Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aboulafia Comment Re: 787 Schedule  
User currently offlineKangar From Ireland, joined Feb 2000, 395 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4592 times:

Folks, Just noticed this comment attributed to Mr. Aboulafia, whose commentary I take with a pinch of salt at the best of times, but this one seems especially off the cuff:

" -- "2004 was the first year Airbus enjoyed a higher market share than Boeing (in revenue)," said Aboulafia. "The situation will stay neck-in-neck until 2009, when the 787 arrives (we forecast a one-year delay).

http://www.defenseworld.net/Military...r/7307-DefenseAerospacePressnews-1

Does anyone know on what basis/facts Aboulafia forecasts a delay for the 787, other than lazy journalism?

Cheers

Kangar

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1844 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4578 times:

Mr. AbWHO?

Who is that?


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

Quoting Kangar (Thread starter):
"The situation will stay neck-in-neck until 2009, when the 787 arrives (we forecast a one-year delay).

Wow.... What a clown.


User currently offlineKangar From Ireland, joined Feb 2000, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

"Respected" industry commentator

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

I don't know, but the article is 7 months old. And he could be referring to when Boeing takes over revenue marketshare leadership as opposed to 787 EIS. The 787 EIS is closer to mid 2008, and delivery rates during the first year won't be going at full throttle (unless Boeing stockpiles 787s before EIS).


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineKangar From Ireland, joined Feb 2000, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4536 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
I don't know, but the article is 7 months old. And he could be referring to when Boeing takes over revenue marketshare leadership as opposed to 787 EIS. The 787 EIS is closer to mid 2008, and delivery rates during the first year won't be going at full throttle (unless Boeing stockpiles 787s before EIS).

I thought that too, but even 7 months back, it was apparent that Boeing wide bodies were going to comfortably outstrip Airbus wide bodies this year in sales terms, that's a bit before 2009. Also, the fact that he put EIS as 2009 was why I thought he was saying the EIS would be delayed.


User currently offlineAerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2707 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4453 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
And he could be referring to when Boeing takes over revenue marketshare leadership as opposed to 787 EIS. The 787 EIS is closer to mid 2008, and delivery rates during the first year won't be going at full throttle (unless Boeing stockpiles 787s before EIS).

This is exactly how I read the quote.Boeing's civil aircraft revenue wont exceed that of Airbus until a year after entry of the 787. Maybe instead of "lazy journalism" it's more a case of lazy iterpretation?


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4438 times:

Quoting Kangar (Thread starter):
http://www.defenseworld.net/Military...r/7307-DefenseAerospacePressnews-1

Does anyone know on what basis/facts Aboulafia forecasts a delay for the 787, other than lazy journalism?

He is a respected analyst. Perhaps he shares the same cautious view as Merrill Lynch who warned of "unknown unknowns" in the B787 development process.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...772_air27.html

This link appears dead or archived...but that is where it was before. Sorry.


User currently offlineKangar From Ireland, joined Feb 2000, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4427 times:

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 8):
This is exactly how I read the quote.Boeing's civil aircraft revenue wont exceed that of Airbus until a year after entry of the 787. Maybe instead of "lazy journalism" it's more a case of lazy iterpretation?

He did say the 787 arrives in 2009, that's why I took it to mean the delay was in relation to EIS, or is the EIS scheduled for 2009? I always took it for 2008. Interpret that however you like.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4376 times:

Quoting N79969 (Reply 9):
He is a respected analyst.

He's taking a shot in the dark. If he's right, he gets more business, if he's wrong, no one really cares. He simply claims Boeing exceeded expectations.


User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

Quoting Kangar (Thread starter):
Does anyone know on what basis/facts Aboulafia forecasts a delay for the 787, other than lazy journalism?



Quoting Kangar (Reply 10):
He did say the 787 arrives in 2009, that's why I took it to mean the delay was in relation to EIS, or is the EIS scheduled for 2009? I always took it for 2008. Interpret that however you like.

Too many pints, I would say.

One of my favorite pastimes use to be going back to old forecasts made by "analysts" when I was in the computer came in Silly Con Valley, and seeing how accurate they turned out to be. Not very. Kangar, me lad, time for a pint.


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4221 times:

It would not surprise me to see delay's hit part of the 787 program. With the moaunt of new technology that is involved it would really surprise me if this program ran perfectly on time and under budget.

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4191 times:

Most sensible people (no perse Mr Aboulafia) see when a lot of new technologies is introduced at the same time (composites, 5000 psi, high power electronic actuators, bleedless engines, apu) the risk that there will be delays is high in e..g. cwertification. I expect Boeing to have calculated this in, as well as the launch customers in their contracts.

User currently offlinePlaneDane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4157 times:

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 6):
Not likely, the 787 is simply overbudget, undermanned, behind schedule, and slightly overweight (1-3% last I checked, which is really good at this point). . . just like most new airplane programs before it . But its still well within the "range" of a last minute crunch (at least I hope so, unless something major pops up) to get everything done and out the door in time.

Where exactly do you get your information there, 787engineer? Overweight? Overbudget? Behind schedule? Like most new airplane programs?

I've worked for the company for over 23 years and what you're saying really surprises me.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4112 times:

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 6):
Not likely, the 787 is simply overbudget, undermanned, behind schedule, and slightly overweight (1-3% last I checked, which is really good at this point). . . just like most new airplane programs ....

Where exactly do you get your information there, 787engineer? Overweight? Overbudget? Behind schedule? Like most new airplane programs?


& now its gone! Slip of the tongue or big brother watching?

Seriously I´m sure Boeing is putting all it´s efforts in to fix possible issues & get it in the air ASAP.

Hopefully we won´t see such a shameless fiesta as with the A380 delays & issues on a.net and in the US press.


User currently offlineAerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2707 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 21):
Hopefully we won´t see such a shameless fiesta as with the A380 delays & issues on a.net and in the US press.

Yes, how dare the press investigate and question things when they should tow the corporate and government line and keep their ungrateful traps shut  Yeah sure


User currently offline787engineer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4042 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 19):

Where exactly do you get your information there, 787engineer? Overweight? Overbudget? Behind schedule? Like most new airplane programs?

I've worked for the company for over 23 years and what you're saying really surprises me.

Just what I hear from some of upper level managers when i've had a chance to chat with them about how the whole program is going in general. The plane is overweight in a few places and below target weight in others. I don't know exactly where it is now when everything's added together, but it was slightly overweight just a few months ago. Nothing significant that the detailed design process wouldn't iron out; its actually not as overweight as many of them expected at this point of the program. If it wasn't behind schedule there wouldn't be so many people working overtime now would there? Also if it wasn't undermanned they wouldn't still be hiring like crazy would they? And I've heard they've spent more than they've planned to at this point in the development process. This is what I've 'heard' from some sources and I do see indications that these things are true. Very few people in the world have actual evidence to disprove or prove these points, so take it for what its worth. . . just what's passed down the grapevine.

I think most new airplane programs have had their issues during development, whether it was budget, weight, performance, etc. They're simply hurdles we have to overcome before delivery. Like I said, despite all those things I cited they are considered within expectations. At 2 years from EIS most planes are a little overweight, or over budget, etc, as more analysis is done we will find more places to reduce weight, etc. Sometimes we find places where we need to add weight. . . its a long process. You have to remember the planning, scheduling, introduction of new technologies, and new techniques (in design (V5 instead of V4) as well as manufactureing (composites vs. Al)) was very aggressive to begin with. Boeing set some very lofty goals for itself with the 787.

I'll be the first to admit I'm new to the company and I'm a recent college grad, but I know my fair share about airplanes and that's what it looks like to me. Will the 787 first delivery have to be delayed? I certainly don't think so. . . that was the point of my post.

[Edited 2006-01-27 00:33:16]

User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3913 times:

Boeing has made a lot of different aircraft, many of which have been very innovative. They know how long it takes to create an aircraft, and when they lay out a time table, they are building in time for working out things that go wrong, don't work like they should, and whatever else. Is it possible the airplane will be late, absolutely, no one can predict the future, but unless Boeing says "we're going to be late" - which they would, if they were, so as not to alienate their customer base, my guess is anyone claiming knowlege to the contrary is as reliable as a tv psychic.


"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 10):
He's taking a shot in the dark. If he's right, he gets more business, if he's wrong, no one really cares. He simply claims Boeing exceeded expectations.

I have confidence in Boeing but success cannot be taken for granted. Aboulafia is a smart guy. I would not blow his views off lightly


User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3634 times:

My guess that Mr. A is expecting a delay due to the aggressive schedule that Boeing has put in place for the 787. Can anyone confirm that an alll new widebody has been launched and then entered service within 4 years.

It is very easy to guess that the airplane will be late, because a LOT of things have to go right for it to make the EIS date. Just look at the shortened certification period, as an example.

Cheers


User currently offline787engineer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3570 times:

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 31):
Can anyone confirm that an alll new widebody has been launched and then entered service within 4 years.

Hmmm with a little research here on A.net, here's what I found:

B747: L-July 1966, EIS-January 1970; 3 years, 7 months (remember it was based off their USAF proposal)
B767: L-July 1978, EIS-September 1982; 4 years, 3 months
B777: L-October 1990, EIS-May 1995; 4 years, 8 months

A330: L-June 1987, EIS-November? 1993; 5 years, 6 months
A340: L-June 1987, EIS-March 1993; 4 years, 10 months
A380: L-December 2000 (wow, was it really that long ago  eek  ) EIS-December 2006, 6 years

DC-10: L-February 1968, EIS August 1971; 3 years, 7 months
MD-11: L-December 1986, EIS December 1990; 4 years (based on DC-10)

For the 787, launched in April 2004, first delivery is planned for August? 2008, that's 4 years and 5 months. I've always heard it would be built pretty quickly (aggresive scheduling), but it seems as if its pretty normal for Boeing airraft, other than the big leaps technologically, of course. All the data here is from A.net database, there are a few '?' Plz correct me if i'm wrong. *crosses fingers and hope I didn't count wrong* An engineer that can't count who would've guessed!  Silly  embarrassed 


User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

Wow.... I would have thought the 787 was quicker to market then previous models. Numbers don't lie.... thanks

User currently onlineSFORunner From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3445 times:

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 32):
For the 787, launched in April 2004, first delivery is planned for August? 2008, that's 4 years and 5 months. I've always heard it would be built pretty quickly (aggresive scheduling), but it seems as if its pretty normal for Boeing airraft, other than the big leaps technologically, of course.

Some of the 787s notable technologies originated with the Sonic Cruiser, so April 2004 isn't that "hard" of a start date.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10024 posts, RR: 96
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3382 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 23):
The plane is overweight in a few places and below target weight in others. I don't know exactly where it is now when everything's added together, but it was slightly overweight just a few months ago. Nothing significant that the detailed design process wouldn't iron out; its actually not as overweight as many of them expected at this point of the program. If it wasn't behind schedule there wouldn't be so many people working overtime now would there? Also if it wasn't undermanned they wouldn't still be hiring like crazy would they? And I've heard they've spent more than they've planned to at this point in the development process.

Sounds like a normal major programme to me. Every major design/construction project I've worked on has been in these waters at this stage. This would only be outrageously newsworthy if it were the A380 programme  Yeah sure

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 32):
I've always heard it would be built pretty quickly (aggresive scheduling)

Don't get carried away (everyone). It's the final assembly time that's getting blown away (from weeks to days). The rest will be pretty much as you were.
2-3 weeks reduction doesn't make much of a dent in a 4 1/2 year programme.


User currently offlineTifoso From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3243 times:

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 31):

It is very easy to guess that the airplane will be late, because a LOT of things have to go right for it to make the EIS date. Just look at the shortened certification period, as an example.

What worries me also is that Boeing is going to be building a lot of new frames in parallel with the certification process. If they find a big enough problem, all of those frames may need a lot of re-work.

Boeing must be under intense pressure; pulling it off on time and living up all their promises is going to be a challenge. But, I'm sure they will overcome it Big grin


25 AirFrnt : It's only newsworthy on the A380 because the A380 still had major design issues (weight, vortex, possible engine problems) during flight testing. Jus
26 Boeing7E7 : Not so smart he can predict Boeing's capability. Not so smart on much else either. The guy is drumming for business, nothing more, nothing less.
27 Eha : you certainly will have to learn what you are entitled to communicate to the outside world.... E.
28 Glacote : The weight problem was alledgely moderate and easily fixed (no word about cost though). Fuel performance is alledgely better than advertised. There i
29 N79969 : How do you know all of this? The Financial Times, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Jane's Intelligence Review, Asian Wall Street Journal, and other
30 Jet-lagged : Haha. He has the kind of job that many of us would dream of . . . rather than having to huff and puff for free in our spare time on A.net!
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 Comment On 787 Windows posted Mon Jun 13 2005 23:42:17 by C172
Boeing Comment On 787 Windows posted Mon Jun 13 2005 23:42:17 by C172
Boeing Comment On 787 Windows posted Mon Jun 13 2005 23:42:17 by C172
Martinair Re-painting Schedule posted Fri Dec 24 2004 09:42:35 by A388
787 On Schedule posted Wed Dec 6 2006 16:15:03 by Stratofortress
On Tour With The 787: Dreamliner Is On Schedule posted Fri Jun 16 2006 14:59:40 by NYC777
RE: Will Anyone Order 787 @ Farnborough? Who? posted Thu Jun 15 2006 22:28:01 by NYC777
Question Re: Integrity Of 787 Composites posted Sun Apr 9 2006 03:38:08 by JAAlbert
Martinair Re-painting Schedule posted Fri Dec 24 2004 09:42:35 by A388
Martinair Re-painting Schedule posted Fri Dec 24 2004 09:42:35 by A388
787 On Schedule posted Wed Dec 6 2006 16:15:03 by Stratofortress
787 On Schedule posted Wed Dec 6 2006 16:15:03 by Stratofortress
On Tour With The 787: Dreamliner Is On Schedule posted Fri Jun 16 2006 14:59:40 by NYC777
On Tour With The 787: Dreamliner Is On Schedule posted Fri Jun 16 2006 14:59:40 by NYC777
787: Is It On Schedule? posted Mon Jan 30 2006 04:26:51 by A380900
RE: Will Anyone Order 787 @ Farnborough? Who? posted Thu Jun 15 2006 22:28:01 by NYC777
RE: Will Anyone Order 787 @ Farnborough? Who? posted Thu Jun 15 2006 22:28:01 by NYC777
AC Re-confirms 777, 787 Order posted Wed Nov 9 2005 21:58:04 by Sebring
Question Re: Integrity Of 787 Composites posted Sun Apr 9 2006 03:38:08 by JAAlbert
Question Re: Integrity Of 787 Composites posted Sun Apr 9 2006 03:38:08 by JAAlbert
787: Is It On Schedule? posted Mon Jan 30 2006 04:26:51 by A380900
787: Is It On Schedule? posted Mon Jan 30 2006 04:26:51 by A380900
AC Re-confirms 777, 787 Order posted Wed Nov 9 2005 21:58:04 by Sebring
AC Re-confirms 777, 787 Order posted Wed Nov 9 2005 21:58:04 by Sebring
Re-schedule On Virgin posted Fri Apr 13 2001 01:06:15 by Iainhol
Re-schedule On Virgin posted Fri Apr 13 2001 01:06:15 by Iainhol
Re-schedule On Virgin posted Fri Apr 13 2001 01:06:15 by Iainhol
A380 MSN007 F-WWSD Re-registered? posted Sun Dec 10 2006 15:20:32 by Petera380
A380 MSN007 F-WWSD Re-registered? posted Sun Dec 10 2006 15:20:32 by Petera380
A380 MSN007 F-WWSD Re-registered? posted Sun Dec 10 2006 15:20:32 by Petera380