge of the job of this magnitude.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2008-01-16 18:46:07 and read 14656 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
Anybody gets the impression that for the past 3 months there hasn't been much progress booked?

I think that was the point of the update.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
I got really bloody tired of constantly defending the A380 and the A380 program from spurious, baseless, and ignorant claims. I'm trying to save myself some of the effort when it comes time to doing so with the 787, but if Airbus fans like yourself are bound and determined to make Boeing fans pay for their slander, then I likely just won't bother.

Stitch, you go out of your way to be fair and balanced. You don't need to take anyone's crap.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 24):
Would assume 787-10 launch isn't pending...

Good news for Airbus. I remember the "imminent" announcement - what, two years ago? Hmmm...

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 26):
Key word "ABOUT". Boeing has not said much concrete today. They do seem to be at pains to stress it is a supply problem, and not their fault or not their design fault. Its a but churlish, IMHO. I think Boeing are using sub conractors as an easy out clause. Boeing did, afterall, select these companies.

It's a catch-22, isn't it? They talk about supplier issues, then they are trying to blame others, but if they just say "We screwed up", it's not really accurate. In the end, they needed to say it the way they did, and plenty of folks will rightully say "You chose it to be this way". What do you do?

Quoting R2rho (Reply 36):
(sigh)... has Boeing learned nothing from Airbus and their mistakes? And why the hurry to do everything so quickly, setting themselves impossible goals and targets for an aircraft that introduces so much new technology and so many new production methods?

Well, they could have said it'd take longer to do, and like others have said, it would have been a tougher sell. Not just to airlines, but to investors/shareholders. This delay is gonna cost them, but stretching development out would have cost them too, so in the end, it was a risk they chose to take. Too bad it hasn't worked out so well. Next time will be much better.

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 37):
Now when/if they announce a delay of a year or more, then you could compare them to Airbus.

Careful. It's a slippery slope when you start saying things like this. Because when they announce that delay, people love to throw it in your face. And everyone else's. We don't need that anymore around here.  Smile

Quoting Dougbr2006 (Reply 46):
in my opinion, I think Boeing are delaying in hope that the suppliers can get it right before a production aircraft is started, but that just my 10c worth.

Possible. I don't think they are shooting in the dark, but certainly they are crossing their fingers.

Quoting PITIngres (Reply 59):
So, sometimes even well-run projects end up flailing around.

Without quoting your entire post, I would like to say GREAT POST! I love when reality enters the discussion. It can be ugly. It can be simplistic. But it can be darn accurate.  Smile

-Dave

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ER757
Posted 2008-01-16 18:51:13 and read 14631 times.



Quoting PITIngres (Reply 59):
Uh, because they thought they could make it? Maybe with a few minor hitches?

The point is these guys are paid BIG MONEY to know what can and can't be done within a certain time-frame. To be overly ambitious and try to build an all-new aircraft in a manner that they had never attempted before (ie; a lot of outsourcing) built from structural materials never attempted in commercial aircraft before on such a large scale in such a compressed schedule is not, IMHO, the smartrest decision they ever made. Especially when the competition had absolutely nothing to offer against it. Just how many sales would they have lost if they said EIS was May 2009 instead of May 2008? My guess is exactly zero. Think how much less pressure everyone would have been under and how much tarnish would have been kept off their reputation. I really believe someone's head will be on the chopping block over this.
OK - rant by armchair CEO with 20/20 hindsight over.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 60):
It will take Boeing longer then planned to reach peak production, but they will reach it and "sooner" rather then "later".

Let's hope you're right....it's been 6 months since Dreamliner one rolled out and it's still nowhere near airworthy. I also see that Boeing is still very unhappy with certain suppliers - what makes you believe they will suddenly start cranking out their sections in a manner that affords Boeing to punp out 12 copies per month?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2008-01-16 19:04:23 and read 14493 times.



Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
I also see that Boeing is still very unhappy with certain suppliers - what makes you believe they will suddenly start cranking out their sections in a manner that affords Boeing to punp out 12 copies per month?

There are more a$$es on the line than Boeing's. These companies have spent a lot of money on this program, and their companies - and careers - are at stake as well. Anything can happen, but I would guess that those folks are moving heaven and earth to get it done.

Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
The point is these guys are paid BIG MONEY to know what can and can't be done within a certain time-frame

And the point is that with any project, and certainly one this complex, you can only plan so well. Additionally, you also have to weight the benefit of taking risks with the cost of failing. They obviously decided on a timeline that both allowed them to proceed acceptably without creating too much risk.

They are human, and they made mistakes (they being a generic term for those responsible for the decision making). Not earth-shattering, though certainly dissappointing. Very dissappointing.

Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
OK - rant by armchair CEO with 20/20 hindsight over.

With the emphasis on "20/20 hindsight".  Smile

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ER757
Posted 2008-01-16 19:13:23 and read 14411 times.



Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 64):
With the emphasis on "20/20 hindsight".

Oh yeah - Heavy emphasis on that for sure - that's why I don't get paid like Carson and McNerny - LOL

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-16 19:45:45 and read 14155 times.



Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
I also see that Boeing is still very unhappy with certain suppliers - what makes you believe they will suddenly start cranking out their sections in a manner that affords Boeing to punp out 12 copies per month?

Suddenly? No. But time is what the suppliers need and time is what they are getting. Boeing doesn't have the space to receive a significant influx of shipsets right now, so they have to remain at the suppliers right now. And those suppliers are working with Boeing to learn how to properly build them and document that process so it can be passed on to the next shipset, which will need less time to be built, and then passed on to the next shipset after that, which will need even less time.

One does not become an expert at something in one try. It is a succession of repetitions that first instills, and then reinforces, one's knowledge on how to do something. And once one then knows how to do it, further repetitions improve one's competence at doing it and then the speed at which one can continue to competently do it.

The 777 final assembly team didn't start out being able to build seven of them a month. They had to first learn how to build one correctly. Then they learned how to build one correctly faster. And then they learned how to build it correctly faster still. And so on, and so on until they can now build seven of them a month.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: BCBHokie
Posted 2008-01-17 00:19:09 and read 12670 times.

Well, big surprise. Whispers around the Seattle tech community 'round these parts have pointed to extended delays for quite a while. That said, pretty much any major engineering project has difficulties with schedule prediction - and the 787 schedule has always seemed incredibly aggressive to me under the best of circumstances.

It's regrettable, but Boeing has an exceptionally strong order book for the 787, and any canceled orders are likely to just open up more space for another customer waiting in the wings for the immediate future. Longer term, it will be interesting to see how they handle their supplier issues. A bad supplier is a bad supplier whether they're in Snohomish County or Sicily, or in Tacoma or Taiwan. Same with a good supplier. My guess is that Boeing is starting to discover why some of those bids were so low  Smile

Frankly, I hope this doesn't result in more suppliers moving to Puget Sound. I'm having enough trouble affording housing in this crazy market as it is.. Big grin But I wouldn't be surprised to see an increased onsite engineering presence from most suppliers in the long term, even if they don't move production itself here.

I think the most unfortunate part of the whole thing was the publicity stunt on July 8th last year. They would have been far better off behaving like Apple and keeping it under wraps until first flight... announcements make a lot more impact when you can actually demonstrate that things are working. Plus they wouldn't have lost the time to preparing for the rollout... Underpromise and overdeliver is always a sound engineering strategy, and historically I was under the impression that that philosophy had practically been invented by Boeing. Hopefully we'll see a return to that shortly  Smile

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-17 00:26:35 and read 12630 times.



Quoting PITIngres (Reply 53):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
'd prefer to think that a complex programme like this would have a formal process for identifying, mitigating, and retiring risks to both cost and schedule. WAG should be an exaggeration

In the real world, things aren't that nice and neat. The fact that you don't know what you don't know is fatal to any notion that a large project of this sort can be planned in its entirety

 checkmark 
Hence my VERY next sentence was.........

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
However, when too many things change at once, the experience that people have in order to construct the risk management structure proves to have gaps in it which catch the project unawares.

 Smile

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Braybuddy
Posted 2008-01-17 01:16:15 and read 12338 times.

Just who is going to keep the suppliers solvent? If they aren't being paid until the 787s are delivered (or Boeing gets paid, can't remember which) they are going to have serious cash-flow problems. Reading the posts above, it seems most people expect more delays during flight testing, and the original flight text programme seems out the window now.

Just how long can these guys keep churning out sections before laying-off staff? It's going to be particularly tough on the companies who have been up to speed on the programme.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-17 01:21:47 and read 12305 times.



Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 69):
Just how long can these guys keep churning out sections before laying-off staff? It's going to be particularly tough on the companies who have been up to speed on the programme.

Hence suggestions/hints/rumours/gossip that suppliers are pressing Boeing to renegotiate contracts to ease their cash-flow situation. The risk, if Boeing can't/won't help them out, is that things will just get worse.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Slz396
Posted 2008-01-17 01:37:41 and read 12200 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 41):
Unlike Boeing, Airbus has been building planes this way - large pre-fabbed sections sent for quick final assembly - for decades, so this is totally new ground for Boeing and for the suppliers. They thought it would be so much quicker they could compress the timelines to push ahead. But the suppliers were not ready in time and Boeing tried to cover them, but they were not in a position to do so and now the works are snafu'd until enough time passes that they can get everything back to the original plan.

For all the bashing of the de-centralized construction method Airbus has been using for decades ('Well, they need to set up plants everywhere in Europe, just to create jobs everywhere!') I am happy to see that the Europeans are apparently able to manage a highly complex method successfully for decades now, whereas despite all the logistical planning which has gone into the 787 program, isn't remotely as easily copied by Boeing as they had thought it would.

What's more, Boeing thought of doing better than Airbus right away, relying heavily of fully independent suppliers rather than giving most of the outsourced work to subsidiaries or joint-ventures, just because that made more immediate (financial) sense.

In there is to be found the biggest strategic mistake of Boeing: Airbus has traditionally been doing less in-house indeed, but they have always kept a close watch over their suppliers too as they were not just ordinary partners which happened to be the cheapest or willing to pay most to get on board: you will find most of Airbus' key part suppliers being either an EADS plant, a joint-venture with EADS or at least situated on an EADS site with loads of Airbus/EADS staff embedded.

Recently Airbus has selected the preferred partners for the process of spinning off 6 plants and many have criticised their selection which was clearly not given in by the short term will to maximize profits on the spin-off, but I am confident to say that their selection over fully independent companies and the structure in which they will have to work together with Airbus gives the manufacturer more guarantees of keeping a status of 'co-producer', rather than just 'part-customer' as Boeing has become.

Boeing has demonstrated that when you become just a customer of parts, you are not always kept in the know of the nasty things untill it is way too late and there is no time for you to recover in time....

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 55):
In the space of a little over three months, we've gone from "on track", through a six-month delay, and now have an additional three-month delay. On the original timeline, nine months represents a bit more than a "minor" delay.

In fact, as soon as some of the suppliers had to start deliver their parts to Boeing, the problems (of which Boeing obviously didn't know) started.... I'd say that is pretty telling of how fully detached Boeing has become.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
Anybody gets the impression that for the past 3 months there hasn't been much progress booked?



Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 62):
I think that was the point of the update.

Boeing are currently working their but off to make LN001 ready for power up and they are doing the same for the rest of the test frames which are already in house, but it is interesting to see no reference whatsoever as to how Boeing thinks the suppliers causing this nightmare to what had to become the Dreamliner are going to get ready for the massive serial production in less than a year?!

Boeing may do all it can to minimize delays (to about a year) on EIS once the parts are in house, but it may still find itself fully dependant on the performance of its independent suppliers and may soon be watching in despair to the annoyingly slow pace at which parts (fully fitted or not) will be send to them! That's also why they now need to buy time (2 to 3 months) just to give an estimate about their revised production for 2009: they simply don't know what they will be able to deliver as it is not in their hands, no matter how hard they work: it could turn out to be 75 planes, or 50, or just 35 really! All Boeing can tell right now is they will put together as much planes as possible, but how many, that is up to the weakest link: the under-performing suppliers!

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 55):
It would not be surprising to hear of another delay. Their performance today doesn't seem to be filling folks with confidence that everything is now on track. They're saying it will take them another two months to work out how many planes they can deliver in 2009.

You can expect another slippage announced when Boeing will announce power-on and the detailed schedule for the first flight of LN001. My guess is that by then Boeing will have gathered enough information about how incompetent some of their suppliers are and will then announce additional delays to both the EIS and more importantly also the delivery schedules. It is a given, seen the unresolved problems they have with the production of parts.

It is thus not unlikely (and that's an understatement) that the delays are showing a snowball effect:
-) roll out on time (of an unfinished plane)
-) final correct assembly of the first plane delayed 6 months
-) first flight delayed 9 months at best
-) EIS delayed 12 months at best
-) deliveries delayed more (12 to 18 months) as the customer finds itself lower on the order list.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: AndesSMF
Posted 2008-01-17 01:45:49 and read 12134 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 70):
The risk, if Boeing can't/won't help them out, is that things will just get worse.

If not long ago Airbus and its contractors went thru a similar situation and survived, then so will Boeing.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-17 03:07:28 and read 11695 times.



Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 72):
If not long ago Airbus and its contractors went thru a similar situation and survived, then so will Boeing.

But were Airbus's contractors risk-sharing the way Boeing's are?

My understanding (from media articles) is that the partners are not scheduled to be paid till the 787 is cetificated (or possibly even delivered). If correct, any delay could be financially painful for the partners.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: AndesSMF
Posted 2008-01-17 03:48:23 and read 11481 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 73):
If correct, any delay could be financially painful for the partners.

For the short term, sure. But with a swollen order book, unless some real bad problems crop up later, their future earnings potential can be used to obtain short term credit till the initial growing pains go away.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PHKLM
Posted 2008-01-17 03:59:23 and read 11388 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 73):
any delay could be financially painful for the partners.

Especially so when you are a manufacturer sticking to your promises but payments are deferred because of others being late. I reckon Boeing will have to help some of these suppliers out and pay them for the shipments that are made.
It's a nice example of the outsourcing caveat. On paper it works fine, until you find yourself in Boeing's current situation: they can tell the suppliers "you did a bad job, we're not gonna pay you", but then Boeing won't get the parts it needs (at least not on time). So Boeing is now devoting significant resources to cover up the mistakes of their contractors, now clearly, that is not the idea behind outsourcing... The suppliers are in control basically, as they know it is very hard for Boeing to switch suppliers if they reasonably want to stick to the planned EIS of the 787.

On the positive side; the cold-weather soak tests can be performed on the Northern Hemisphere again  Wink

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Babybus
Posted 2008-01-17 04:09:19 and read 11421 times.

Not sure many of us are waiting with baited breath for this one. Boeing should take its time and roll it out when its ready.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-17 04:56:00 and read 11124 times.



Quoting Braybuddy (Reply 69):
Just who is going to keep the suppliers solvent?

Boeing will, of course. They're sitting on tens of billions in cash, so liquidity is hardly an issue. Plus they helped many smaller suppliers with their initial capital expenses and will be repaid with discounted product.

Seriously, people. Does anyone honestly expect Boeing to allow a supplier to go under due to liquidity issues? How, exactly, does that help get 787s into customer's hands?

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 71):
What's more, Boeing thought of doing better than Airbus right away, relying heavily of fully independent suppliers rather than giving most of the outsourced work to subsidiaries or joint-ventures, just because that made more immediate (financial) sense.

Boeing has higher capital acquisition costs then Airbus does. By seeking risk/reward-sharing partners, Boeing need not spend as much of it's own money, which was important because they were also launching four new derivatives to existing models (739ER, 748I 748F, 777F) as well as the 787 and they had other programs in other divisions that needed funding. The risk/reward-sharing also should have acted as an incentive to those suppliers to work harder and smarter to reap larger rewards. Some did just that, while others appear to have tried to cut corners. Boeing also has a more hostile workforce then Airbus does, so by shifting the work to other partners, Boeing was hoping to insulate itself from labor unrest. While it did that, it also apparently insulated them from labor competence, as well.

It comes down to hard lessons learned. Boeing and the suppliers that they keep will be the stronger for it in the end, and that will bring benefits not just to the 787, but also the 737RS and 777/747RS programs.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-17 05:55:01 and read 10783 times.



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 23):
Boeing has 4 times the backlog and half the delay approximately. Any guesstimate of the compensation payable?

Jetstar/QF seem to be getting quite anxious according to the SMH for 17 Jan 08, link archived now.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 28):
Wonder if Airbus is paying attention. They've begun the move to offload work on subcontractors. All fine and dandy as long as it's done right.

You would think they would be. You would hope they would be. Then again, was Boeing paying attention when Airbus was having its woes and B was setting very tight time frames, and its some of its more avid supporters never tired of the UP&OD mantra.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 68):
Quoting PITIngres (Reply 53):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
'd prefer to think that a complex programme like this would have a formal process for identifying, mitigating, and retiring risks to both cost and schedule. WAG should be an exaggeration

In the real world, things aren't that nice and neat. The fact that you don't know what you don't know is fatal to any notion that a large project of this sort can be planned in its entirety

checkmark
Hence my VERY next sentence was.........

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
However, when too many things change at once, the experience that people have in order to construct the risk management structure proves to have gaps in it which catch the project unawares.

Is that a complex argument for handing projects like the 787 over to the tender mercies of Rumsfeld?  Wow!

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 71):
Recently Airbus has selected the preferred partners for the process of spinning off 6 plants and many have criticised their selection which was clearly not given in by the short term will to maximize profits on the spin-off, but I am confident to say that their selection over fully independent companies and the structure in which they will have to work together with Airbus gives the manufacturer more guarantees of keeping a status of 'co-producer', rather than just 'part-customer' as Boeing has become.

Boeing has demonstrated that when you become just a customer of parts, you are not always kept in the know of the nasty things untill it is way too late and there is no time for you to recover in time....

It will be interesting Slz396 to look at your comments with 20 20 hindsight after 350 EIS and see if that is a percipient analysis. There certainly are differences, and not all can be thumped into the good and bad bins. The outcome will be a test of the different types of "pudding".

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 75):
On the positive side; the cold-weather soak tests can be performed on the Northern Hemisphere again

Only if it flies before about Dec 08!  Big grin  Big grin

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: EBJ1248650
Posted 2008-01-17 05:55:13 and read 10779 times.



Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 3):
Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "However, we continue to be challenged by start-up issues in our factory and in our extended global supply-chain."

No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".

Appears the problems are logistics and production line issues.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: PITIngres
Posted 2008-01-17 06:14:04 and read 10680 times.



Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
The point is these guys are paid BIG MONEY to know what can and can't be done within a certain time-frame.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, or pick on you personally, but I think there might be a fundamental misunderstanding here: sometimes you CAN'T know what the issues and timeframes will be.

It's not about being paid enough. It's not about experience, or having the right people, or enough seniority, or a fancy resume, or anything. If a project involves unknowns, the scope of the unknowns can be UNKNOWABLE.

How many miles of undiscovered caverns are there in the Mammoth Cave system?

Like that.

Sometimes even when you think you know the scope of something, you don't. My little war story above was about an integration project, grafting a 3rd party piece onto a software product we had. The managers involved in the initial scoping all had plenty of experience with software and integrations; I had not quite 20 years at the time, myself. What nailed us were miscommunications between us and the 3rd party as to some of the details about the inner workings of their stuff. We thought it did X, and they thought we were asking about Y. The first couple months of that project were a real exercise in discovery.

Obviously, some of the things Boeing did on the 787 project were not so swift. The early rollout thing might not have been a good idea; maybe they believed the fairy tales told them by some suppliers; maybe they were late with specs to some suppliers? I'm not in a position to know. I don't argue that Boeing has run this project optimally. I just get worried when people seem to think that Boeing's management should have somehow been able to foresee all of this, and plan around it; anyone who imagines that has left the path of reality.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-17 08:39:59 and read 10452 times.



Quoting Beta (Reply 61):
One thing: if Boeing bets the company on the B787, then it's disappointing that they put a B team in place to run it.

That was Boeing's A team, actually.

Quoting Beta (Reply 61):
Scott Carson has to go; he's been given chances again and again, and has proven unsuccessful.

How has he proven unsuccessful? Carson's job is to run Boeing Commercial Airplanes...the whole thing, not just the 787, and Boeing is charging ahead on all cylinders with the 737NG, 747, and 777, just had their three largest order years in history, is sitting on a mountain of cash and huge backlog, etc. Carson is doing a great job.

Execution of the 787 program falls on the program manager. Mike Bair has already been removed and Shanahan hasn't been there long enough to hold him to the fire just yet.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: ER757
Posted 2008-01-17 14:57:38 and read 10274 times.



Quoting PITIngres (Reply 80):
I don't mean to beat a dead horse, or pick on you personally, but I think there might be a fundamental misunderstanding here: sometimes you CAN'T know what the issues and timeframes will be.

Not taken personally at all - I love a good discussion. This one will probably end up very similar to a case where a sports team is doing badly after high excpectations - someone has to take the fall in public, so the coach gets fired because you can't sack all the players. I'd look for a sacreficial lamb to be offered up soon - the fact is that these managers are paid handsomely to accept resposnibility and the consequences when things go south. That's more or less what I meant and maybe I just didn't say it properly.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PlaneWasted
Posted 2008-01-17 16:18:41 and read 10179 times.

Sad news...

Am I the only one a bit worried for Boeing?
If something goes badly wrong in the flight testing, or at the ramp up, or with certification authorities, we will see another long delay. And honestly, with projects of this technical magnitude it is a big risk, no matter how competent you are.
I think a long delay could cripple or even kill Boeing Commercial. Sure, the 737 and 777 can bring in some money for a while, but they are getting closer and closer to their end.
We have already seen two cases of single airliner programs killing a company.

But I believe Boeing will make it, but the 787 program will definately shape Boeings future for a long time, in a good or bad way.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-17 16:43:20 and read 10166 times.

A complete and total failure of the 787 program would be devastating and would likely trigger a sale of Boeing Commercial to a foreign buyer - my guess would be the Japanese heavies as they and the government have the time, money and talent to invest in new product lines and the US government would "trust" them with the technology more then the Russians or the Chinese.

Lockheed-Martin has done quite well just concentrating on military and space and there is no reason Boeing IDS would not be successful following such a role once divorced of BCA. I actually would expect Boeing to use the monies from a BCA sale to buy Northrup-Grumman to bolster their own position in the defense and space market.

[Edited 2008-01-17 16:44:13]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-18 00:34:08 and read 9763 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 78):
Is that a complex argument for handing projects like the 787 over to the tender mercies of Rumsfeld?

That's a thought  Smile

It's a (retrospective) argument for not trying to push quite as many boundaries, in the business sense, all at the same time....  yes 

IIRC haven't BA indicated that following this experience they're looking to draw their supply chain "horns" in a fraction for the time being? If so, that's a fairly typical response to overreaching yourself.

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-18 03:45:14 and read 9636 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 88):
It's a (retrospective) argument for not trying to push quite as many boundaries, in the business sense, all at the same time....

Yep, too many boundaries, that is Rummie's field of expertise.  Wow!

I presume that Boeing kept possession of ALL design information in its outsourcing. Does this not tend to divorce the design teams from floor experience of what happens when you build the designs if the fabrication is being done by separate companies at separate sites?

SLZ396 commented "Boeing has demonstrated that when you become just a customer of parts, you are not always kept in the know of the nasty things untill it is way too late and there is no time for you to recover in time..." Presumably IF that is the case, the longer term implications could be even greater.

Would not the separation of the various parts of the manufacturing process by ownership also have implications for putting design change into effect?

Does the Boeing model differ significantly from the one that is emerging at Airbus?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: CaptainX
Posted 2008-01-18 04:55:26 and read 9564 times.

More media coverage.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...eamliner_0116jan16,0,6882616.story

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-18 10:19:28 and read 9345 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 87):
I presume that Boeing kept possession of ALL design information in its outsourcing.

Doubtful. There are many components on current production aircraft that Boeing doesn't have all the design information for.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 87):
Does this not tend to divorce the design teams from floor experience of what happens when you build the designs if the fabrication is being done by separate companies at separate sites?

Yes, but that's nothing new. There seems to be this idea that Boeing designs and builds everything on their current airplanes...that's a long way from the truth. The 787 is unique in the degree of outsourcing, not the process or concept.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-18 10:28:37 and read 9323 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 89):
There seems to be this idea that Boeing designs and builds everything on their current airplanes...that's a long way from the truth. The 787 is unique in the degree of outsourcing, not the process or concept.

 yes 

Does Boeing have the specifications for every component on that plane in a CATIA file somewhere? Sure. But they have the same for every component on the 777, as well.

But that does not mean that a Boeing employee designed every component on that plane nor that every component on that plane is the intellectual property of Boeing. A CATIA file of an Alcoa Ti fastener and how it fastens two pieces of the 787 would be Boeing's intellectual property, but the design of that fastener itself is Alcoa's intellectual property. Alcoa might even have provided Boeing with a CATIA file of that fastener, which would make the actual fastener data Aloca's IP and how Boeing uses it Boeing's IP.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-18 10:31:22 and read 9311 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 90):
Does Boeing have the specifications for every component on that plane in a CATIA file somewhere? Sure. But they have the same for every component on the 777, as well.

Actually, even that isn't true (at least for some stuff). Once you drop below the component level the vendor only needs to supply the parts list, not the specifications or design criteria. A component CATIA model doesn't need to have the internal bits in it.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-19 04:34:50 and read 9054 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 90):
But that does not mean that a Boeing employee designed every component on that plane nor that every component on that plane is the intellectual property of Boeing. A CATIA file of an Alcoa Ti fastener and how it fastens two pieces of the 787 would be Boeing's intellectual property, but the design of that fastener itself is Alcoa's intellectual property. Alcoa might even have provided Boeing with a CATIA file of that fastener, which would make the actual fastener data Aloca's IP and how Boeing uses it Boeing's IP.

Thanks Stitch and Tdscanuck. It sort of makes it very clear, that parts of the system at least have the potential to be NOT all that clear.

I can see why they might want to do that, but I cannot say I like it at all as a an intellectual proposition! At best, it seems like a messy way to do it , and at worst, has the possibility of being dangerous.

I assume you are going to tell me that the same holds for Airbus? I think I might go back to Benny Hill for a remedy!!  Wow!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 07:35:52 and read 8889 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 78):
You would think they would be. You would hope they would be. Then again, was Boeing paying attention when Airbus was having its woes and B was setting very tight time frames, and its some of its more avid supporters never tired of the UP&OD mantra.

Airbus's issues weren't completely supplier related though. The past few years have been a clear demonstration that it is not as easy to get a commercial jet out the door as some on this site would *want* you to believe.

Reminds me of a conversation...

"Don't worry, we're not going to make the same mistake again!"
"No, no, you're making whole new ones!"

Quoting Stitch (Reply 41):
The only way that would happen would be for Boeing to assume sole control of the entire production process and build them from the outside-in like they do every other plane. And if they do that, they are totally shafted, since 787 production rates would be much lower then planned and the existing backlog would be pushed back into the 2020s.

I think you misunderstood me, 737RS production will likely be dictated by what goes on with the 787, and the Unions have some perfect ammo to use to keep those production jobs in house.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 41):
Unlike Boeing, Airbus has been building planes this way - large pre-fabbed sections sent for quick final assembly - for decades.

All manufacturers do it this way. That's the most efficient way to build airplanes. When final assembly starts, fuselage barrels are brought into place, wings, stabilizers, and the systems are integrated. Airbus's only difference is geographical distance between subassembly fabrication and the final assembly process, whereas in Everett the subassemblies are manufactured within that giant labyrinth. And even then, those facilities were Airbus facilities. Much like 737 fuselage subassemblies are still built in Wichita (in a company now spun off, Spirit Aerosystems) and shipped to Renton. Airbus is considering a shift to outside vendors for a large portion of the A350.

Quoting CaptainX (Reply 85):
Odds are nearly 100% imo.

Based on what exactly? Past delays based on supplier problems DO NOT indicate what will or will not happen during flight testing.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2008-01-19 07:36:16 and read 8888 times.



Quoting ER757 (Reply 63):
The point is these guys are paid BIG MONEY to know what can and can't be done within a certain time-frame. To be overly ambitious and try to build an all-new aircraft in a manner that they had never attempted before (ie; a lot of outsourcing) built from structural materials never attempted in commercial aircraft before on such a large scale in such a compressed schedule is not, IMHO, the smartrest decision they ever made.

No amount of money enables people to accurately predict next week's weather; a project of this magnitude is similarly beyond the abilities of mere mortals to accurately predict to the degree you seem to expect.

Quoting PlaneWasted (Reply 83):
I think a long delay could cripple or even kill Boeing Commercial. Sure, the 737 and 777 can bring in some money for a while, but they are getting closer and closer to their end.
We have already seen two cases of single airliner programs killing a company.

I assume you are referring to the DC-10/MD-11 killing MD; in fact I believe what killed MD was their unwillingness to take enough risk. They were unwilling to start with blank paper; the MD80-90 series were warmed-over DC-9's, and while improved in many ways did not improve fuel efficiency enough. The MD-11 kept too much from the DC-10 and did not meet expectations either. As I understand it the MD-11 wing was merely a tweaked DC-10 wing, not a new design, which is probably a big part in why it disappointed. That said, Boeing knows well that designing a new airliner is a "bet the company" move; they literally did that twice in their history (both the 707 and 747 cost more than the net worth of the company at the time to develop) and a complete failure of the 787 most likely would bankrupt them, even with their other products and backlog. But in spite of Captain X's dire prognostications, I do not believe this will happen.

Quoting PITIngres (Reply 80):

How many miles of undiscovered caverns are there in the Mammoth Cave system?

Excellent point; your posts have been very well put and very much to the point.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 474218
Posted 2008-01-19 07:38:16 and read 8889 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 84):
I actually would expect Boeing to use the monies from a BCA sale to buy Northrup-Grumman to bolster their own position in the defense and space market.

Why do you think the Justice Department would let Boeing buy Northrup Grumman when Lockheed Martin's proposal to buy them was turned down?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 07:49:57 and read 8867 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 93):
I think you misunderstood me, 737RS production will likely be dictated by what goes on with the 787, and the Unions have some perfect ammo to use to keep those production jobs in house.

My view is that the suppliers that successfully learn to execute to plan on the 787 will be the ones chosen for the 737RS. And those suppliers will pre-fabricate their 737RS sections as they do for the 787 and will deliver them to the plant where a handful of machinists will put them together like they do on the 787.

I really do not expect Boeing to bring the pre-fabrication work in-house like they do for the 747, 767 and 777. If anything, the 737RS will likely be built in two major pieces - the complete fuselage and the wingbox/wings.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 93):
All manufacturers do it this way. Airbus's only difference is geographical distance between subassembly fabrication and the final assembly process, whereas in Everett the subassemblies are manufactured within that giant labyrinth.

I should have been more clear in that when I say "building the Airbus way" I am referring to the delivery of mostly-complete sections to the factory which are then quickly assembled together into a complete airframe. The 787 production line was designed to receive these sub-assemblies mostly-complete and not in the somewhat-complete stage that they are delivered to the 747, 767 and 777 lines. So Boeing has had to "re-create" the 787 line to be like the other lines for LN0001/LN9997/LN9998 (at least) and this has taken time away from completing those frames (exacerbated by lack of parts) which has all helped contribute to the continued delays.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 07:51:25 and read 8864 times.



Quoting 474218 (Reply 95):
Why do you think the Justice Department would let Boeing buy Northrup Grumman when Lockheed Martin's proposal to buy them was turned down?

Because Boeing would not have a commercial airplanes side anymore so you'd have two pure defense and space contractors who would likely be on relative equal footing in terms of size.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 08:07:01 and read 8814 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 96):
My view is that the suppliers that successfully learn to execute to plan on the 787 will be the ones chosen for the 737RS. And those suppliers will pre-fabricate their 737RS sections as they do for the 787 and will deliver them to the plant where a handful of machinists will put them together like they do on the 787.

Indeed. But I forsee Boeing scaling back the level of out-sourcing in the future. I'm not saying a return to 767, 777, and 747 levels, but perhaps not as high as 787 is now.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 96):
I really do not expect Boeing to bring the pre-fabrication work in-house like they do for the 747, 767 and 777. If anything, the 737RS will likely be built in two major pieces - the complete fuselage and the wingbox/wings.

I was almost going to that 737 is currently built like that until I read this...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 96):
I should have been more clear in that when I say "building the Airbus way" I am referring to the delivery of mostly-complete sections to the factory which are then quickly assembled together into a complete airframe. The 787 production line was designed to receive these sub-assemblies mostly-complete and not in the somewhat-complete stage that they are delivered to the 747, 767 and 777 lines. So Boeing has had to "re-create" the 787 line to be like the other lines for LN0001/LN9997/LN9998 (at least) and this has taken time away from completing those frames (exacerbated by lack of parts) which has all helped contribute to the continued delays.

In that case I agree with you.  Smile Nonetheless, spreading the risk works both ways as we've seen. I'd still expect Boeing to move more fabrication work back in-house for 737RS. Not all of it of course, but I think industrial engineers are taking notes right now concerning the supplier problems.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-19 08:17:33 and read 8791 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 98):
But I forsee Boeing scaling back the level of out-sourcing in the future. I'm not saying a return to 767, 777, and 747 levels, but perhaps not as high as 787 is now.

However, by the time Boeing is ready for the 737RS, the teething pains of the 787 will be a distant memory. Boeing, and its contractors, will have learned the lessons and be in a much better position to handle the 737RS.

Assuming Boeing can indeed sort out the supply-chain issues (I have no reason to believe they won't eventually), the benefits realised by the system will probably make a compelling case for doing the same again for the 737RS (but maybe not on such a tight schedule!)

I guess it comes down to the old adage - no gain without pain. Having gone through the pain on the 787, Boeing should be in a position to take an even better gain on the 737RS. I don't see them throwing their hands in the air and saying "OK, let's go back to the old way!"

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-19 08:19:45 and read 8820 times.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 93):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 78):
You would think they would be. You would hope they would be. Then again, was Boeing paying attention when Airbus was having its woes and B was setting very tight time frames, and its some of its more avid supporters never tired of the UP&OD mantra.

Airbus's issues weren't completely supplier related though. The past few years have been a clear demonstration that it is not as easy to get a commercial jet out the door as some on this site would *want* you to believe.

Reminds me of a conversation...

"Don't worry, we're not going to make the same mistake again!"
"No, no, you're making whole new ones!"

It seems to have been very like that. But at a distance you would have thought that the A380 woes would have set alarm bells ringing about checking on everything even if it was clear that the 787 was not going to have the really dumb wiring problem. Of course it may be that there were other less major glitches that Airbus chose not to wash in public and if there were any such, they might indeed have been more relevant to the 787 case.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 94):
Quoting PITIngres (Reply 80):

How many miles of undiscovered caverns are there in the Mammoth Cave system?

Excellent point; your posts have been very well put and very much to the point.

I brooded over that. As you know, I have become an aficionado of Rumsfeld think and speak. However, there is a passivity in the undiscovered caverns that might not be totally appropriate.

Would not: "The percentage of undetected crime" be more appropriate? That has a human factor to add to the level of uncertainty. Wow!

[Edited 2008-01-19 08:20:39]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 08:36:24 and read 8729 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 99):
However, by the time Boeing is ready for the 737RS, the teething pains of the 787 will be a distant memory. Boeing, and its contractors, will have learned the lessons and be in a much better position to handle the 737RS.

Companies like Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, and Embraer don't get to be where they are without learning lessons...be it from failures, teething issues, or smashing successes.  Smile

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 99):
Assuming Boeing can indeed sort out the supply-chain issues (I have no reason to believe they won't eventually), the benefits realised by the system will probably make a compelling case for doing the same again for the 737RS (but maybe not on such a tight schedule!)

If they stay on this path, hopefully they will at least, as you said, not have such a tight schedule. Still, putting most of the work out on suppliers can always increase the risk of a kink in the system. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link!

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 99):
I guess it comes down to the old adage - no gain without pain. Having gone through the pain on the 787, Boeing should be in a position to take an even better gain on the 737RS. I don't see them throwing their hands in the air and saying "OK, let's go back to the old way!"

Well I'm not advocating the old way. But the level of out-sourcing may have been a little over the top in this case. I'm confident they can get it working. But for 737RS I see a little more in-house work...at least initially will a gradual off loading of some more work, even if not to the 787's level, but in the ballpark.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 100):
It seems to have been very like that. But at a distance you would have thought that the A380 woes would have set alarm bells ringing about checking on everything even if it was clear that the 787 was not going to have the really dumb wiring problem. Of course it may be that there were other less major glitches that Airbus chose not to wash in public and if there were any such, they might indeed have been more relevant to the 787 case.

Hence the quotation.  Wink For all we know, wiring might be the least of the 787's concerns, and so far as we can tell, it's all supplier problems. With systems this intricate, you fix one problem, you can create ten more. I think they are learning from each other, but they're also finding creative ways of stumbling here or there.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 08:50:59 and read 8788 times.

I believe Boeing will push to have suppliers source near the factory and will likely build a new factory complex. That way, if something goes wrong, Boeing's people are minutes instead of hours (or even days) away. They will also have space to store components needing additional work and would make it easier to document and substitute sections - so say LN105's wings are ready by the fuselage is not, and LN107's fuselage is ready, but not the wings. So LN105's wings go on LN107's fuselage and vice-versa and the paperwork is changed and documented appropriately.

Neither PAE nor RNT have the room, so I expect if Boeing stays in WA, they will build a new complex (possibly one capable of handling Y3, as well) somewhere in Eastern Washington (Moses Lake, perhaps?). Or they will move to a Southern state where labor rules are a bit more relaxed.

Boeing could then scale back RNT to just military 737 production on a single line and sell most of the remaining property.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Flighty
Posted 2008-01-19 09:19:21 and read 8746 times.



Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 20):
This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.

Especially because they are so clearly lying. Again. About what is wrong. Obviously some parts, and processes, are being resdesigned from the ground up. And the potential remains for additional clean-sheet redesigns, should flight testing or final production dictate that.

They are learning, but not necessarily getting closer to completion. The potential remains for steps backward rather than forward in completing the 787. That is why they do not know the real timeline of this jet. Their risk analysis was overwhelmed by the marketing dept. To the point where, the initial production plan was laughably naive. In retrospect. Boeing is still performing research on the 787. It is not yet in "production." My 2c.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Art
Posted 2008-01-19 09:25:51 and read 8730 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 99):
However, by the time Boeing is ready for the 737RS, the teething pains of the 787 will be a distant memory. Boeing, and its contractors, will have learned the lessons and be in a much better position to handle the 737RS.

I wonder why Boeing set themselves such an ambitious schedule without giving themselves a lot of latitude in promised delivery dates to customers, thereby avoiding penalties. Eg delivery scheduled May 2009 minus up to 12 months. Would airlines have ordered an alternative instead? There wasn't one. IIRC Airbus were saying they did not plan to offer one since the A330 was a good enough alternative.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 09:47:40 and read 8680 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 103):
Especially because they are so clearly lying. Again. About what is wrong. Obviously some parts, and processes, are being resdesigned from the ground up. And the potential remains for additional clean-sheet redesigns, should flight testing or final production dictate that.

Based on? If it's so obvious, perhaps you'd be willing to show us proof.  Yeah sure

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 474218
Posted 2008-01-19 09:57:23 and read 8646 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 97):
Because Boeing would not have a commercial airplanes side anymore so you'd have two pure defense and space contractors who would likely be on relative equal footing in terms of size.

But Boeing currently makes more money off their military division than they do off commerical aircraft. Add the Northrup Grumman sales to Boeing and you would have a company almost twice as big as Lockheed Martin.

2007 military sales Lockheed Martin $36,090 million. Boeing $30,800 million. Northrup Grumman $23,649 million.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Flighty
Posted 2008-01-19 10:26:18 and read 8586 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 105):
Based on? If it's so obvious, perhaps you'd be willing to show us proof.

The difference between parts and assembly is small. Boeing is in effect creating "parts" they thought suppliers were going to create. The parts are not going together as planned -- requiring minor assembly process ("part") redesigns. This could go on. Boeing admits they still need to learn some more things.

So to say the aircraft will definitely be done at a certain time, Boeing does not have the credibility to say that. It's interesting to hear Boeing's official line, but obviously they are not telling us the actual story. Nor are they telling us their real worries.

What is the worst case scenario? We don't know. Boeing does not dare say. To the extent that Boeing denies the potential for further changes in production methods, I think that is a lie. They told us that already in 2007, and it was false.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 10:51:24 and read 8510 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 106):
The difference between parts and assembly is small. Boeing is in effect creating "parts" they thought suppliers were going to create. The parts are not going together as planned -- requiring minor assembly process ("part") redesigns. This could go on. Boeing admits they still need to learn some more things.

Thanks for clearing that up. But that is hardly "from the ground up redesign". Rather this is taking over the design process from the suppliers. Otherwise they have an idea of what they want the parts to function as.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 106):
So to say the aircraft will definitely be done at a certain time, Boeing does not have the credibility to say that. It's interesting to hear Boeing's official line, but obviously they are not telling us the actual story. Nor are they telling us their real worries.

What is the worst case scenario? We don't know. Boeing does not dare say. To the extent that Boeing denies the potential for further changes in production methods, I think that is a lie. They told us that already in 2007, and it was false.

Pure speculation. Boeing isn't doing that now until they have the supply chain issue resolved.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Flighty
Posted 2008-01-19 11:03:18 and read 8494 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 107):
"from the ground up redesign".

Oh, no no no.

Boeing knows exactly what they want the 787 to be. But, I do not trust they can build it yet. They are very close, but all the v1.0 parts will not necessarily fit. Some v1.1 parts may be necessary. That could take added time. Boeing does not really say, will all due candor, how much time is needed. It just rests on their reputation, not specific facts.

Maybe people on this forum have the specific facts. But on the production floor is where the action is. I think Boeing will respond more quickly than Airbus to last-minute redesign needs of small parts and / or production methods. But they already built that speed into their timeline... that's the problem.

But I am not trying to say the "plastic fuselage will never work" line. It will work. We can sense the true final draft production vehicle won't exist until well into 2009 however. 1 year's delay or so... or more.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 11:36:24 and read 8420 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 108):
Oh, no no no.

Boeing knows exactly what they want the 787 to be. But, I do not trust they can build it yet. They are very close, but all the v1.0 parts will not necessarily fit. Some v1.1 parts may be necessary. That could take added time. Boeing does not really say, will all due candor, how much time is needed. It just rests on their reputation, not specific facts.

Glad we cleared that up. Though I stress that their reputation rests on specific facts. Frankly the suppliers, Boeing, and the customers know the most.

Nowadays with CAD software, parts are machined to very tight tolerances. Not sure if you get many instances of parts not fitting 'right' the first time.

I think most of it has to do with scheduling. Fault could lie with either Boeing or the supplier. LM took awhile getting their design models released to their sub-contractor for the fabrication of F-35B (BF-1's) bulkheads. That was two years ago, and I remember being an intern during that period. (for the sub, not LM). QC at that company was high though. You'd have to be, or a new vendor would be put in your place. Of course, it's hard to build a fighter jet when you don't have the basic skeletal structure.  Smile

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Flighty
Posted 2008-01-19 12:22:24 and read 8335 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 109):
Frankly the suppliers, Boeing, and the customers know the most.

Yup and I wish they would tell us that info. But it's not very likely. Unless the delays stretch out again. Airbus maintained their facade as long as possible until their veil of glamorous confidential "you don't need to know" just dissolved. Boeing can probably keep it up as long as first flight occurs this summer. Then it is easier to hide hiccups.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 109):

I think most of it has to do with scheduling. Fault could lie with either Boeing or the supplier.

Probably some of both. Boeing has mainly shunted blame to its small partner firms. I don't think that's very classy. It is Boeing's project. If project management (and deadline-setting!) was a problem, those are Boeing's alone. Why not say so...

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 109):

Nowadays with CAD software, parts are machined to very tight tolerances. Not sure if you get many instances of parts not fitting 'right' the first time.

Oh yes, probably correct. But I see it as a piece of software. With such a complex system there are bound to be a few tweaks needed. The more time, the better the product can be. Since Boeing must release a top quality product, its time window is going to be slightly unknown. I have never heard of a complex system -- such as any jet -- being perfect on day 1.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 12:31:02 and read 8323 times.



Quoting Art (Reply 103):
I wonder why Boeing set themselves such an ambitious schedule without giving themselves a lot of latitude in promised delivery dates to customers, thereby avoiding penalties.

Being first to market, especially with such a (r)evolutionary plane, is huge, as we have seen with the 787's orders. This is especially important when you are attempting to target the replacement market of a previous generation. Boeing wanted to be able to offer the 787 in time for airlines to start replacing their 767-300ERs as well as early-delivery A330-200s and A330-300s because Airbus did not have a comparable replacement model. If they had waited, airlines would have bought more A330-200s and A330-300s and Boeing would have lost out on those sales.

Airbus is making hay with the A350-900 right now because it is a solid replacement for early A340-300s and 777-200(ER)s and Boeing does not - and will not - have an comparable replacement available. But the A350-1000 is off to a very slow start because airlines are adding 777-300ERs by the shedload because they need that capacity now and those airlines are not going to want to scrap a perfectly good airframe with only 5-10 years on it. So it is likely the first wave of A350-1000 sales will go to replace 777-300s as well as for expansion predicated for post-2015 delivery. Then, around 2011 or 2012, assuming Boeing does not respond with the 787-11 or Y3, A350-1000 sales should start to see a sharp rise.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 13:02:34 and read 8269 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Yup and I wish they would tell us that info. But it's not very likely. Unless the delays stretch out again. Airbus maintained their facade as long as possible until their veil of glamorous confidential "you don't need to know" just dissolved. Boeing can probably keep it up as long as first flight occurs this summer. Then it is easier to hide hiccups.

The thing is, those that actually need to know, probably do. The rest of us are left guessing. Refusal to set a new firmer schedule may also be a way to avoid missing targets they're not ready to set yet.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Probably some of both. Boeing has mainly shunted blame to its small partner firms. I don't think that's very classy. It is Boeing's project. If project management (and deadline-setting!) was a problem, those are Boeing's alone. Why not say so...

With all of these vendors, there could be multiple unique issues with various different ones. Deadline-setting though wouldn't be Boeing's fault entirely though. While their schedule was too ambitious, Boeing's suppliers agreed on paper to try to meet them. It's not like they were kept in the dark. They knew the schedule, bid on it, and signed with Boeing on the understanding they'd have those components ready. They failed to do so. Contractually, they're the ones with the hit. Boeing would be wise, however, to learn from this and avoid schedules that are so tight in the future. That's still a recipe for headaches, even if the contractors made promises they couldn't keep. After all, a promise that a sub-contractor can't keep becomes a promise Boeing can't keep when it creeps its way up the chain.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Oh yes, probably correct. But I see it as a piece of software. With such a complex system there are bound to be a few tweaks needed. The more time, the better the product can be. Since Boeing must release a top quality product, its time window is going to be slightly unknown. I have never heard of a complex system -- such as any jet -- being perfect on day 1.

Usually, but the tweaks have more to do with software and fitting the airplane out. Plus, with advanced manufacturing, poorly fitting part tweaks are reduced. Such tweaks are also usually ironed out during an on schedule build and test phase. It's rare for parts to "not fight right" in such a magnitude as to gum up production like this. Seems like delays in getting the parts out to begin with.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Pygmalion
Posted 2008-01-19 13:10:22 and read 8255 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 106):
The difference between parts and assembly is small. Boeing is in effect creating "parts" they thought suppliers were going to create. The parts are not going together as planned -- requiring minor assembly process ("part") redesigns. This could go on. Boeing admits they still need to learn some more things.

From what I hear the parts fit fine and Boeing has stated so many times as well. They were all designed in the same CATIA system (and version!) and Boeing has stated that the parts fit without any problems. From what I hear from friends in SC, Boeing required all the suppliers to use the same design and digital pre-assembly system but allowed them to use their own internal supply chain management and production planning systems. Evidently it was the transfer of work and Boeing having to entirely re-plan the airplane assemblies and move all that hardware that threw the monkey wrench in the works. No redesigns, just re-plan. Remember Boeing has to show upon request of the FAA any and all processes that put that part together and its pedigree. The amount of paper work in aviation is astounding.

(Rememeber Airbus still doesn't have a production certificate for the A380, this is why. I think they gave up on conformity and just put it together, certifying each one until some future MSN when they will re-establish that conformity process trail)

With the production rates Boeing needs to hit, not getting a PC would slow them down too much. I think they are aiming to keep their production conformity plan on track and so are making sure they have all the i's dotted and T's crossed.

Imagine getting a box of parts in the mail instead of that box of pre-assembled pieces when you found that bicycle under the Christmas tree. No assembly instructions, just a detailed full size drawing and a telephone helpline. Now put it together. Doable sure, but don't expect to build it as fast as the person that should have done it in their own factory with the full instructions and tools.

The more pre-assembled it comes the faster you would complete it. I think the thing we need to look for is how much future sections are completed prior to shipment.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: BestWestern
Posted 2008-01-19 13:43:47 and read 8183 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 112):
Deadline-setting though wouldn't be Boeing's fault entirely though.

Who owns the project? Boeing

Whos responsiblity is it to get the aircraft out the door on schedule? Boeing

Who is project managing the constuction? Boeing

Who's sets the deadline? Boeing

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 13:55:04 and read 8151 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Probably some of both. Boeing has mainly shunted blame to its small partner firms. I don't think that's very classy. It is Boeing's project. If project management (and deadline-setting!) was a problem, those are Boeing's alone. Why not say so...

Boeing has said so.

But people want to know why the bleedin thing is not in the air and part of the reason is because the suppliers are to blame. Saying so has nothing to do with "class" or lack thereof. It has to do with them being open and honest about the issues facing the program.

People demand honesty and openness from Boeing and Airbus and then lambaste them for providing it. Do they want real honesty and openness, or do they just want to hear Boeing and Airbus alone take the blame because it pleases them to know they have failed and they just want to rub it in?

I want to know why Boeing can't deliver. And the answer "we screwed up" doesn't tell me anything useful and just re-affirms the obvious.

Boeing telling me their suppliers delivered incomplete parts and they are having a difficult time adjusting their production process to meet it. So now I know to watch the suppliers and watch Boeing's production line inside 40-26. If suppliers start to send in more complete parts and/or Boeing is spending less time on them inside 40-26, I can deduce that Boeing is likely to start moving more planes. On the flip-side, if every piece that arrives is swarmed with machinists for three weeks before it goes anywhere, then I can deduce Boeing is not likely to start moving more planes.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-19 14:58:51 and read 8034 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 101):
I believe Boeing will push to have suppliers source near the factory and will likely build a new factory complex. That way, if something goes wrong, Boeing's people are minutes instead of hours (or even days) away.

Boeing people are on site, everywhere. Whatever happens - seconds away. Above that, what makes you assume that it's always the suppliers' people who are failing or doing the mistakes? And what makes you assume that Boeing is omnipotent and can immediately solve anything that goes wrong if only it's across the street?

Sure, well trained, experienced Boeing workers can solve problems much faster than workers being paid a measly $10 an hour at some supplier. But they wanted it that way... (to make one thing clear: That's certainly not the fault of those measly paid workers).

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Zeke
Posted 2008-01-19 15:23:35 and read 7991 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 116):
But don't even try to play the suppliers as victims. The schedule was NO secret. They agreed to deliver as per the schedule, and they couldn't.

Was it always the fault of suppliers ?

Suppliers can only build something if Boeing has told them when to build, I remember hearing that Boeing was "late" in advising them what to build, and then wondering why they have not ramped up to suit.

I hear tooling is one of the major issues, which seems to fit with this. It is pretty easy to get new infrastructure built for manufacturing (new buildings, autoclaves etc), but unless you know what to build, the tooling cannot be built.

Cast your mind back to 2005, Richard Aboulafia predicted a 12 month slip in the 787 program because of this.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Keesje
Posted 2008-01-19 16:47:58 and read 7937 times.

Increasing I hear info the cockpit is still kind of empty. This section was build in Wichita & most of its content is from US contractors.

It seems there are more critical paths in parallel. Who would choose which names to "mention" to the press?

"Suppliers" are easy to blame, they won´t backfire to their big customer.

Maybe if Boeing had not outsourced major parts of the 787, delays / problems would be even worse, or the backlog 3x times as low .. nobody knows. I assume Boeing didn´t outsource for nothing.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 118):
Cast your mind back to 2005, Richard Aboulafia predicted a 12 month slip in the 787 program because of this.

 checkmark 

And he was not the only one during the last few years.

The famous article in Businessweek in june 06.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...25/b3989049.htm?campaign_id=search

Leahy 8 months ago
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...5147_airbus13.html?syndication=rss
and many more.

All were dismissed / attacked / ridiculed on TV, Internet blogs, articles and forums like these; no prove, no source, subjective, unboeing, look at the sales, the A380 is worse, etc, etc.

There was a invisible block on any sign things weren´t as smooth / under control as Boeing communicated. It got a grib on stock traders too.

Lets hope Boeing gets everything under control, can create a realistic timeline and compensations aren´t too high. Flight testing, certification & production ramp up are some of the challenges ahead.. good luck to the folks doing the hard work.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-19 17:13:22 and read 7873 times.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 118):
Was it always the fault of suppliers ?

Suppliers can only build something if Boeing has told them when to build, I remember hearing that Boeing was "late" in advising them what to build, and then wondering why they have not ramped up to suit.

I hear tooling is one of the major issues, which seems to fit with this. It is pretty easy to get new infrastructure built for manufacturing (new buildings, autoclaves etc), but unless you know what to build, the tooling cannot be built.

Cast your mind back to 2005, Richard Aboulafia predicted a 12 month slip in the 787 program because of this.

Addressed and already suggested here:

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 109):
I think most of it has to do with scheduling. Fault could lie with either Boeing or the supplier. LM took awhile getting their design models released to their sub-contractor for the fabrication of F-35B (BF-1's) bulkheads. That was two years ago, and I remember being an intern during that period. (for the sub, not LM). QC at that company was high though. You'd have to be, or a new vendor would be put in your place. Of course, it's hard to build a fighter jet when you don't have the basic skeletal structure.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PVG
Posted 2008-01-19 17:17:05 and read 7857 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 95):
So Boeing has had to "re-create" the 787 line to be like the other lines for LN0001/LN9997/LN9998 (at least) and this has taken time away from completing those frames (exacerbated by lack of parts) which has all helped contribute to the continued delays.

This is what i don't get (I may be proposing something stupid and expensive, but..): I assume that the later frames (LN0002 etc.....) are being delivered either complete or more complete so that they can go through the normal manufacturing process to completion. So, why doesn't Boeing put aside the first 2 or 3 incomplete frames and work on them as time allows and get moving on the frames that are delivered in proper condition so that they can use those as test frames to get the ball rolling?

Is this just too expensive to do? Is there not enough space to put aside the first few frames and still continue the normal operation with the later frames? Are the first few being built specifically as test frames with specific features that can't economically be replicated in the later frames on such short notice?

Maybe it's just not done this way, but it seems like a logical thing to do.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-19 17:21:56 and read 7891 times.



Quoting PVG (Reply 121):
This is what i don't get (I may be proposing something stupid and expensive, but..): I assume that the later frames (LN0002 etc.....) are being delivered either complete or more complete so that they can go through the normal manufacturing process to completion. So, why doesn't Boeing put aside the first 2 or 3 incomplete frames and work on them as time allows and get moving on the frames that are delivered in proper condition so that they can use those as test frames to get the ball rolling?

I believe it is because Boeing needs to ensure that the first six frames are all built to a common spec so their data can all be combined to get a single Type Certificate and a single Production Certificate. As such, I believe (and if I am interpreting comments from Carson and Shanahan correctly) that everything being performed on LN0001 at PAE is being reported back to the suppliers to ensure the identical work on LN0002 and her sisters are done the same way. And I expect if LN0002 or later are ahead of LN0001 on something, that data is being fed forward to PAE to ensure it is done that way one LN0001.

What Boeing cannot afford now is different test planes, since the data would not be valid across the board.

Big version: Width: 492 Height: 335 File size: 62kb
A Note to the Skeptics... *grin*

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PVG
Posted 2008-01-19 17:37:17 and read 7815 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 122):
I believe it is because Boeing needs to ensure that the first six frames are all built to a common spec so their data can all be combined to get a single Type Certificate and a single Production Certificate. As such, I believe (and if I am interpreting comments from Carson and Shanahan correctly) that everything being performed on LN0001 at PAE is being reported back to the suppliers to ensure the identical work on LN0002 and her sisters are done the same way. And I expect if LN0002 or later are ahead of LN0001 on something, that data is being fed forward to PAE to ensure it is done that way one LN0001.

What Boeing cannot afford now is different test planes, since the data would not be valid across the board.

Thanks!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-19 22:38:04 and read 7685 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Probably some of both. Boeing has mainly shunted blame to its small partner firms. I don't think that's very classy. It is Boeing's project. If project management (and deadline-setting!) was a problem, those are Boeing's alone. Why not say so...

A curious and worrying symmetry. Airbus "blamed" airlines for complex specifications after offering carte blanche, and Boeing "blames" the components in a supply chain that it designed. Different perhaps, but similar duck shovelling?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PM
Posted 2008-01-19 22:50:26 and read 7663 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 124):
duck shovelling

"duck shovelling"? Is that an Australian thing?  Confused  Big grin

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-19 23:03:21 and read 7656 times.



Quoting PM (Reply 125):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 124):
duck shovelling

"duck shovelling"? Is that an Australian thing?

With all the water about at present, there will be shed loads of duck to shovel!

An example of the term in full flight, as it were.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com....gaging_in_untruthful_scare_tactics

"Because Danna, after being on the receiving end of some of the Commonwealth's legislation, Family Law Act and going to my local Federal Member for some justice and relief only to find my letters joining the "My Dear Minister" circuit then having them duck shovel the matter between portfolios I have very little faith in going to see the local member."

But Google seems at a loss for the origin. I must say I thought the term was in more widespread use. Just goes to show how isolated I am. Anyway, you get the idea of its meaning and use. Also, contemplate the efficiency of trying to shovel live ducks!

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: PM
Posted 2008-01-19 23:08:54 and read 7753 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 126):
Also, contemplate the efficiency of trying to shovel live ducks!

As a bird watcher and quite a fan of ducks, Id rather not!  biggrin 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-20 01:07:35 and read 7655 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 116):
Who hasn't delivered on time? Suppliers



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 117):
Boeing people are on site, everywhere. Whatever happens - seconds away. Above that, what makes you assume that it's always the suppliers' people who are failing or doing the mistakes?

In my experience, it's overly simplisitic to "blame" suppliers when a programme is set up as a risk-sharing partnership in the way the 787 is.
It's more usual for there to be lots of ways that genuine communication can fail due to a lack of familiarity of the parties with each other, and their "ways".
As others have also said, suppliers do have dependencies upon the prime contractor as well.
It's a 2-way street.

It's not usually a good idea to turn on a supply chain that you are dependent upon...  Smile

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: BestWestern
Posted 2008-01-20 01:35:57 and read 7620 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 129):
t's not usually a good idea to turn on a supply chain that you are dependent upon...

The cheerleader is turning on the supply chain to deflect critical analysis of boeing.

If you buy a new house, and there are no windows in it when you are due to move in - you blame the house builder for not getting their act together - the house builder will try and blame the window supplier, but you wouldnt have any it, would you? The builder didnt have enough control of the building proccess. The builder were over optimistic in their building plans - the builder wasnt project managing properly - the builder wasnt ensuring the supplier was doing what he promised...

for the cheerleaders - is the wetdreamliner is turning into a bad-dreamliner???

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-20 02:47:37 and read 7533 times.



Quoting BestWestern (Reply 130):
for the cheerleaders - is the wetdreamliner is turning into a bad-dreamliner???

 smile 

Unless things go smoothly form here on in, the 787 will earn the inevitable sobriquet "Nightmareliner" (having already laid claim to 7-late-7*)



*To be balanced, of course, it joined the A3-late-0  wink 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-20 05:52:06 and read 7392 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 127):
In my experience, it's overly simplisitic to "blame" suppliers when a programme is set up as a risk-sharing partnership in the way the 787 is.
It's more usual for there to be lots of ways that genuine communication can fail due to a lack of familiarity of the parties with each other, and their "ways".
As others have also said, suppliers do have dependencies upon the prime contractor as well.
It's a 2-way street.

It's not usually a good idea to turn on a supply chain that you are dependent upon...

Not doubting you at all Astuteman.  Smile I've already covered that with Reply 109. What we're seeing here is what happens in such a well spread out program when someone drops a ball, be it Boeing or the vendors. It can fester if not properly managed. LM has teams dedicated to helping a supplier become more efficient. Sometimes they help, othertimes they might just be seen as interference.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 127):
The cheerleader is turning on the supply chain to deflect critical analysis of boeing.

Ok, now you've tried my patience. You DARE to call me a cheerleader despite what I've said about the prime contractor's responsibility!? This after I have to deflect your attack post on me!?

You just nit picked ONE line from my post and spun it to misrepresent me. If you read all of what I said, you wouldn't come off looking foolish and unconstructive.

Read reply 109 COMPLETELY. You'll see an allusion to Boeing's responsibilities and how they likely contributed to the tight jam production is in. Capeesh?

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-20 06:01:03 and read 7382 times.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 113):
Boeing required all the suppliers to use the same design and digital pre-assembly system but allowed them to use their own internal supply chain management and production planning systems.

Are you sure? What's the e2Open Platform good for then?

"Exostar Enables Boeing's 787 Supply Chain" December 13, 2006:
http://www.exostar.com/news/press_re...eases/pressrelease_view.asp?id=145

The Exostar solution is designed to allow Boeing and its partners to collaborate on planning schedules, issue purchase orders, track purchase order changes, exchange shipping information, manage returns, and manage inventory consumption across the multiple tiers involved in the manufacturing process. The system also monitors process exceptions that occur between partners providing notification and an evaluation of the potential impact against schedules.

Case Study: Boeing 787: Global Supply Chain Management Takes Flight
http://www.exostar.com/docs/Boeing%20787%20Case%20Study.pdf

Expected Results
- Eliminate latency in communicating demand/supply changes and change impacts across partner tiers
- Ensure continuity of supply while minimizing supply disruptions - Improved on-time delivery and ship-to-commit date with end customer
- Provide global visibility to all partners involved in the delivery of the completed assemblies
- Reduce total manufacturing cost by leveraging best price and value partners globally


One of the biggest challenges in this production model is ensuring that all
partners have access and visibility to the latest demand information from
Boeing and that Boeing has visibility to the supplier’s ability to meet the
delivery schedule. It is crucial that all of the major subassemblies arrive in
Washington at the same time for final assembly. If a subassembly is late or
missing, there is very little time or space for Boeing to store the other large
components. If a partner can not meet an expected delivery date then
Boeing must adjust the schedule and potentially delay the arrival of the other
assemblies.


In other words: When it became apparent that partners were behind schedule - be it due to the fasteners or for whatever reason - Boeing should NEVER have have demanded them to ship their sections in 'as is' condition with the missing parts boxed up. The management e-tools in place were never designed to cope with the use case of a 'forced' delivery of incomplete items with outstanding work, so parts lists and work statements were done - if at all - outside of the system on paper. What's holding up not only LN1 is that Boeing did not yet succeed in bringing all the e-tools in synch with reality. To make things worse, reality is not static. The first experience from the shop floors has already resulted in a few engineering changes, adding the dimension of change management.

[Edited 2008-01-20 06:16:56]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-20 06:03:04 and read 7373 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 130):
Ok, now you've tried my patience. You DARE to call me a cheerleader despite what I've said about the prime contractor's responsibility!? This after I have to deflect your attack post on me!?

Something odd happening with post numbers.

As I just checked 127 was from Astuteman
128 from

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 128):
BestWestern



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 130):

So
Quoting BestWestern (Reply 127):
The cheerleader is turning on the supply chain to deflect critical analysis of boeing.

has been incorrectly numbered.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-20 06:07:22 and read 7362 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 132):

Sorry about that. It was my quote function. I noticed as I was typing that it incorrectly stated "Astuteman" instead of "BestWestern"...I only corrected the username, forgot about the post number. All is well with the site's algorithms, no need to send alarm bells to SR.  Smile

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flig
Username: Beta
Posted 2008-01-20 06:49:32 and read 7313 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 81):
Quoting Beta (Reply 61):
Scott Carson has to go; he's been given chances again and again, and has proven unsuccessful.

How has he proven unsuccessful? Carson's job is to run Boeing Commercial Airplanes...the whole thing, not just the 787, and Boeing is charging ahead on all cylinders with the 737NG, 747, and 777, just had their three largest order years in history, is sitting on a mountain of cash and huge backlog, etc. Carson is doing a great job.

Execution of the 787 program falls on the program manager. Mike Bair has already been removed and Shanahan hasn't been there long enough to hold him to the fire just yet.

Tom.

Tom
Precisely, Carson is the president of BCA, overseeing one of the most important commercial airplane development in the company's history since the 747, and the program runs late, not just a few months late, not 6 months as he claimed not so long ago, now almost a year late. Sure, he's not in charge of the day-to-day, but he's charged with putting the right people in the right places, providing oversight, making sure things stay on track. Bottom line, the buck stops at his desk, no if and or but. This is a performance business, and Boeing BCA has not performed well (not in the technical design) with one of the most important project in years with Scott Carson at the helm.
The 737NG is a well-established line, and successful with or without Carson; obviously credits must be given to him to continue that success, and contributed to its success in the past as the head of sale and marketing. Ditto the 777. As far as the new B747, it remains to be seen. I'm not saying he's totally incompetent executive, or Boeing should let him go now, but he's good at where he was, not where he is. Perhaps, Boeing misses Allan Mullaly more than it realizes. Remains to be seen!
I'm sure the B787 is going to be one heck of an commercial airliner, but its execution leaves so much room for improvement.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-20 08:00:22 and read 7221 times.



Quoting BestWestern (Reply 128):
The cheerleader is turning on the supply chain to deflect critical analysis of boeing.

With respect, you cannot have a critical analysis of Boeing without including the supply chain when it comes to discussing any of their programs - not just the 787.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Art
Posted 2008-01-20 08:22:34 and read 7183 times.

Does a multi-month delay provide Boeing with an opportunity to make detail improvements to the 787 (eg reduce its weight) that might otherwise have come along later? Or is the focus now entirely on getting hold of all the correctly assembled assemblies that make up the plane, sticking them together ASAP, getting the 787 flying ASAP, getting it flight tested and certified ASAP and getting production set up?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-20 08:33:37 and read 7180 times.



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 130):
I've already covered that with Reply 109

You did indeed. My apologies.  Smile

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 131):
Boeing should NEVER have have demanded them to ship their sections in 'as is' condition with the missing parts boxed up.

Boeing DID publicly state that this was planned in...  Smile
FWIW I agree completely, but I know from my own experience on Astute that a thousand and one "organisational" imperatives make it very difficult to "stop the bus".
I (and my colleagues) tried on Astute, and failed. It is scant comfort that the new business "leaders" retrospectively applaud our efforts. Others (at the time) "knew" better  crying .

Quoting Stitch (Reply 135):
With respect, you cannot have a critical analysis of Boeing without including the supply chain when it comes to discussing any of their programs - not just the 787.

 checkmark 
Manufacturing management 101...  Smile

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-20 08:52:15 and read 7138 times.



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 131):
In other words: When it became apparent that partners were behind schedule - be it due to the fasteners or for whatever reason - Boeing should NEVER have have demanded them to ship their sections in 'as is' condition with the missing parts boxed up.

Boeing has subsequently learned this lesson. They thought their own people could take care of it quickly, but they were wrong.

Quoting Art (Reply 136):
Does a multi-month delay provide Boeing with an opportunity to make detail improvements to the 787 (eg reduce its weight) that might otherwise have come along later? Or is the focus now entirely on getting hold of all the correctly assembled assemblies that make up the plane, sticking them together ASAP, getting the 787 flying ASAP, getting it flight tested and certified ASAP and getting production set up?

Boeing's focus now has to be on getting the thing into the air. Right now, weight doesn't matter. If it's heavy - even ridiculously so - that's fine. If such a case comes to pass, it could even become a case of the folks tasked for the first six swap them for other builds and Boeing re-allocates them at a discount to airlines who are looking more for a medium-range airliner where the higher MEW is "masked" by the fact that they can still fly a maximum payload a shorter distance while still being at or below MTOW.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-20 08:57:24 and read 7140 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 137):
Boeing DID publicly state that this was planned in...

Not quite, I think. They did state indeed that the first airframes would involve travel work that would be progressively reduced to get to fully stuffed assemblies until LN something. BUT it was never intended to have travel work at the extent triggered by the pre-roll-out deliveries, amounting to "30.000 parts". I heard from at least one tier-1 supplier that they DID raise their concern about shipping structurally incomplete, unstuffed assemblies. Seems like Boeing replied something to the effect of "we know what we are doing"...  yes 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2008-01-20 09:35:08 and read 7079 times.

Boeing and Airbus are under no obligation to satisfy the attitudes, opinions, curiosities and/or whims of a.netters. In building any plane, their responsibility is to first make a safe plane which satisfies all legal, regulatory obligations. Then to satisfy their customers and then shareholders.

Posters here aren't even on the radar. Why get excited about, or take personally, anything they do? Other than curiosity, how much personal stake to average a.netters have in either company?

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-20 10:24:50 and read 7034 times.

Quoting Art (Reply 136):
Does a multi-month delay provide Boeing with an opportunity to make detail improvements to the 787 (eg reduce its weight) that might otherwise have come along later? Or is the focus now entirely on getting hold of all the correctly assembled assemblies that make up the plane, sticking them together ASAP, getting the 787 flying ASAP, getting it flight tested and certified ASAP and getting production set up?

The focus right now is just on getting the first plane in the air. Such improvements will happen anyway as more and more Dreamliners are built, but in the meantime preventing further slippage is imperative. Besides, optimal detail improvements can't be made until the flight test data is available to decide just what should be improved.

Well, the production process is one thing...kind of a big detail though.  

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 137):
You did indeed. My apologies.

No problem. I should have put it all together in one post, I've actually caused confusion among quite a few others.  

  B4e-Forever New Frontiers  

EDIT: Quote function, dangit, I did it again! I guess A.net doesn't want to quote Astuteman on anything. At least I'll get the number right this time.  

[Edited 2008-01-20 10:26:12]

[Edited 2008-01-20 10:26:52]

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-20 10:41:02 and read 6988 times.



Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 140):
Other than curiosity, how much personal stake to average a.netters have in either company?

On this side of the pond, quite a few of us have an indirect investment in Airbus.  wink 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-20 11:21:41 and read 6949 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 142):
On this side of the pond, quite a few of us have an indirect investment in Airbus.

So we're regularly told anyway...  biggrin 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: BestWestern
Posted 2008-01-20 14:12:13 and read 6772 times.



Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 140):
how much personal stake to average a.netters have in either company?

We are always told here that our governments own, and our taxes subsidise airbus?  Smile

In effect, we own the goddammed company - it is there at our pleasure!  Smile

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Pygmalion
Posted 2008-01-20 14:19:44 and read 6757 times.



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 131):
In other words: When it became apparent that partners were behind schedule - be it due to the fasteners or for whatever reason - Boeing should NEVER have have demanded them to ship their sections in 'as is' condition with the missing parts boxed up. The management e-tools in place were never designed to cope with the use case of a 'forced' delivery of incomplete items with outstanding work, so parts lists and work statements were done - if at all - outside of the system on paper. What's holding up not only LN1 is that Boeing did not yet succeed in bringing all the e-tools in synch with reality. To make things worse, reality is not static. The first experience from the shop floors has already resulted in a few engineering changes, adding the dimension of change management.

those tools were intended to cope with some traveled work from a top tier to another top tier supplier. the integrated planning is at that level as well. Each top tier is expected to manage their own subs... IMO some of the east coast suppliers did not manage them well. Change management is always an issue but not the culprit here. Moving a box of parts or partially completed subassembly that were supposed to be a complete subassembly when you have to transfer quality buyoffs, partially completed paper and records etc etc is the issue IMHO. Boeing underestimated the task, pure and simple. Hard to chew your way out of beyond jsut grinding through it and stopping anymore from being shipped. I thinkwe are seeing the right behavior now. Its too bad that they did not delay and force more completion earlier. They may have been flying now. As it is I think they are getting er done. Wait and see is all we netters can do now.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Flighty
Posted 2008-01-20 14:26:27 and read 6731 times.



Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 140):
Posters here aren't even on the radar. Why get excited about, or take personally, anything they do? Other than curiosity, how much personal stake to average a.netters have in either company?

Boeing releases Press Releases to the general public. Most of us are in that category.

If we have a problem with that public communication, we say so here. I am not entirely happy with Boeing's PRs, as an industry watcher / possible Boeing investor and nothing more.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: WingedMigrator
Posted 2008-01-20 15:08:17 and read 6656 times.



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 131):
What's holding up not only LN1 is that Boeing did not yet succeed in bringing all the e-tools in synch with reality.

Custom stove pipes between e-tools, bursting at the seams from an overwhelming pressure to meet schedule, resulting in a perilous near-loss of configuration control.

That tune sounds dreadfully familiar, if that's indeed what's going on.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: 474218
Posted 2008-01-20 15:59:22 and read 6594 times.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 142):
On this side of the pond, quite a few of us have an indirect investment in Airbus.

Not to worry, I am sure Airbus will see to it that all EU citizens are will compensated for their contributions.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 146):
Boeing releases Press Releases to the general public. Most of us are in that category.

If this were true they would be called "Public Releases".

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Stitch
Posted 2008-01-20 16:44:33 and read 6539 times.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 146):
Boeing releases Press Releases to the general public. Most of us are in that category.



Quoting 474218 (Reply 148):
If this were true they would be called "Public Releases".

Well they do come from Boeing's "Public Relations" department...  wave 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Boeing4ever
Posted 2008-01-20 22:07:47 and read 6435 times.

Reposted, this time more in keeping with the forum rules...

face="ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva" color="#9A9DA0">Quoting href="/discussions/profile.main?username=BestWestern" class=quote
target=_blank>BestWestern (Reply
114
):
Who owns the project? Boeing

Whos responsiblity is it to get the aircraft out the door on schedule?
Boeing

Who is project managing the constuction? Boeing

Who's sets the deadline? Boeing


Who knew about Boeing's schedule? Suppliers

Who signed contracts knowing full well the schedule? Suppliers

Who hasn't delivered on time? Suppliers


I'm not saying the original tight schedule wasn't flawed, and Boeing
is beholden to their customers. In fact had you read my post
beyond that line instead of making your cute little Q & A retort at me,
you'd have read that too. But don't even try to play the suppliers as
victims. The schedule was NO secret. They agreed to deliver as per
the schedule, and they couldn't.

  alt="airplane" border=0> B4e-Forever New Frontiers  src="/discussions/graphics/smilies/airplane.gif" alt="airplane" border=0> 

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Baroque
Posted 2008-01-20 22:20:55 and read 6402 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 143):
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 142):
On this side of the pond, quite a few of us have an indirect investment in Airbus.

So we're regularly told anyway..

Is not the real trick to find which country does not have at least an indirect investment in BOTH Airbus and Boeing among, the US, EU (taken there to include Scandinavian countries not in EU), Japan, Canada, China, Australia and the other twenty or whatever countries I have either forgotten or do not know enough to list? And that is not counting the customers who in most cases have staked quite a bit of dough in both of them.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-21 00:47:36 and read 6301 times.



Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 145):
partially completed paper and records etc etc is the issue IMHO

Again, from personal experience, It's quite possible you've hit the nail squarely on the head here, Pygmalion.

As an example, I received a submarine section from our fabrication shop many years ago, and had to strip out a whole heap of outfit because we couldn't PROVE that the structural weld buried beneath it had be non-destructively tested (MPI in this case).
When we did reveal the weld, it was patently obvious that it HAD been MPI'd (the white "reveal" paint, QC marks, repair welds), but we STILL had to do it again, because there was no documented evidence.

And that was caused by the fab shop rushing to meet a delivery milestone

Obviously not necessarily a directly comparable analogy, but if you have to spend hours, or even days, chasing product assurance documentation before you can even start the job, your schedule can pretty soon start to look sick.

Could well be a factor

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 145):
Boeing underestimated the task, pure and simple

And would lead to this, guaranteed.

Regards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-01-21 08:30:26 and read 6056 times.



Quoting Art (Reply 103):
I wonder why Boeing set themselves such an ambitious schedule without giving themselves a lot of latitude in promised delivery dates to customers, thereby avoiding penalties.

Well, they've slid almost a year already and nobody has been paid any penalties (a few operators are making noises about it but nobody has said their penalty clauses have been activated). So it certainly looks like Boeing did give themselves a lot of latitude on promised delivery dates.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 110):
Boeing has mainly shunted blame to its small partner firms. I don't think that's very classy. It is Boeing's project. If project management (and deadline-setting!) was a problem, those are Boeing's alone. Why not say so...

Because they're not Boeing's fault alone and it would be misleading to say that they were. Boeing is accountable for the delays...that is not the same thing as responsible for them.

Quoting PVG (Reply 120):
This is what i don't get (I may be proposing something stupid and expensive, but..): I assume that the later frames (LN0002 etc.....) are being delivered either complete or more complete so that they can go through the normal manufacturing process to completion. So, why doesn't Boeing put aside the first 2 or 3 incomplete frames and work on them as time allows and get moving on the frames that are delivered in proper condition so that they can use those as test frames to get the ball rolling?

Each frame has a dedicated flight test plan and concurrent dedicated instrumentation set. They need all of them, built as designed, in order to complete the flight test program. If the put aside LN1 (the only incomplete frame they have) they'd just have to replicate all the work already done on LN1 onto LN7 (or totally shuffle the build for LN2-LN7)...I expect either option would be significantly longer than just sticking to the current plan.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 128):
If you buy a new house, and there are no windows in it when you are due to move in - you blame the house builder for not getting their act together - the house builder will try and blame the window supplier, but you wouldnt have any it, would you?



Quoting Beta (Reply 134):
Precisely, Carson is the president of BCA, overseeing one of the most important commercial airplane development in the company's history since the 747, and the program runs late, not just a few months late, not 6 months as he claimed not so long ago, now almost a year late. Sure, he's not in charge of the day-to-day, but he's charged with putting the right people in the right places, providing oversight, making sure things stay on track. Bottom line, the buck stops at his desk, no if and or but. This is a performance business, and Boeing BCA has not performed well (not in the technical design) with one of the most important project in years with Scott Carson at the helm.

BCA has performed fine in the technical design. That's one area of the 787 where there hasn't been any known issues so far. Carson is not in charge of providing oversight of the 787 project and he is not in charge of making sure the project stays on track...that's what the program manager is for. The CEO is explicitly *not* involved in operations. Scott's role, now, is providing the support that the program needs to deliver on its commitments.

Quoting Art (Reply 136):
Does a multi-month delay provide Boeing with an opportunity to make detail improvements to the 787 (eg reduce its weight) that might otherwise have come along later? Or is the focus now entirely on getting hold of all the correctly assembled assemblies that make up the plane, sticking them together ASAP, getting the 787 flying ASAP, getting it flight tested and certified ASAP and getting production set up?

All those things happen in parallel, primarily because they come from different groups. Design is certainly still working on weight reductions farther down the line, factory is working on getting what they have assembled, flight test is working on being ready the second they get the airframe, and certification is working with the FAA on everything they can do that doesn't require a flying aircraft (which is a lot).

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 140):
Other than curiosity, how much personal stake to average a.netters have in either company?

As a percentage basis I have no idea, but any of us who work for either OEM, their suppliers, or airlines who rely on those products have a pretty hefty personal stake in at least one of the two.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Scbriml
Posted 2008-01-21 11:03:46 and read 5855 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 153):
Well, they've slid almost a year already and nobody has been paid any penalties (a few operators are making noises about it but nobody has said their penalty clauses have been activated).

Probably due in large part to the fact that Boeing will not be able to tell them when they're going to get their planes for another two months. So at this point, most won't know how many 787s they're going to get and when. Makes it tricky to work out what compensation might be due.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-01-21 11:34:08 and read 5793 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 153):
BCA has performed fine in the technical design. That's one area of the 787 where there hasn't been any known issues so far.

 checkmark  as an engineer I have to agree. Weight issues (2-3% is normal at this stage) and a lousy execution on production ramp-up (endemic in the industry?) aside, the overall technical concept of the aircraft, including the production process, still looks very convincing to me.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 153):
any of us who work for either OEM, their suppliers, or airlines who rely on those products have a pretty hefty personal stake in at least one of the two.

 checkmark  well put.

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-01-21 11:36:43 and read 5775 times.



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 155):
Weight issues (2-3% is normal at this stage) and a lousy execution on production ramp-up (endemic in the industry?) aside

An occupational hazard of massive programmes like this, whatever industry they're in...  Smile

REgards

Topic: RE: Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight
Username: AndesSMF
Posted 2008-01-21 12:13:17 and read 5692 times.



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 155):
the overall technical concept of the aircraft, including the production process, still looks very convincing to me.

But it will take years to get everyone up to par using the new processes. I have gone thru several 'paradigm shifts' in our engineering side (construction). Once was from paper drafting to CAD processes. It will soon go from CAD to a CATIA like process. Each time the transition took YEARS to get fully implemented and years for most to be comfortable with the new processes. Only after a few years were the savings fully realized.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/