Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Boeing will decide by the end of June on whether to further accelerate 787 production to as many as 16 per month after continuing record demand for the new twinjet.
The rate increase is dependent on the availability of the Boeing 747-400LCF (Large Cargo Freighter) development
EI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
I would have thought that part of that desision hangs on the abilities of the 787s suppliers to maintain that rate of production. Im in no doubt that the market is there for another line.
11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1646 posts, RR: 11 Reply 6, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting Dbo861 (Reply 3): How many airplanes per month are they currently planning on producing if they don't ramp up production?
From the article linked in the thread starter:
Quote: The initial rate will launch at four per month, rising to six per month within one year. The rate then increases to 10 per month in 2010 under the current rate acceleration plan agreed under the initial study.
HAJFlyer From Switzerland, joined Sep 2005, 1466 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 7): Let's hope for them that all the airlines are taking delivery of ther frames that soon... Which is not granted
If we see no major changes in the the current economic situation of high oil prices, robust growth and a declining US dollar, airlines will be falling over themselves to get their hands on a dreamliner.
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 9, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
NAV 20 -- Phew! If they can achieve that rate of production they could theoretically clear the backlog of 350 frames in less than two years.
I said a while ago that I thought that the 787 might turn out to be this century's first DC3 Dakota. This news appears to fuel that impression.
See NAV 20, you continue to be THE most entertaining dispensers of raw zealotry among all the usual suspects around here. Way to go!
I'd like to point out to you that --from a fully-in-service airliner standpoint anyway -- the 787 programme has done absolutely n-o-t-h-i-n-g, as of this particular point in time. Especially after all the pack of lies served up previously about the "Sonic Cruiser", under Condit and so on.
Now, by all means let's hope the plane will roll out and fly sometime soon, of course -- and in so doing let's sure hope as well that the guys and girls building the thing are way more emotionally level-headed and technically-oriented then the gang of zealots around here, for instance, because otherwise yikes would Boeing ever be in real trouble then.
But let's at least give it another few months more here, shall we. Now that finally the rubber really is starting to hit the road, for their hoped-for EIS timeline anyway.
Brendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 5): One off the line appx. every two days??
Yes, that's right.
Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 5):
How would this rank up with other assembly lines (737 series, A320 series, etc)?
Boeing and Airbus are delivering about 30-32 737's and A320's each month IIRC.
Later this year, the 777 will be produced at a rate of seven each month, and I believe that the A330/A340 are also produced at this rate now.
CaptainBob From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
The gigantic autoclaves for the 787 are just now beginning to come online, and it will soon become apparent if these will actually work as anticipated. The success of the autoclaves has to be a factor in deciding when a 2nd line goes forward.
Different suppliers (there are only a handful around the world) are building each of the critical autoclaves required for the different sections. Each supplier is attempting to use its own concepts on these custom machines that have never been built before. They should all be working (or not working) properly in July this year.
The stable supply of large autoclaves has always been underestimated. There are no highly capitalized players in this market, and not much experience in building large machines in general (except for a company called Thermal Equipment who have built most of the larger ones for Boeing in the past).
This situation will have to be fixed before either or Airbus or Boeing can depend on a supply chain for these multi million dollar machines that are critical to the expanded use of large single piece composites in future planes.
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
CaptainBob -- The gigantic autoclaves for the 787 are just now beginning to come online, and it will soon become apparent if these will actually work as anticipated.
I remember reading somewhere several months back that February '06 was when that was supposed to start happening. But no biggie if it's actually now instead though, since it really is a huge undertaking and key to the very project itself, in addition to decisions about a second line opening, as you point out.
Hjulicher From Liechtenstein, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
This is more of a question, but if boeing does open a second assembly line, do you know where it will be located? This is so far fetched, but I was watching (Ñåãîäíÿ)* Sevodnja, a Russian news program, and it said that the B787 will be built in Russia, or something along the lines. I know that boeing does have facilities in Moscow, but I don't know to what extent they are collaborating with the 787 program. However, for some reason I remember that the news program said that Boeing would build the aircraft here, or some parts of it. It was defenitely substantial information, because it's bringing jobs, and it's provided a larger presence now, bigger than traditional for boeing. Can anyone support this?
Would it be possible to have two assembly lines in two continents? Would this also reduce labor costs? And possibly provide goverment support for the 787 since it's built here? Like for Aeroflot?
*Change encoding to Cyrillic (Windows) if the word looks like giberish.
ClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4522 posts, RR: 25 Reply 14, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting Hjulicher (Reply 13): This is more of a question, but if boeing does open a second assembly line, do you know where it will be located? This is so far fetched, but I was watching (Ñåãîäíÿ)* Sevodnja, a Russian news program, and it said that the B787 will be built in Russia, or something along the lines
It did say in the article that the second line would be at Everett.
However what you said was very interesting indeed!
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
Rheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1956 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting CaptainBob (Reply 11): Each supplier is attempting to use its own concepts on these custom machines that have never been built before.
Actually, autoclaves like these have been in use ever since the B-2 stealth bomber was 'boken' back in the mid eighties. Or take the composite wings Boeing designed and produced for the Navy A-6 SWIP program in the late eighties.
Plenty of time has passed since then and a plethora of programs and projects contributed to the composite structures design data base, manufacturing process know-how and cost reduction efforts that culminated into the 787. Finally it had to happen.
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Well, just to get things straight, there are 6 total lines in Everett right now. 2 for 747, 1 for 767, 1 for 777 (the new/future "moving" assembly line), 1 for 777 (the old/current 777 line, which will be being changed to a moving 787 line), and 1 empty line (used for test aircraft refurbishments, conversions, ect.).
If Boeing were to put the 787 on 2 lines, they would have to A. build a new line, B. squish the 747-8 into one line, or C. shut down the 767 completely.
Halibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting Mark_D. (Reply 9): See NAV 20, you continue to be THE most entertaining dispensers of raw zealotry among all the usual suspects around here. Way to go!
Mark_D,
Why must be so blatantly offensive ? NAV20 was simply expressing his oppinion . Your extreme derogatory attitude is completely uncalled for & your bias comments inaccurate !
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 2): Phew! If they can achieve that rate of production they could theoretically clear the backlog of 350 frames in less than two years.
I said a while ago that I thought that the 787 might turn out to be this century's first DC3 Dakota. This news appears to fuel that impression.
Agreed NAV20 ,
I believe Boeing knows how vulnerable Airbus is with regard to the A350 & there A350 Launch customer QR ?! It would be wise for Boeing to jump up production of the 787 while Airbus is currently caught in the Pickle .
Airbus: You've got big trouble
Boeing's rival is having a tough time designing its 787 competitor, making A350 launch customer Qatar Airlines "very unhappy."
But the news that Airbus is going back to the computer-assisted drafting software on the A350 is creating a stir with the one customer that's already really interested in the jet - Qatar Airways.
"We are launch customer for an aircraft that, other than its model number, does not now exist," the airline's chief executive, Akbar Al-Baker, told Flight International. "Qatar Airways is very unhappy about this."
Dalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 5808 times:
additionally, this weeks FI also had an article about Kawasaki Heavy Industries(KHI) offloading some of their Embraer 190/195 wing production back to Embraer, so they can concentrate on 787 fuselages and they are "expected to be informed later this year of a further production increase".
CaptainBob From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 19 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 5804 times:
Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 15): Actually, autoclaves like these have been in use ever since the B-2 stealth bomber was 'boken' back in the mid eighties. Or take the composite wings Boeing designed and produced for the Navy A-6 SWIP program in the late eighties.
I believe that Thermal Equipment built the 25 foot diameter B-2 Bomber autoclave for Boeing, and I think that they built a large one for the Navy A-6 too. They built another 25 foot diameter one some time ago for the Beech's Starship, but the 787 autoclaves are 30 foot diameter, a major jump in design and something that hasn't been done before.
Also, many of the 787 autoclave suppliers have never built anything near these sizes, and they still need to prove themselves.
Dalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 5798 times:
Quoting Trex8 (Reply 19): is Alenia-Vought "on board" for this production ramp up?? the Japanese can make all the wings they want but if there are no fuselages!!!
Ummm, KHI are making the fuselage barrels. They are offloading some Embraer 190/195 wing work, so they can meet Boeing's 787 fuselage production rate.
Trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 22, posted (6 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 5766 times:
Quoting Dalecary (Reply 21): Ummm, KHI are making the fuselage barrels. They are offloading some Embraer 190/195 wing work, so they can meet Boeing's 787 fuselage production rate.
TWAtwaTWA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (6 years 12 months 22 hours ago) and read 5615 times:
Quoting HAJFlyer (Reply 8): If we see no major changes in the the current economic situation of high oil prices, robust growth and a declining US dollar, airlines will be falling over themselves to get their hands on a dreamliner.
How does this work, when Boeing gets firm orders from airlines, years in advance of delivery, is the price locked? What if the dollar continues to fall (like it is right now) Foreign airlines would love to pay less foreign currency, and Boeing would get paid the same in US dollars.
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 65 Reply 24, posted (6 years 12 months 22 hours ago) and read 5598 times:
Quoting TWAtwaTWA (Reply 23): How does this work, when Boeing gets firm orders from airlines, years in advance of delivery, is the price locked?
Yes, firm orders include specific prices.
25 SirOmega: Doesnt C make the most sense? If Boeing ramps up the second line around 2010 it seems unlikely there will be any demand for a 767 after the 787 is in
26 Trex8: there are still a few orders for 763s but Boeing may be hoping for that air force tanker contract still
27 Zvezda: Another option would be to consolidate B777 production on one line. That might be reasonable from 2010.
28 Kaitak744: The 777 is on one line and will always be. 2005: - 747 - 747 - 747 - 767 - 777 - (miscellaneous) 2006 (late) - 747 - 747 - (miscellaneous) - 767 - em
29 WorldXplorer: Removed. My first point was made moot by Kaitak744's clarification. Unless the 767-300F catches on, this line is dead. A BCF program makes so much mor
30 Zvezda: Kaitak744, thanks for clarifying that. However, if the B747 could fit in the 3rd assembly hall, it would be strange if the B787 were too large.
31 Kaitak744: It didn't The 747 line is like a U. Parts come in through door 3, and the finished product came out through doors 1 and 2. Now, the parts go in throu
32 Zvezda: Kaitak744, I see. Thank you for the further clarification.
33 Ikramerica: I would assume you could do: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 787-10 - 748 - 748 - 767 - 787-8/9 - 777 747 parts go in 3 like before and planes come out 2
34 Kaitak744: Indeed that is a good plan. Lets hope Randy sees this post. . However, where would Boeing do its work which it currently does in the "miscellaneous"
36 Kaitak744: Probably so. The 747-8's parts can not be brought in by Boeing Beluga. So, the parts will still arrive in small pieces via train/ship. These small pi
37 Glideslope: Thats a great compairson. You may be right on with it.
38 Tockeyhockey: by bringing up the sonic cruiser, you come off as just as much of an anti-boeing zealot as NAV20 is a boeing booster. what point is there in bringing
39 JayinKitsap: Note - Keesje saying something nice about Boeing. Yes I think it also is good news for the airlines, passengers, and Boeing. Getting more planes with
40 DAYflyer: Sounds like they had better start building a couple more of these and get the rest of the supply chain on the same page. which officially begins with
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9084 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2004, 792 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Sep 2005, 1466 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, 
From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, 
From Liechtenstein, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4522 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
