Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Looking At 10 Or More 787s/Month  
User currently offlineN1786b From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 559 posts, RR: 17
Posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7019 times:

Interesting article published on bloomberg.

March 5 (Bloomberg) -- Boeing Co. is in talks for the manufacture of as many as 10 fuselages a month for its new 787 Dreamliner, more than the seven originally agreed with Finmeccanica SpA's Alenia Aeronautica.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...=conews&tkr=BA:US&sid=ah5znQp9blgo


The article also seems to imply they may even go higher than the 10.

Other tidbits include:

- Boeing will decide this Summer if they will be increasing production of the 787
- He refused to pinpoint the problems but now says Alenia is now on schedule:

''The program is going as expected,'' he said. ''Nothing is easy in the beginning when you're talking about such a high-tech program.''


Interesting development. Does this mean we will be seeing two assembly lines or can a single line do it? And will Boeing have to look into getting another DreamLifter?

- n1786b

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11449 posts, RR: 61
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 6994 times:

Quoting N1786b (Thread starter):
Boeing will decide this Summer if they will be increasing production of the 787

I'm sure a well-timed order for 50-100 frames from any one or more of AA, Delta or United would help make the decision for them.  Smile


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3381 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 6869 times:

AA maybe , aren't Delta close to breathing their last breath?

I expect that there will be a gradual upcurve in the production rate rather than a big bang second line. If this comes off- then B will be building more 787s a month that A will be building all Wide bodies (until the A380 line comes up to full speed in 2010).


User currently offlineATCGOD From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 661 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 6660 times:

Quoting N1786b (Thread starter):
Interesting development. Does this mean we will be seeing two assembly lines or can a single line do it? And will Boeing have to look into getting another DreamLifter?

I'd venture to guess that once they determine their suppliers can keep pace with a second assembly line they'll announce and implement it. I'd also say they'll double their LCF's if they do decide to implement a second line. Just a guess, but that's what I see happening.


User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 6621 times:

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 2):
aren't Delta close to breathing their last breath?

hardly they have an exit plan and they have recently ordered 777's


User currently offlineATCGOD From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 661 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6538 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 4):

hardly they have an exit plan and they have recently ordered 777's

Actually, to clarify, they didn't order 777's they simply converted their existing order of 772ER's into 772LR's. And yes, I believe they are on pace to exit bankruptcy either April or May of this year.


User currently offlineLaddb From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 220 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6538 times:

Pardon my ignorance, but I did not realize that the fuselage was being made by Alenia. I have also read that Airbus is behind a bit on compsite technology, and that they have slated a plant in the UK to focus on composite structures. Finally, there is a rumor that Alenia may be in talks to purchase one of the Airbus plants. Wouldn't that be a good thing for A? Can't Alenia use the experience gained from producing 787 fueselages to produce the A350XWB ones?

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6354 times:

Well, if they think there are "2000" to be delivered in 20 years, that's 100 a year. But the first few years won't be that many, 30 or so in 2008, 50-60 in 2009, maybe up to 85 in 2010. That means they'd need 9 a month to meet 2000 in 20 years...


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAA787823 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6316 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
I'm sure a well-timed order for 50-100 frames from any one or more of AA, Delta or United would help make the decision for them.

I have said it many times before, and once again. I HIGHLY doubt AA will order ANY new aiplanes for ATLEAST another 18-24 months. First, AA wont do this until the last of the TWA FA's fall off the recall list. Second AA is still not in any financial shape to order new airplanes, they still have lots of debt to pay down, and they are BARELY profitable.


User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6272 times:

Part of this would be to free up some slots for customers soon, so as to stave off any airliners having to go to A350XWB because they just can't get 787s.

I doubt it would stay at 10/month forever.



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6009 times:

This talk of a 2nd line I believe ignores the fact that it will only take 3 days to assemble each aircraft. With a rate of 10 a month that will just barely require 2 on the floor at any one time. How many airframes fit on a line? If it is six then one line can produce 60 if they work 7 days. Working 5 days will still allow them to produce 42 in a 30 day month. This is far above what the subcontractors can supply, so that is what will determine production rates. I doubt that a 2nd line will ever be needed.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineBrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5972 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 10):
This talk of a 2nd line I believe ignores the fact that it will only take 3 days to assemble each aircraft

That's the long term goal, it will take much more time to get through final assembly for the first years.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 10):
How many airframes fit on a line?

I believe that there will be four stations along the production line.

Anyway, the current limitation isn't the production line, but the subcontractors.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6834 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5846 times:

Quoting Brendows (Reply 11):
That's the long term goal, it will take much more time to get through final assembly for the first years.

Granted the first year or two will be much slower, but I believe they have a pretty good idea of how they will do it, so it might happen much faster than you think.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5790 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 10):
This is far above what the subcontractors can supply, so that is what will determine production rates.

Obviously. What I've said before is that it will require subs to build more autoclaves and tape machines and all that, and to do that, the sub would need assurance that they could also win 797 contracts, and switch their extra autoclaves over to 797s once the 787 "cools" and the 797 is in full swing in 2016 or whatever.

To assure that, Boeing wants to know that the sub is reliable over a period of time (something that won't be determined until 2009), and also they need to supply the sub with enough detail on the 797 to know their new factories will be suitable for "dual use" which is again a 2009 timeframe.

This is likely, to me, why Boeing is not committing to increased production at this time, but are telling investors they are doing their best to make it work. And it won't be until 2010-2011 that those suppliers would be ready to produce those extra parts. Luckily, that's just in time for the 787-9 and 787-10...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5759 times:

Quoting Laddb (Reply 6):
Can't Alenia use the experience gained from producing 787 fueselages to produce the A350XWB ones?

Depends. Many of the techniques used for the 787 fuselage are propriety of Boeing, and subcontractors can't turn around and use the same process for a competing product.

However, as a risk-sharing venture, Boeing didn't design the entire production method. Subcontractors had to develop various materials techniques on their own which could potentially be used for outside projects.

Quoting BlatantEcho (Reply 9):
I doubt it would stay at 10/month forever.

The projected market for the 200-300 seat market is over 3,000 aircraft over twenty years. Producing the 787 at 10 units per month for 18 of those 20 years corresponds to 2,160 aircraft. That figure corresponds to 72% market share for the 787.

Not that impractical when you think about it. Boeing secured 66% market share with the 777 despite the fact that it was the last 300-seat aircraft to reach the market, facing competition from the incumbent MD-11 and A343. With the 787, Boeing has almost 4-5 years of production volume without any Airbus competition, and the A350 is still fraught with uncertainty.


User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4783 times:

Quoting N1786b (Thread starter):
And will Boeing have to look into getting another DreamLifter?

I would think so. I thought at one time they were contemplating having five of them, but now it's three or four? Can someone clarify? Anyone know when the 3rd one will be ready to take to the skies?


User currently offlineEagle11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 170 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4291 times:

Quoting Brendows (Reply 11):
Anyway, the current limitation isn't the production line, but the subcontractors.

 checkmark 

Unfortunately, Boeing can't put the plane together without the required parts. At this point, the subcontractors seem to be working extremely hard to make the current schedule. Once that is accomplished and any final production issues are worked out, then I think we'll see everyone from Boeing on down through their list of contractors ramping up production to a higher (yet still reasonable) level.

I just can't wait to see these planes rolling off the line.



"The Eagle has landed"
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8190 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3712 times:

The subs decided to take a risk on the 7E7 when they joined the program and I have a feeling that they are rather pleased with how things have turned out - in terms of sales. A decision on increasing production when it will take more investments in terms of plant and equipment would be a decision to take another risk - but this one would be smaller as the R&D aspects of the initial risk are eliminated.

I believe that the subs would want to have some discussions with Boeing before making a decision, with the initial area to cover being the projected additional sales to various airlines, such as BA, AA, etc. The other area for discussion would obviously be the potential for using part of their investment in the Y1 program.

Based on how the 787 program is going to date I believe that most, if not all, subs would be rather happy to see the program (and their share of the profits) grow.


User currently offlineFirennice From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3472 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 14):
Quoting Laddb (Reply 6):
Can't Alenia use the experience gained from producing 787 fueselages to produce the A350XWB ones?

Depends. Many of the techniques used for the 787 fuselage are propriety of Boeing, and subcontractors can't turn around and use the same process for a competing product.

However, as a risk-sharing venture, Boeing didn't design the entire production method. Subcontractors had to develop various materials techniques on their own which could potentially be used for outside projects.

We were doing business with Spirit and Vought that were having their drilling machines being manufactured in germany. We were doing testing there with Airbus as well in the same drilling machine manufacturer. It may only be a few hundred meters from each other but the engineers were not allowed to converse with one another, data was completely seperate, results and processes were seperate, and all scraps of CFRP, Titanium and aluminum were tracked to make sure they did not violate confidentiality agreements.

Our engineers were surprised that there shared no data between each other. None. If we sent them a package and did not write which department it was for they did not open it till they found out who it was for. They were developing completely different methods of doing the same thing. Our engineers were amazed that the differences that each company took to (essentially) do the same thing.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3036 times:

Quoting ER757 (Reply 15):
I would think so. I thought at one time they were contemplating having five of them, but now it's three or four? Can someone clarify? Anyone know when the 3rd one will be ready to take to the skies?

the initial fleet will be 3 planes, 2 primary and 1 backup, They are likely looking for frame #4 if not contracted on it, and it would not surprise me if frame #5 wasn't being looked for.

The current production rate is supposedly possible with 2 dreamlifters, but likely its going to require at-least 1/2 time on the spare which can be dangerous as its there as a spare for a reason. That is if one of the main planes goes tech, or needs a week downtime for MX, then there is a backup to take up the slack. If you start using the hours on the back up, it might not have any free time when problems happen.


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...
Emirates Looking At Possibly Leasing More Aircraft posted Thu Jan 15 2004 13:58:20 by Emirates777
10 More 787s For VN? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 17:04:24 by SQuared
CO Orders 10 More 787s + 34 737s posted Tue Jun 6 2006 09:34:37 by N1786b
Hints Boeing Is Looking At Outsiders, Mulally Out? posted Wed May 25 2005 23:12:25 by Keesje
More Carriers Looking At PIT posted Sat Jan 8 2005 19:12:40 by PITrules
Boeing Looking Still Looking At New Planes posted Wed Jan 31 2001 02:50:50 by B757300
Boeing 747-8 Press Error Or Not? posted Tue Feb 13 2007 04:27:21 by Reggaebird
Ramp Agent: Should I Work At Skywest Or US? posted Fri Feb 2 2007 03:19:48 by San747
Boeing Cut At Wachovia, Concerns Over 787 Program posted Mon Jan 22 2007 12:43:50 by UALMMFlyer
BA Looking At Potential Acquisition Opportunities posted Thu Jan 11 2007 02:23:14 by Concorde001