Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing's 787 Program Fact Sheet  
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 18
Posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 7516 times:

Check it out here:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/programfacts.html

I am sure some of you read this already... But I thought I would share it for those that havan't yet. Many interesting facts... kewl.

But the following fact caught my eye as I was surprised to read it and at the same time made me happy:

US and non-US content on the 787

Roughly 75 percent US
Roughly 25 percent non-US

So in essence, this is an American designed and built aircraft. In comparison, the A380 is built with 40% American content and I believe it gets closer to 50% w/ GE/PW engines.

Cheers,

Ric


Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7459 times:

Boeing is 10 for 10; the 787 will be 11 for 11. The 10 are:
707, DC-8, DC-9 727, 737, 747, DC-10, 757, 767, and 777


I must be blind, because I don't see what these all have in common. They all flew on their first try? Boing still sells parts for them? What am I missing?



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7427 times:

I believe its for succesful newly launched from scratch aircraft????

But I agree with you not sure what they are trying to say here.



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2815 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7399 times:

Maybe they are referring to commercial successes. Of course Boeing only inherited the DC-8, -9 and -10 when they acquired MD. They didn't mention the 717 so I guess they're really 11 for 12. That's marketing for ya.

User currently offlineKL911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 5120 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7393 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Thread starter):
But the following fact caught my eye as I was surprised to read it and at the same time made me happy:

US and non-US content on the 787

Roughly 75 percent US
Roughly 25 percent non-US

Why is that something to be happy about?



Next trip : DUB-AUH-CGK-DPS-KUL-AUH-CDG-ORK :-)
User currently offlineN844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7377 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 3):
Maybe they are referring to commercial successes. Of course Boeing only inherited the DC-8, -9 and -10 when they acquired MD. They didn't mention the 717 so I guess they're really 11 for 12. That's marketing for ya.

Also note they didn't mention the MD-11, so maybe they're including the DC-10 and derivatives as one, big successful family. Plausible since they didn't include the MD-95/717 on that list, or any of the other (more successful) DC-9 derivatives.

Quoting KL911 (Reply 4):
Why is that something to be happy about?

A little nationalism when it comes to one's own country's aerospace manufacturing prowess isn't anything to worry about, particularly when that country is also importing at a dangerous rate.



New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4702 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7328 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BoeingBus (Thread starter):
Roughly 75 percent US
Roughly 25 percent non-US



No way jose!This is Enron accounting!

From Boeing site:

Partner work statement on the airplane structure

Japanese - 35 percent
Vought and Alenia - 26 percent
Boeing partners - 35 percent
Other - 4 percent
US and non-US content on the 787

Roughly 75 percent US
Roughly 25 percent non-US

The Japanese have 35% of the airframe program. Alenia has half the 26% of the Vought-Alenia share. That doesn't even get into things like Rolls engines and the vast majority of Trent contents are UK sourced, in fact the Japanese share of Trent 1000 is higher than what RR USA will be supplying!
Its possible with some daft accountancy that the 75% pertains only to the $ value including final assembly but if you are talking the actual components, at least a half if not more will be from non US sources even if some of those non US sources use US subcontractors (which for the Japanese, Italians and Brits will be minimal)

[Edited 2005-04-25 01:50:40]

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 7238 times:

Just because Alenia has half the share, it doesn't mean that half the work is being done in Italy. Also do the airframe workshares include anything besides work on the structure?


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 7145 times:

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 6):
No way jose!This is Enron accounting!

It certainly does sound a little high, doesn't it? Maybe someone on the inside can chime in on this.



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 7052 times:

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 6):
Japanese - 35 percent
Vought and Alenia - 26 percent
Boeing partners - 35 percent
Other - 4 percent
US and non-US content on the 787

Roughly 75 percent US
Roughly 25 percent non-US

Does it really matter?

Can US manufacturing claim credit for the A-380 as;

"Roughly 40 percent US"
"Roughly 60 percent non-US"?


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6984 times:

You can easily doctor these kind of statistics. If you want to make the 787 look more like a US plane - you can count a given part assembled in the USA as 100% American. If you are giving a speach in Europe and want to make the plane look less American, you can break that statistic down a bit. Suppose 1 subassembly of that part was made in the US and three in Europe. Then that same part can be said to be 75% European. You can drill down all the way to the farms, forests and mines if you have to in order to get the results you want.

An honest accounting would probably use some sort of "Value Added" system. This kind of system would count how much value each plant in each country adds to the material that makes up the airframe. That would be incredibly complicated to figure out, but who needs to anyway? The numbers are not meant to give an honest picture of what is going on - so it is best to just keep changing things until you get a number that sounds good to the intended audience.

This is not meant to slam Boeing. Corporations and activist groups all over the world do the very same thing. Everybody, or nearly everybody, who has an agenda to push doctors statistics.


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6832 times:

This is the stat which got me:

Quote:
How much lighter is 787 from A330-200
30-40,000 lbs

I thought it was going to be lighter, but not by that much! I guess all those composites will sure pay off for the airlines!

Cruiser



Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
User currently offlineGoodmanr From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 297 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6674 times:

It has to do with launching a new aircraft...

So, if the A350 never takes off because they don't get enough orders, that would count as 0/1



USAirways - Chairmans Gold
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5503 times:

Quoting SATX (Reply 8):
It certainly does sound a little high, doesn't it? Maybe someone on the inside can chime in on this.

It's called multiple supply chains. Even if Japan does an assembly, the parts may come from say.. Denver as an example.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5373 times:

Quoting N844AA (Reply 5):
Also note they didn't mention the MD-11, so maybe they're including the DC-10 and derivatives as one, big successful family.

The MD-11 was an abject failure, probably why it wouldn't be listed as a success.

N


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2815 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5289 times:

That's certainly fallacy of limited scope. 100% of our successful aircraft were successful.

User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4702 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 13):
Even if Japan does an assembly, the parts may come from say.. Denver as an example.

well, the reason Boeing and the Japanese consortium still have no final contract and the Japanese govt has not released funding for MHI, KHI and FHI is because Boeing wants the Japanese to subcontract out their share of work to other Asian suppliers in korea, China , Taiwan, Malaysia etc. If the prime subcontractors are going to be sending work anywhere it isn't to the US.

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 7):
Just because Alenia has half the share, it doesn't mean that half the work is being done in Italy

not so. see the AWST article last year on Vought-Alenias share of the work, Alenia fabricates the parts in Italy, sends it to the new Vought plant in the Carolinas for assembly and the final sections are shipped to Boeing and Alenia is guaranteed half the value of the work with nearly all of their portion to be done in Italy.

The reality is that all new major aerospace projects are multinational, it gives the manufacturer lower costs and gains them market share (you think the Japanese have been ordering 767s , 777s and now 787s simply because its the best product on the market??? If you do, you have no clue how Tokyo works!). For Boeing to say 3/4 is American is stretching it though.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing Use Of Rfid On 787 Program posted Fri Nov 4 2005 20:25:21 by MrComet
Boeing's 747 Freighters For 787 Program posted Tue Apr 19 2005 01:32:36 by Dimsum
Photo Of Boeing 787 Section Being Transported posted Sat Oct 28 2006 16:09:01 by RobK
AA, DL, UA Vie For Boeing 787 Gold Care Contracts posted Wed Oct 18 2006 01:13:52 by WorldTraveler
Boeing 787 To Have Best Cabin Air/Comfort Ever posted Sun Oct 8 2006 20:32:05 by RoseFlyer
Boeing 787 Dreamliner Break Even No! posted Tue Oct 3 2006 22:26:50 by Bringiton
Boeing 787-3 For Delta Hawaii Routes? posted Sat Sep 9 2006 22:30:06 by 1337Delta764
Boeing 787 Progress posted Mon Sep 4 2006 18:03:31 by DTW757
Kawasaki Heavy Mulling 2nd Plant For Boeing 787 posted Fri Aug 18 2006 20:29:44 by NYC777
Pegasus Aviation Order 6 Boeing 787-8s posted Tue Jul 18 2006 09:29:00 by PanAm_DC10