Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/3956731/

Topic: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: BlueShamu330s
Posted 2008-04-26 13:54:21 and read 9175 times.

Taken from the other site, (sounds like a dried fruit), a quote from Tim Jeans at Monarch:

Quote from Tim Jeans:

"After months of rumour Boeing has now confirmed to us the extent of the problems with the 787 production programme and the consequent effect this will have on the delivery schedule of our six aircraft.

"Boeing’s ability to ramp up production rates after the first deliveries was always the high risk factor in the programme and they have now confirmed that they will be unable to match their original estimates and are now planning on production build up in line with that they were able to achieve on the 777 programme. Taking the 777 programme as the benchmark, this would mean a 30 month delay to our first delivery and similar delays to the other five aircraft. The best case scenario is therefore that we would see the 787 in service for Summer 2013 which clearly has significant implications for the interim period.

"We are now working closely with Boeing on opportunities for them to assist us with interim aircraft to bridge the capacity gap in our programme. Inevitably some of the alternatives they will offer will be commercially sensitive, but we will share with you the possible options as soon as they are known to us."

Shamu

[Edited 2008-04-26 13:57:12]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2008-04-26 14:21:03 and read 9100 times.

This is really where the Vought problems hurt them, but Boeing can only blame itself. In order to cut costs and not have to deal with unions in Washington, they have created an even bigger mess than the A380 convoys through tiny french towns.

Hopefully both Boeing and Airbus have learned from the A380 and 787 mistakes and future planes will involve fewer large section movements and fewer partners. For Boeing, when every section is critical, "sharing the risk" really ended up equating to "multiplying the risk" because it meant more outside interests were capable of delaying the program in more ways.

As others have asked in other threads, why haven't certain Boeing execs been summarily fired for this decision, or was it so ingrained in their culture that every single person in management thought the risk sharing and production chain was the best method?

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: FlyingAY
Posted 2008-04-26 23:27:38 and read 8737 times.

Monarch has an order of 6 787-8s, which were supposed to be delivered during 2011-2013. What would be a suitable interim aircraft for Monarch? They are operating a rather diverse fleet currently with both Airbus and Boeing widebody aircraft. Sizewise the 767 would be closest to 787-8, but I think that the availability of the 767 is pretty close to zero currently. 777 on the other hand would be too big considering that the largest aircraft operated by them is currently A330-200.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Beaucaire
Posted 2008-04-26 23:30:21 and read 8737 times.

I don't see how Boeing will be in a position to supply alternative aircraft as interim solutions to those customers severly affected in their growth-plans.
You can certainly squeeze the manufacture of some additional 777's or even 767's in the pipeline ,but not in large enough numbers to satisfy multiple customers with hundreds of aircraft concerned.
We have a backlog of over 800 aircraft ,and all of them will be affected.If ramp-up is slower than initially expected,those with delivery-slots initially sheduled for 2013 will have to wait until 2016/17 ??

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-04-26 23:49:53 and read 8689 times.



Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 3):
I don't see how Boeing will be in a position to supply alternative aircraft as interim solutions to those customers severly affected in their growth-plans.

Quite a bit of it will likely be helping postpone retirements and rearranging leased and to-be-retired aircraft to help.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 3):
You can certainly squeeze the manufacture of some additional 777's or even 767's in the pipeline ,but not in large enough numbers to satisfy multiple customers with hundreds of aircraft concerned.

True, but nobody (airlines or Boeing) wants a one-for-one replacement.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 3):
We have a backlog of over 800 aircraft ,and all of them will be affected.If ramp-up is slower than initially expected,those with delivery-slots initially sheduled for 2013 will have to wait until 2016/17 ??

It's not quite that bad...the worst delays are in the first few years, then they get better. By 2013 it's almost back to normal, assuming they hold this schedule.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Asiaflyer
Posted 2008-04-27 00:21:22 and read 8620 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 3):
We have a backlog of over 800 aircraft ,and all of them will be affected.If ramp-up is slower than initially expected,those with delivery-slots initially sheduled for 2013 will have to wait until 2016/17 ??

It's not quite that bad...the worst delays are in the first few years, then they get better. By 2013 it's almost back to normal, assuming they hold this schedule.

It actually looks that bad, which was discussed in an earlier thread when the latest ( and hopefully last) delay was announced.
By 2013 they would be able to reach production of 140 planes per year, but it takes until 2016-2017 until the current backlog is cleared.

2009 - 25 (confirmed by Boeing in the recent release)
2010 - 100 (optimistic number)
2011 - 100
2012 - 120 (10-a-month standard)
2013 - 140 (start the ramp up to 16 planes a month)
2014 - 180
2015 - 192 (16-a-month reached)
2016 - 192 (backlog of orders to date - 892 - caught up here plus 57 additional)

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Chiad
Posted 2008-04-27 00:48:44 and read 8532 times.



Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 5):
It actually looks that bad, which was discussed in an earlier thread when the latest ( and hopefully last) delay was announced.
By 2013 they would be able to reach production of 140 planes per year, but it takes until 2016-2017 until the current backlog is cleared.

Does that mean that Boeing is likely to pay some kind of compensation for around 900 aircrafts?

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NCB
Posted 2008-04-27 02:08:58 and read 8373 times.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 6):
Does that mean that Boeing is likely to pay some kind of compensation for around 900 aircrafts?

That's how I see it. If the first aircraft is delivered 30 months late, all the other aircraft following it will be 30 months late unless production rate is increased to an amount higher than the predicted 2 days per aircraft...

I find this ramp up schedule very disastrous. They are trying to produce a widebody at the rate they produce a narrowbody... The whole idea of having a new widebody coming out of the factory every 48 hours is just too crazy.

Boeing have been very good at selling the aircraft... promising outstanding performance etc...
Now that the aircraft is heavier than predicted they might even end up paying performance penalties for 900 aircraft...

[Edited 2008-04-27 02:10:12]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-04-27 02:23:10 and read 8302 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 3):
We have a backlog of over 800 aircraft ,and all of them will be affected.If ramp-up is slower than initially expected,those with delivery-slots initially sheduled for 2013 will have to wait until 2016/17 ??

It's not quite that bad...the worst delays are in the first few years, then they get better. By 2013 it's almost back to normal, assuming they hold this schedule.

Goldman Sachs reckon that some 220 delivery slots have been lost between now and 2013, assuming there's no further delays.
Given the level of sales that the 787 achieved so far, it's difficult to see how things will be back on schedule, even by 2013.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
Hopefully both Boeing and Airbus have learned from the A380 and 787 mistakes and future planes will involve fewer large section movements and fewer partners. For Boeing, when every section is critical, "sharing the risk" really ended up equating to "multiplying the risk" because it meant more outside interests were capable of delaying the program in more ways.

The trouble is, other industries have successfully used this approach to reduce cost, schedule and risk. That's why Boeing attempted it.
In my view, the issue isn't in the strategy itself, as you appear to portray it, but in the execution of the strategy.
It's important to make the distinction IMO....

Quoting NCB (Reply 7):
Now that the aircraft is heavier than predicted they might even end up paying performance penalties for 900 aircraft...

Can't see that.
There are rumours of an "overweight" issue, which seem sort of supported by Boeing's logic for delaying te 787-9 EIS to 2012 being to allow some weight reduction engineering to be incorporated.
So its possible early frames may be overweight (just as early A380's are)
It's possible that better-than-expected engine SFC and aerodynamics might overcome some, or all of this.
Then again they might not.
Either way, I see no reason why, (even in the worst case (he stresses) ), that by 2012 787's won't be hitting their specs.

Regards

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: Beaucaire
Posted 2008-04-27 02:24:20 and read 8292 times.

Could someone tell me how long the barrel-sections and wings have to bake in an autoclave oven in order to gain max. strenght ? When searching the web I could not find any timing -related informations.
Subcontractors have each one (? ) autoclave oven to produce the sub-assemblies.Producing one aircraft every two days (roughly ) would stretch the sequence of those ovens to extremely high levels.Are there plans to increase the number of autoclaves?

[Edited 2008-04-27 02:24:39]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Moo
Posted 2008-04-27 02:27:37 and read 8279 times.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 5):
It actually looks that bad, which was discussed in an earlier thread when the latest ( and hopefully last) delay was announced.
By 2013 they would be able to reach production of 140 planes per year, but it takes until 2016-2017 until the current backlog is cleared.

2009 - 25 (confirmed by Boeing in the recent release)
2010 - 100 (optimistic number)
2011 - 100
2012 - 120 (10-a-month standard)
2013 - 140 (start the ramp up to 16 planes a month)
2014 - 180
2015 - 192 (16-a-month reached)
2016 - 192 (backlog of orders to date - 892 - caught up here plus 57 additional)

While my numbers are a 'best guess', there were other numbers in that thread which were actually both more pessimistic and at the same time more likely. My guess was an optimistic one.

[Edited 2008-04-27 02:28:43]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Art
Posted 2008-04-27 02:58:53 and read 8153 times.



Quoting BlueShamu330s (Thread starter):
a 30 month delay to our first delivery and similar delays to the other five aircraft

As many died in the wool Boeing fans pointed out when CaptainX first appeared on the forum making similar statements, a delay of 2+ years in deliveries is inconceivable. How on earth can CaptainX and the man from Monarch be so stupid as to believe in such an impossibility?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
Boeing can only blame itself. In order to cut costs and not have to deal with unions in Washington, they have created an even bigger mess than the A380 convoys through tiny french towns.

I am not aware of any reports that the Airbus convoy system has disrupted production.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Boeing74741R
Posted 2008-04-27 08:00:32 and read 7840 times.



Quoting Art (Reply 11):
As many died in the wool Boeing fans pointed out when CaptainX first appeared on the forum making similar statements, a delay of 2+ years in deliveries is inconceivable. How on earth can CaptainX and the man from Monarch be so stupid as to believe in such an impossibility?

Probably because everyone saw how Airbus had problems with the A380 and thought that Boeing won't make the same mistake with their original 'too good to be true' production and delivery schedules, plus if the deal for 787s on offer to the airlines is good...

I think the only hope that Monarch have of getting aircraft earlier is IF airlines who have deliveries scheduled ahead of Monarch decide to defer them (a la VS with the A380) or decide to cancel (some will think it's unthinkable but there are airlines who will be willing to do this) but with such a huge order book I can't see this happening.

I guess we'll be seeing their A300s flying for longer than originally anticipated.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-04-27 10:00:46 and read 7658 times.



Quoting Chiad (Reply 6):

Does that mean that Boeing is likely to pay some kind of compensation for around 900 aircrafts?

It completely depends on how the contracts were structured. It's unlikely that a plane scheduled for delivery 8 years from now has a really tightly defined delivery date.

Quoting NCB (Reply 7):

I find this ramp up schedule very disastrous. They are trying to produce a widebody at the rate they produce a narrowbody... The whole idea of having a new widebody coming out of the factory every 48 hours is just too crazy.

I thought it was every 72 hours, not 48, but why is it crazy? The 737's come out at more than one per day and the final assembly process for a 787 is *way* simpler than a 737.

Quoting NCB (Reply 7):
Now that the aircraft is heavier than predicted they might even end up paying performance penalties for 900 aircraft...

So far, Boeing has consistently said they're within contractual performance guarantees. Their heavier than they want to be, but not so heavy that they can't meet their obligations.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 9):
Could someone tell me how long the barrel-sections and wings have to bake in an autoclave oven in order to gain max. strenght ?

It probably depends on the part, but typical cure cycles for autoclave parts are on the order of a few hours.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 9):
Subcontractors have each one (? ) autoclave oven to produce the sub-assemblies.

They have multiple autoclaves (for the really big parts) or load multiple parts in each autoclave (for the smaller stuff).

Tom.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Grantcv
Posted 2008-04-27 10:20:11 and read 7566 times.

Boeing was resisting a second production line. Now that it seems clear that Boeing was depending way too much on overly rosy expectations, does it not make sense for Boeing and their partners to invest in the facilities worldwide that would allow 787 production to actually be boosted? The 787 is essentially sold out for the next 8 years. Was that really the plan? Surely they are leaving money on the table by not having the production capacity for additional aircraft for so long.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: GCT64
Posted 2008-04-27 10:20:55 and read 7567 times.



Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 5):
but it takes until 2016-2017 until the current backlog is cleared.

That must be pretty worrying reading for AA and UA.
AA's oldest B763s will be 30 years old in 2018 with UA's not far behind.
They may yet live to regret not getting on the 787 earlier.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: PlaneInsomniac
Posted 2008-04-27 12:55:32 and read 6301 times.

I would consider the 30 month figure a worst case, but not an unlikely one. In any case, devastating news for the profitability of the 787 program. Boeing may end up having to provide some sort of compensation for delivery delays as much as almost twice as long as the A380's (with an EIS ca. 18 months late), and for more than four times as many planes (almost 900 compared to less than 200).

Adding the reported very low prices Boeing has offered for the 787 so far, the effect on the bottom line will decidedly be very negative. It seems the early sales success of the 787 may have done as much harm as it was a boost to the program.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 13):
It's unlikely that a plane scheduled for delivery 8 years from now has a really tightly defined delivery date.

Well, for all we know now pretty much every plane on order will be delivered late, many of them as much as two years or more. I would consider it a given that delivery delays of this magnitude violate some sort of contractual agreement for most of the planes in the backlog. That's the difference between firm orders and more loose agreements such as a LOI or a MOU. There may not be an exact day set into stone for delivery, but a delay of 30 months - two and a half years - will incur some sort of penalty.

Anyway, this can only mean more orders for the A330. Either as direct interim lift orders, or due to an increased pressure on the used midsize widebody market, for which the A330 is the only reasonable available valve.

Edit: Removed my highly controversial Toulouse-champagne connection.

[Edited 2008-04-27 13:21:12]

[Edited 2008-04-27 13:21:37]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-04-27 12:59:54 and read 6262 times.



Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 16):
Anyway, the champagne is probably out in Toulouse

After the A380 fiasco, and with their own ambitious ramp-up yet to come on the A350, I doubt that, somehow...  scratchchin .

Regards

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Beaucaire
Posted 2008-04-27 13:10:42 and read 6139 times.

Toulouse is extremely worried about the $ /€ exchange rate,that makes the profit-margin excercise a very tough science..

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Kappel
Posted 2008-05-01 05:40:15 and read 5293 times.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...t-787-could-be-30-months-late.html

Royal Jordanian now says the same thing. The 787 may be delivered

Quote:
one-and-a-half to two-and-a-half years

late. Guess the production ramp-up will not go as forseen I guess. What's going on here?

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Babybus
Posted 2008-05-01 05:57:21 and read 5216 times.

The incredible delays on the 787 will involve Boeing giving out vast cash pay-offs. I'm sure Monarch will be happy to see that prop up their end of year accounts for the next few years. That's unless they decide to cancel the whole order.  stirthepot 

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Kappel
Posted 2008-05-01 06:02:30 and read 5181 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 20):
That's unless they decide to cancel the whole order.

I doubt Monarch, RJ or any other carrier will cancel the 787, just like nobody cancelled the a380 (pax) orders. Even though I do wonder what will happen with the 787-3 orders. But if this 30 month delay turns out to be true, it's going to cost Boeing big time, like it did Airbus. Anyway, RJ said "between 18 and 30 months late". Lets hope it's closer to the former (already announced delays) than to the latter.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Moo
Posted 2008-05-01 06:04:33 and read 5175 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 20):
The incredible delays on the 787 will involve Boeing giving out vast cash pay-offs. I'm sure Monarch will be happy to see that prop up their end of year accounts for the next few years. That's unless they decide to cancel the whole order.

Apparently, according to several of the usual A.net suspects, Boeing reached their 'contractual limits' on compensation payments early on in the delays and thus won't be paying out anything extra. But thats just A.net pillow talk.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NAV20
Posted 2008-05-01 06:13:05 and read 5139 times.



Quoting Babybus (Reply 20):
The incredible delays on the 787 will involve Boeing giving out vast cash pay-offs.

Not if this is any guide:-

"DUBAI (Reuters) - European plane maker Airbus paid Dubai's Emirates EMAIR.UL as much as $110 million during the last year in compensation for the late delivery of the A380, of which the Arab carrier is the largest customer, Emirates said.

"Emirates, which has ordered 58 of the world's largest passenger planes, received 404 million dirhams ($110 million) during the year to March 31 in "liquidating damages", according to its annual report released on Wednesday."


http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSL303548620080430

If that (about $2M. per aeroplane) is a typical level of compensation in the aviation world for a two-year delay, no-one is going to get rich (or poor) from mere delays.

Incidentally, the correct phrase is 'liquidated damages' - a sum pre-agreed by both parties, and shown in the sales contract as the limit of compensation payable in the event of delays (regardless of the actual loss to the purchaser, be it less or more than the pre-agreed sum). I would expect most contracts to contain similar clauses. It may, of course, be an annual amount - but even then paying out those sorts of figures isn't going to 'break the bank' at either Airbus or Boeing.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Boeing74741R
Posted 2008-05-01 10:06:06 and read 4851 times.



Quoting Kappel (Reply 21):
I doubt Monarch, RJ or any other carrier will cancel the 787, just like nobody cancelled the a380 (pax) orders. Even though I do wonder what will happen with the 787-3 orders.

Never say never. I think it will be the level of compensation Boeing offers to customers for the delays what makes the minds up of airlines whether to cancel or stick with it, as there are no doubt several airlines (and growing) getting pi$$ed off over the delays.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: PlaneInsomniac
Posted 2008-05-01 10:19:42 and read 4803 times.



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 23):
Not if this is any guide

Frankly, the EK case is probably the worst guide for this. With their large and growing number of additional A380 orders, they had plenty of opportunity to conceal additional compensation through higher discounts for new orders. (Which is something that Airbus was certainly more than happy to do.) Also note that EK placed additional orders during the height of the A380 crisis, for which they most likely got ultra-low prices from Airbus.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Observer
Posted 2008-05-01 10:26:03 and read 5066 times.

Lan Chile is now publicly talking about a two year delay for its 787s. This follows Monarch (30 months) and Royal Jordanian (up to 30 months).

Qantas, which received A$200m for delays on its A380 program, said publicly look at this figure and multiply times the 787 orders. That comes to $1bn, but this can't be realistic, I shouldn't think.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: 707lvr
Posted 2008-05-01 10:54:33 and read 4978 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
was it so ingrained in their culture that every single person in management thought the risk sharing and production chain was the best method?

As poisonous as the labor-management relationship has become, even this would not be a surprise. Perhaps they considered the enlightened self-interest of both and decided to take the chance.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: AirbusA6
Posted 2008-05-01 11:10:17 and read 4914 times.

As with the A380, there will be many airlines cursing the manufacturer for delaying the delivery, while there will also be others who over extended themselves, and see financial storm clouds brewing, who may be rather pleased that their 787s are a couple of years late AND that they'll get compensation too...

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Musapapaya
Posted 2008-05-01 11:29:53 and read 4838 times.



Quoting GCT64 (Reply 15):
That must be pretty worrying reading for AA and UA.
AA's oldest B763s will be 30 years old in 2018 with UA's not far behind.
They may yet live to regret not getting on the 787 earlier.

I can only hope Airbus goes well on its A350 program and one day UA or AA will order some - boeing is not everything in the market.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Lorgem1
Posted 2008-05-01 13:18:07 and read 4667 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 8):
The trouble is, other industries have successfully used this approach to reduce cost, schedule and risk. That's why Boeing attempted it.
In my view, the issue isn't in the strategy itself, as you appear to portray it, but in the execution of the strategy.
It's important to make the distinction IMO....

 checkmark 
Excellent! Excellent! As I've said from day 1!
If the (design) or any ?? changes continue, off course it will have a 'chain' reaction on its supplier's, certification, engineering, etc.. Can you imagine having to backtrack on ALL assemblies from ALL it's suppliers? In other words, all aircraft produced prior to ceasing changes will have to be produced 'by hand'. Yes!, they can improve the production schedule by 2012 to its original estimates, but they have to "FIX" as in standardize the aircraft design and production process ASAP.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Glacote
Posted 2008-05-01 16:52:23 and read 4465 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 8):
So its possible early frames may be overweight (just as early A380's are)

With respect - not so. Those rumours have the B787 twice more overweight than the A388 was. Not counting redesigned wing box, non-wifi IFE, etc. Methinks those huge, heavy windows will shrink... (never been a big fan of them personally).

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 13):
It completely depends on how the contracts were structured. It's unlikely that a plane scheduled for delivery 8 years from now has a really tightly defined delivery date.

Especially since economic conditions may have change "slightly" since planes were ordered (oild price + credit crisis). Airlines may sure cry fool but actually not be too unhappy about delaying delivery - hence payment.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 23):
even then paying out those sorts of figures isn't going to 'break the bank' at either Airbus or Boeing.

Very true. It's more a question of lost opportunities.

Playing devil's advocates: if you know your competitor will enter the market two years after you you really want to squeeze as many early sales as possible. Even if you have to be "optimistic" about ramp up. Better pay some compensations and have a few disappointed customers (which remains to be seen btw) and gain market momentum.

BCA probably overestimated their own production management skills - but that may have been a very conscious bias.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-05-01 17:13:06 and read 4422 times.



Quoting Glacote (Reply 31):
Those rumours have the B787 twice more overweight than the A388 was.

Is that in pounds or %?

Quoting Glacote (Reply 31):
Not counting redesigned wing box, non-wifi IFE, etc.

A big reason for the non-wifi IFE was that it was *lighter* than the wifi IFE, so I'm not sure how you can pin the weight gain on that.

Quoting Glacote (Reply 31):
Methinks those huge, heavy windows will shrink...

Are you seriously suggesting they're going to redesign the entire fuselage based on a program that's already two years behind?

Tom.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NCB
Posted 2008-05-01 18:47:56 and read 4336 times.

The Dreamliner is 6 tons overweight now already, SUH said it 7 months ago.
The A380 was 6 tons heavy at completion, with the extra wiring.

The A380 was therefore 2.2% overweight, while the B787 is 5.45% overweight and likely to increase further.

[Edited 2008-05-01 18:53:00]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2008-05-01 19:03:16 and read 4306 times.



Quoting NCB (Reply 33):
The Dreamliner is 6 tons overweight now already, SUH said it 7 months ago.
The A380 was 6 tons heavy at completion, with the extra wiring.

The A380 was therefore 2.2% overweight, while the B787 is 5.45% overweight and likely to increase further.

Your logic is flawed on many levels. First, it's been widely reported that the plane is 2.5 tons overweight, not 6 tons. That's the same 2-2.5% the A380 was saddled with, which Airbus will slowly trim off as time goes on.

Further, if it was 6 tons overweight 7 months ago (and it wasn't), why do you think it is more overweight now? And why will it become even more overweight as things go forward rather than less?

Aren't the goals of any platform to decrease, not increase weight, during testing and production ramp up?

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2008-05-01 19:33:35 and read 4252 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
Further, if it was 6 tons overweight 7 months ago (and it wasn't), why do you think it is more overweight now? And why will it become even more overweight as things go forward rather than less?

Aren't the goals of any platform to decrease, not increase weight, during testing and production ramp up?

This somewhat depends on the timescale. During testing and production most aircraft loose weight as they figure out which bits were overdesigned. It would be fairly odd for the Dreamliner to be gaining weight at this stage of the game. Over the full life cycle, aircraft tend to gain weight as feature and fixes get added on, but that's over decades of mature production, not testing/rampup.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NAV20
Posted 2008-05-01 20:18:50 and read 4210 times.

Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 25):
Frankly, the EK case is probably the worst guide for this. With their large and growing number of additional A380 orders, they had plenty of opportunity to conceal additional compensation through higher discounts for new orders.

Of course you're right that there's always scope for negotiation, PlaneInsomniac. But I'd have thought that EK, of all airlines, held all the cards in the case of the A380 - if they'd cancelled their order (for fully one-third of the backlog) they'd have killed the whole A380 programme.

By contrast, Boeing has 787 orders running out of their ears. I expect that, rather than fear cancellations, they'd almost welcome some in present circumstances, as it would reduce the delays for their other customers. In that connection, I fully expect them to negotiate cancellation of the 783 and provide the Japanese airlines with 767s and/or some 737s instead.

So I'd think that the EK compensation probably represents 'top dollar' and that compensation for other A380 customers (and 787 customers) is likely, if anything, to be on a less generous scale.

[Edited 2008-05-01 20:25:56]

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2008-05-01 22:10:12 and read 4125 times.



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 36):
I expect that, rather than fear cancellations, they'd almost welcome some in present circumstances

Yes, it sounds like bad business practice, but I would imagine that Boeing would welcome cancellations or conversations to 777s, and are also very likely offering great deals on 763ERs, not as interim lift, but as permanent solutions for marginal carriers.

It's tough when you have a product in high demand and can't deliver it.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-05-01 23:29:41 and read 4076 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
First, it's been widely reported that the plane is 2.5 tons overweight, not 6 tons

Steve Udvar Hazy WAS quoted as saying that "the dreamliner is some 14 000lb overweight (roughly 6 tonnes  Wink )"......

He's generally pretty well respected in the industry.
Nevertheless, I personally am reluctant to nail my colours to a 6 tonnes weight problem just because S U-H was "reported" as saying it exists. Popcorn time in that respect.

What IS pretty unignorable is that Boeing themselves, in the last briefing, cited the reason for delaying the EIS of the 787-9 variant until 2012 was that they needed that time in order to get it engineered down to the weight they needed it to be. That statement was THEN followed by another which said that the 787-9's weight engineeering would THEN be back-engineered into the 787-8 and 787-3.

That reads TO ME like there is a problem (of whatever scale), that will not be properly fixed on the 787-8 until after 2012. How big? Dunno. Will it affect the promised performance? Dunno again. More popcorn required.

For what it's worth, Airbus will be working on a specific programme of weight reduction on the A380 in order to achieve spec weight, right through to 2012. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Fortunately for Airbus, we know that, for other reasons, the 1st planes hit their numbers despite being overweight, and that the forthcoming weight reductions will actually be "icing".

 crossfingers  hoping that 14 000 lb isn't true.....  Wow!
A 14 000lb overweight 787-8, (if no SFC or aero gains materialise) will struggle to outrange a 2009 spec A330-200...
So here's hoping, and keep the popcorn coming.  Smile

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 36):
So I'd think that the EK compensation probably represents 'top dollar' and that compensation for other A380 customers (and 787 customers) is likely, if anything, to be on a less generous scale.

When airlines like QF obviously received upwards of $10m per frame, it's clearly ludicrous to consider that $2m per frame is the sum of EK's compensation. There will be more, and/or other means (e.g. the write-off of the A340-600's may have been part of the deal)

Rgds

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Burkhard
Posted 2008-05-02 00:15:00 and read 3984 times.

I think nobody will cancel the 787 for the delays - but maybe selling 2013 delivery slots might make a good buck.

On the other hand, we cannot be sure every airline that has 787 in the books still will be with us in 4 or five years...

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NAV20
Posted 2008-05-02 00:25:14 and read 3967 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 38):
When airlines like QF obviously received upwards of $10m per frame, it's clearly ludicrous to consider that $2m per frame is the sum of EK's compensation.

Astuteman, to try to avoid yet another disagreement, Airbus' present position is that after the 45 deliveries planned for 2010, they will be pretty well back on programme. So I'll happily concede, if it helps, that EK's compensation figure so far probably refers only to a proportion of their total orders.

Nevertheless, it's perfectly clear that the airlines are not in a position to extract untold open-ended billions from the manufacturers over the delays that both of them are currently facing.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-05-02 00:46:04 and read 3922 times.



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 40):
Nevertheless, it's perfectly clear that the airlines are not in a position to extract untold open-ended billions from the manufacturers over the delays that both of them are currently facing.

Indeed not. That's obviously a historical position specific to the A380 in days gone by.....  Wink

Rgds

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: Brendows
Posted 2008-05-02 01:47:55 and read 3854 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 38):
Steve Udvar Hazy WAS quoted as saying that "the dreamliner is some 14 000lb overweight (roughly 6 tonnes Wink )"

I'll have to arrest you here Astuteman  Wink Hazy was talking about the 789 here, not the 788.
Here's the quote:

Quote:
He also said that the 787-9 is around 14,000 lb. over budget on its operating empty weight. In addition to the challenge this presents for the -9, it creates a problem for the proposed 787-10 because the additional weight on the already heavier platform could mean a heavier landing gear as well as higher-thrust engines, changes that would cause it to lose a lot of commonality with the smaller -8 and -9 variants, he said.

Source:
www.atwonline.com
 wave 

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
First, it's been widely reported that the plane is 2.5 tons overweight, not 6 tons.

Pretty correct. That figure showed up in late 2006 (and Carson said back then that LN1-6 would be above weight specifications.) The 787 was between 1-2% overweight last summer according to McNerney.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2008-05-02 02:08:30 and read 3804 times.



Quoting Brendows (Reply 42):
I'll have to arrest you here Astuteman  Wink Hazy was talking about the 789 here, not the 788.

Fair Cop. I suspished as much, but wasn't sure.
Some concern over the 789's weight does seem to be supported by Boeing's comments regarding its EIS delay, though.
Be interesting to speculate why the 787-9 could be seen to be 6t overweight, and the 787-8 "only" 2.5t........

Interesting article, though. Thanks.
(As an aside, I noticed his reference to a 30ft (or so) A380 stretch for EIS in 10-12 years, too. Nice to see some documented evidence..)

Rgds

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamli
Username: Khobar
Posted 2008-05-02 11:24:38 and read 3355 times.



Quoting Chiad (Reply 6):
Does that mean that Boeing is likely to pay some kind of compensation for around 900 aircrafts?

Current estimates:

• Morningstar: $800 million to $1 billion;
• Cowen & Company: $4 billion;
• Goldman Sachs: $3 billion
• Lehman Brothers: $3 billion to $5 billion;
JP Morgan: $3.5 billion to $4.5 billion;
• Wachovia: $2 billion to $3 billion.

http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn_2_041508.pdf

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
This is really where the Vought problems hurt them

Vought has been a problem, but not the root cause of the delays.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 13):
So far, Boeing has consistently said they're within contractual performance guarantees. Their heavier than they want to be, but not so heavy that they can't meet their obligations.

Boeing seems to have undertaken this particular project without knowing any answers. This has resulted in one "surprise" after another, so if performance comes up short, I'll not be surprised. Boeing has also been overly optimistic, reminding me time and again of Kevin Bacon at the end of "Animal House". So when they say it's not so heavy they can't meet their obligations, I take that with a pinch and a half of salt. We'll see, and I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 15):
That must be pretty worrying reading for AA and UA.
AA's oldest B763s will be 30 years old in 2018 with UA's not far behind.
They may yet live to regret not getting on the 787 earlier.

Nothing to regret - they can order A350's/A330's if needed, or they can just not order.

Since US airlines have no need to offer comfort, IFE, or any other technological advance that a new plane would offer, they can focus on cutting costs.  Wink

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 23):
If that (about $2M. per aeroplane) is a typical level of compensation in the aviation world for a two-year delay, no-one is going to get rich (or poor) from mere delays.

The figure quoted is only part of the compensation.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
Your logic is flawed on many levels. First, it's been widely reported that the plane is 2.5 tons overweight, not 6 tons. That's the same 2-2.5% the A380 was saddled with, which Airbus will slowly trim off as time goes on.

The Dreamliner is reportedly 14,000lbs overweight. Because of the weight issue, the wingbox was lightened by using thinner composite spars. Testing indicated that they would prematurely buckle compared with metal counterparts.

Contrary to some doom and gloom peddlers here, the solution is not a "redesign" in the sense intended - Boeing doesn't have to start from scratch as "redesign" implies. Reading Jon's blog on the matter, you'd think the sky was about to fall. "A center wing box design flaw has forced Boeing to redesign a critical section of the 787, program sources tell FlightBlogger, due to the potential for premature buckling in the structural spars." I'd worry about this if an A380 lost a wing, and I don't expect that to happen without help.

Boeing publically stated two days after ILFC went public that they had already resolved this issue.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2008-05-03 05:47:13 and read 3161 times.

Current analyst estimates for penalties are based on the assumption that a production rate of 10/mont is achieved by 2012.

What Boeing now indicated to Monarch is that they "are now planning on production build up in line with that they were able to achieve on the 777 programme". This means that in year 5 (2013) production will reach 7 per month, not 10, and that delivery delays, starting with 16 months, therofore will continue to mount, reaching 30 months by mid 2013.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: Glacote
Posted 2008-05-03 07:36:03 and read 3077 times.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 32):
Are you seriously suggesting they're going to redesign the entire fuselage based on a program that's already two years behind?

I may be completely out-of-touch with engineering reality - but I would have expected that shrinking windows size by say 30% (in surface) would be easy structurally speaking. And I would expect that to shelve say 1 metric t off the total mass. That's huge imho.

I for one don't want to pay a single dime for a "larger" window. I am pretty sure nobody will. I hence fail to understand why airlines haven't pushed Boeing to forget about that nice marketing idea.

Or isn't glass a lot heavier (including needed structure reinforcements around) than carbon?

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 32):
Quoting Glacote (Reply 31):
Those rumours have the B787 twice more overweight than the A388 was.
Is that in pounds or %?

In percents - I remember ANA quoting 5 metric tons at the beginning of the programme (ie same as A388 which should be twice heavier). Unsure where she stands now.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 34):
First, it's been widely reported that the plane is 2.5 tons overweight, not 6 tons.

I never heared the 6t (heard 5t) but missed the "2.5t" either. All I remember was a colourful thread about she being "within customers guaranteed weight" but "missing Boeing's targets". Which is pretty vague.

2.5t are bad (especially for a plane touted as lightweight, carbon marketspeak, etc.) - but not that bad.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 36):
I expect that, rather than fear cancellations, they'd almost welcome some in present circumstances, as it would reduce the delays for their other customers.

I was rumoured that AF deferral of A388 deliveries was suggested by Airbus itself...

Quoting Brendows (Reply 42):
I'll have to arrest you here Astuteman Wink Hazy was talking about the 789 here, not the 788.
Here's the quote:

Thank you that is extremely helpful.

Quoting Khobar (Reply 44):
Current estimates:[...] Goldman Sachs: $3 billion

Given their track record I think their figure will be correct.

Quoting Khobar (Reply 44):
The Dreamliner is reportedly 14,000lbs overweight. Because of the weight issue, the wingbox was lightened by using thinner composite spars. Testing indicated that they would prematurely buckle compared with metal counterparts.

Contrary to some doom and gloom peddlers here, the solution is not a "redesign" in the sense intended - Boeing doesn't have to start from scratch as "redesign" implies.

Thank you for the precise factual post.

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 45):
Current analyst estimates for penalties are based on the assumption that a production rate of 10/mont is achieved by 2012.

May not be true. Your point is valid, but you don't know what "analysts" really know/expect. The worsening of delays could well be factored in analysts numbers.

The main difference with A.net is that they loose their job if they do not get it right.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: N328KF
Posted 2008-05-03 16:17:13 and read 2928 times.

In the Boeing annual shareholder's meeting, I asked McNerney if he made a mistake letting Mulally go and putting Carson in his place. He said it was 'absolutely the right decision.' It sounded canned -- I am thinking that he has been questioned a lot on that.

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: NAV20
Posted 2008-05-03 19:16:50 and read 2859 times.



Quoting Glacote (Reply 46):
I was rumoured that AF deferral of A388 deliveries was suggested by Airbus itself...

Yes, Glacote, makes a lot of sense, given the political background.

About 787 delivery dates, first of all there’s the question of ‘which type of 787?’ Boeing are making progress with the 788, but the 789 will require a lot more design, development, and testing work before any dates can be fully firmed up. Most of the customers have ordered a mix of 788s and 789s – very possibly their ‘average’ period of delay reflects the 788s relatively early and the 789s relatively late?

And I've already said elsewhere that I expect the 783 to be cancelled altogether, in negotiation with the two airlines that have ordered it. Using the 787 as a medium-haul cattle-truck never made a lot of sense to me, I for one won't be sorry to see it go.

In any case, the way any sort of supply contract works, it’s unlikely that the terms agreed with any two airlines will be exactly the same. Such deals start off with a ‘standard draft’ but the final document will have all sorts of clauses which have been modified in negotiation. And people’s priorities differ. Some airlines will have placed the emphasis on the lowest possible price, others will have put more weight on the earliest possible delivery; and the clauses governing penalty payments etc. will vary accordingly.

Further, given that the fitout requirements of each airline are likely to be so different, and a single aeroplane is not much use to an airline in terms of servicing a route, Boeing will have to be aiming at a measure of ‘batch production.’ Airbus were fortunate that their three earliest customers did not particularly want deliveries until the Australian high season (September on); and beyond that they had also to concentrate, in production terms first on giving SQ a ‘quorum’ of aeroplanes, and only later on (indeed, virtually a year later) trying to do the same for Qantas/EK.

What it boils down to is that some airlines will have stronger bargaining positions than others – because of the terms of their contracts, their operational needs, the size of their orders, the mix of types they require, and also (very probably, anyway) the ‘value’ of their custom from Boeing’s viewpoint.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised, either, if Boeing is 'playing hardball' with some of the less valuable customers, more or less saying, “On present indications that’s the best we can do. If it’s not good enough, sorry, but here’s your deposit back and the agreed minimum penalty payment; and we’ll pay a bit towards your administration costs too. Sorry it turned out this way, and we hope we can part friends and do business again when things have calmed down.”

Topic: RE: Monarch Warns 30 Month Deliv. Delay On Dreamliner
Username: BestWestern
Posted 2008-05-04 01:15:33 and read 2783 times.

The AF delays were also attributed to the collapse of CDG 2E, which only reopened very recently - 2E was designed for A380 usage, with plenty of A380 ready airbridges.


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/