Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FI: Dreamliner Takes Shape  
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5802 posts, RR: 47
Posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7313 times:

A great detailed article in FI

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...207664/Dreamliner+takes+shape.html


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7161 times:

Interesting reading.
What strikes me it that basically all is happening in Japan and Italy: didn't know that apart from the tail, there will be not much 'Boeing' about the Boeing 787 really...

What is somewhat worrying is this:
David Brigante, Alenia vice-president said on Alenia's longer-term strategic ambitions the development of the 787 "created a small Airbus between us, Vought and the Japanese".

What's next?
Formalize this current collaboration between the 3 partners of the 787 to let them share their technology on a newly designed plane in the 737/A320 class, produce the tail and wing fairing them selves and simply dump Boeing?
Remember Airbus was born out of a loose occasional multinational collaboration too when they saw the chance to conquer the market with an innovative shorthaul product (A320). Isn't there something called Y1 which would be a fine occasion to storm the markets for a newly created manufacturer?

[Edited 2006-07-10 18:48:45]

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10234 posts, RR: 97
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7065 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
Formalize this current collaboration between the 3 partners of the 787 to let them share their technology on a newly designed plane in the 737/A320 class, produce the tail and wing fairing them selves and simply dump Boeing?

If you read a couple of lines further down from your quote, it says:-

"Alenia has been gradually building trust towards “becoming collaborative. In the end, it’s going to be better this way.” The partnership does not necessarily mean any tie-ups over future projects such as the Boeing 737RS. “On the next one, we are competitors,” he says"

Interesting times. Great article.

Thanks for the thread NYC777.

Regards


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5802 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6949 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 2):
Thanks for the thread NYC777.

You're quite welcome!



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineTexfly101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6837 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
Formalize this current collaboration between the 3 partners of the 787 to let them share their technology on a newly designed plane in the 737/A320 class, produce the tail and wing fairing them selves and simply dump Boeing?
Remember Airbus was born out of a loose occasional multinational collaboration too when they saw the chance to conquer the market with an innovative shorthaul product (A320). Isn't there something called Y1 which would be a fine occasion to storm the markets for a newly created manufacturer?

Thats is a possibility....providing that they also have the expertise to both coordinate and provide the systems necessary to complete final integration. The computer coding for the flight controls alone will run into the millions of lines. All the subsystems, environmental systems, control systems, etc, have their associated problems and requirements that fall far outside composites expertise. The painting prior to the final delivery checkout is outside the factory integration processes and is very rarely mentioned, but is a huge part of making the airplane right before the customer says OK. Add in the choice of needing a lead company that is responsible for final integration, i.e. making everything work together, and it takes a company of Boeing's or Airbus' size and experience to both take this risk and pull it off. I wouldn't use the beginnings of Airbus as an example as it took European governmental alliances to make it happen. Probably a good example of a private venture is where Boeing and Lockheed joined forces to build United Space Alliance, the company that manages the Space Shuttle. The only way that happened was that there was a guaranteed contract by NASA waiting, again a governmental backing. Most likely, the decision to compete in the single aisle market wouldn't have that...the only guarantee would be that both Boeing and Airbus will have an excellent product waiting that will be the airlines first choice due to the long history of the 727, 757, 737 and A32X. So while the decision to compete is possible, it would be a huge risk with no gurantee of profits. It would also go against an almost assured profitable position as a supplier to Boeing and Airbus.


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6837 times:

For MSN01, does anyone know the schedule from when major assembly begins (actual assembly in Everett) until first flight? It seems to me that there is very little time for this to take place in 2007.

James



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 offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6742 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
What strikes me it that basically all is happening in Japan and Italy: didn't know that apart from the tail, there will be not much 'Boeing' about the Boeing 787 really...

Oh! A talking point . Spirit is ex-Boeing, and they have a huge portion of it, and almost all of the integration work is being done here. It's all being managed in the US. Welcome to a globalized economy.

I assume the reason that the Airbus contingent keeps bringing this up is because there is a perception mismatch. Boeing is a American company, that sells planes worldwide for profit. Airbus is a European company that is partially government owned and thus must serve the twin masters of a corporation (profit) and of a government (prestige and jobs).Finally there is a perception mismatch. Boeing is a American company, that sells planes worldwide for profit. Airbus is a European company that is partially government owned and thus must serve the twin masters of a corporation (profit) and of a government (prestige and jobs).

As for the Japanese involvement, this is a good thing. Remember that is is Japan that is the world's second largest economy (soon to be lost, or recently lost to China), not the EU. Anything Boeing can do to involve their economy on their projects is great.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6591 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 6):
Remember that is is Japan that is the world's second largest economy (soon to be lost, or recently lost to China), not the EU

No, the EU as a whole is larger than Japan. But Japan is the 2nd largest national economy after the US.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5802 posts, RR: 47
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6553 times:

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 5):
For MSN01, does anyone know the schedule from when major assembly begins (actual assembly in Everett) until first flight? It seems to me that there is very little time for this to take place in 2007.

James

Look for all the major pieces to be arriving at Everett in the first half of '07 and roll out, ground tests, and first flight between July and August. I have a feeling that there will be a little bit more information at Boeing's 787 update briefing at Farnborough on July 18th at 10AM (local time).



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6461 times:

Airfrnt-
I am trying to understand what Alenia's VP said would be the best long term strategy for his company. No need to turn this topic into yet another A vs B thread with you explaining me why B has a superior business case in your view.

Quoting Texfly101 (Reply 4):
Thats is a possibility....providing that they also have the expertise to both coordinate and provide the systems necessary to complete final integration. The computer coding for the flight controls alone will run into the millions of lines. All the subsystems, environmental systems, control systems, etc, have their associated problems and requirements that fall far outside composites expertise. The painting prior to the final delivery checkout is outside the factory integration processes and is very rarely mentioned

Thank you for this enlightening post.
I know there is much more to building modern planes than just having the composite know-how to make the different segments of the plane and then join them together and just like you I doubt the Japanese have enough expertise on global coordination and systems integration for any aviation projects, but from Alenia I am not so sure: Alenia is co-owner of ATR, so they probably have a good amount of expertise and skills in house to undertake coordination, integration and certification projects for aviation programs. Obviously a regional turboprop is not the same as a 150-seating jet plane, but it could be a starting point.
As to painting the planes: I don't know how difficult this is, but looking at the large number of independent paint shops around the world, I don't think this would be a big hurdle to overcome.
The computer coding for the flight controls might prove the most complex task which none of the 787 partners has done so far... Maybe they'd need to seek help in Russia? There are some bright design bureaus out there who'd be more than willing to help them out on this...

Again, I am not predicting any doomsday event for Boeing by having launched the 787 with such a strong foreign involvement, I am just trying to assess in how far it would be achievable for the Italian/Japanese partners on the 787 program to break away from Boeing and to set up their own integrated manufacturer to come up with Y1 without any Boeing involvement at all!
From what I have read on the 787, Boeing is depending more on some of its key industrial partners for essential innovative technology for their future products, than these partners need Boeing on these products once they have proven them selves in the market.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5802 posts, RR: 47
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 6402 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 9):
I am just trying to assess in how far it would be achievable for the Italian/Japanese partners on the 787 program to break away from Boeing and to set up their own integrated manufacturer to come up with Y1 without any Boeing involvement at all!

Sure that could happen jus as much as China could take the know how fromthe second A320 line and leverage that into another competitor in the single aisle short haul market. It just the nature of the gobalization trend. China and Japan would love to have their own indigenous aerospace industries that would compete with Airbus and Boeing and they're finding ways of getting the knowledge from both companies.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 6145 times:

Douglas tried building MD-80s in China, and found it actually was better to do it in long beach. China has lots of experience building russian jets, and somehow they still aren't a threat.


"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4763 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5974 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 2):
If you read a couple of lines further down from your quote, it says:-

"Alenia has been gradually building trust towards “becoming collaborative. In the end, it’s going to be better this way.” The partnership does not necessarily mean any tie-ups over future projects such as the Boeing 737RS. “On the next one, we are competitors,” he says"

Interesting times. Great article.

Thanks for the thread NYC777.

I think this comment is referring to competition vs. the other composite builders - vought, mitsubishi, kawasaki - and not necessarily meaning devloping their own...



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31412 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5910 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 9):
I am just trying to assess in how far it would be achievable for the Italian/Japanese partners on the 787 program to break away from Boeing and to set up their own integrated manufacturer to come up with Y1 without any Boeing involvement at all!

Probably not very, at least in the "near term" of the next decade.

Remember both Embraer and Canadair/Bombardier created their own niches - the Regional Jet. Neither started by trying to compete directly with Boeing or Airbus products.

Heck, even Airbus did not start by competing with Boeing directly. The A300 was in itself a "niche product" and remained so (along with the A310) for almost a decade until they launched a complete family of planes in the late 1980s.

As noted, China and Japan would like to have their own domestic airliner industries, but it takes more then raw money and talent to fight two established manufactuers who themselves are actively working to improve their product.

It would be one thing if China or Japan had launched the 787 or the A380 - something well outside the "norm". But as noted, CFRP alone is not going to determine the success or failure of the next generation of narrowbodies, though it will play a role. And neither China nor Japan's industry will be able to launch a new generation of narrowbodies before Boeing's Y1 and Airbus' A320RS.

Honestly, I can see why Japan continues to push SST research. A fuel-efficient, boom-friendly, long-range SST really would be the "game changer" they'd need to break into the commercial airline market in a big way.


User currently onlineBraybuddy From Ireland, joined Aug 2004, 5811 posts, RR: 31
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5465 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 1):
there will be not much 'Boeing' about the Boeing 787 really...

So NOW we know the reason for the 7E7 designation: the E stands for Europe!


User currently offlineAntiuser From Italy, joined May 2004, 657 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5439 times:

It surely is very interesting to see it all slowly come together. Can't wait for the test flights to begin (especially since I live in Seattle) Big grin.


Azzurri Campioni del Mondo!
User currently offlineOkees From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 424 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4337 times:

Cant wait till its done!!


mobs jakis
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3788 times:

Quoting Texfly101 (Reply 4):
Thats is a possibility....providing that they also have the expertise to both coordinate and provide the systems necessary to complete final integration. The computer coding for the flight controls alone will run into the millions of lines. All the subsystems, environmental systems, control systems, etc, have their associated problems and requirements that fall far outside composites expertise. The painting prior to the final delivery checkout is outside the factory integration processes and is very rarely mentioned, but is a huge part of making the airplane right before the customer says OK. Add in the choice of needing a lead company that is responsible for final integration, i.e. making everything work together, and it takes a company of Boeing's or Airbus' size and experience to both take this risk and pull it off. I wouldn't use the beginnings of Airbus as an example as it took European governmental alliances to make it happen. Probably a good example of a private venture is where Boeing and Lockheed joined forces to build United Space Alliance, the company that manages the Space Shuttle. The only way that happened was that there was a guaranteed contract by NASA waiting, again a governmental backing. Most likely, the decision to compete in the single aisle market wouldn't have that...the only guarantee would be that both Boeing and Airbus will have an excellent product waiting that will be the airlines first choice due to the long history of the 727, 757, 737 and A32X. So while the decision to compete is possible, it would be a huge risk with no gurantee of profits. It would also go against an almost assured profitable position as a supplier to Boeing and Airbus.

to put it more succinctly, it's all about capital. boeing has it. these smaller firms do not. even if they get the expertise, they are half a century away from having the financial resources to build a complete fleet that could compete with either airbus or boeing.


User currently offlineCloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 641 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1780 times:

I never considered Boeing a manufacturer of aircraft, but the assembler of them.


Boston, USA
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 Superfreighter Takes Shape In Taiwan posted Sat Apr 15 2006 14:48:57 by BoeingBus
LHR T5 Takes Shape... posted Tue May 18 2004 14:41:41 by EK413
FI: EVA Says No 345/346, Takes More 773ER posted Tue Jan 28 2003 04:48:41 by Bigo747
FI-P+W Tout Geared Fan For A320 posted Mon Dec 4 2006 12:23:18 by Astuteman
FI: Boeing Patents Anti-Terror Autopilot System posted Fri Dec 1 2006 14:23:51 by USAF336TFS
FI:Launch Of A350XWB Program Delayed. posted Fri Nov 24 2006 13:59:14 by USAF336TFS
Randy Takes A Slap At The XWB posted Wed Nov 22 2006 17:10:53 by DLPMMM
FI: A350 Launch Imminent - EIS Slips posted Mon Nov 20 2006 09:36:57 by N1786b
FI: PAL Selects 777 posted Mon Nov 20 2006 09:30:42 by N1786b
Traveler Ejected For Smell Takes Airline To Court posted Fri Nov 17 2006 16:18:30 by Eoinnz