Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing: No Delays On 787  
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9635 posts, RR: 68
Posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14438 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Fresh news off the Boeing vine.

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- The top executive of the first airline that will operate The Boeing Co.'s 787 said he has been assured the Dreamliner is on track to arrive on time.

Also looks like the first 6 will be, in good old American fashion, overweight.

But Boeing said it has made progress, and the first plane delivered to All Nippon Airways will meet the promised weight.

That will be the seventh plane assembled. The first six test planes will all be overweight, according to Boeing.


For all those hoping for bad news on the 787 program, after all, misery loves company, sorry!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/315831_air16.html

68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGeorgebush From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 679 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 14270 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
For all those hoping for bad news on the 787 program, after all, misery loves company, sorry!

Lmao! Great to hear! Its Boeing I wouldnt expect any less than that!



Al Gore invented global warming.
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3393 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 14056 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
Also looks like the first 6 will be, in good old American fashion, overweight.

But Boeing said it has made progress, and the first plane delivered to All Nippon Airways will meet the promised weight.

That will be the seventh plane assembled. The first six test planes will all be overweight, according to Boeing.

So will the first 6 planes be re-fitted and sold on to airlines when the development programme is done?


User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 13980 times:

Good to hear Boeing and Mitsubishi didn't drop the ball on the B787 like Airbus did with A380.

I was wondering too, what they'll do with the first 6 planes though - sell them at a discount or contractual weight penalties?


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 13919 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- The top executive of the first airline that will operate The Boeing Co.'s 787 said he has been assured the Dreamliner is on track to arrive on time.

This is wonderful news. Congratulations to Boeing. They have put in the effort, now they are ready to take full advantage of it.  Smile

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
For all those hoping for bad news on the 787 program, after all, misery loves company, sorry!

Why would anyone wish that? Only if one is not a true aviation enthusiast.

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 13864 times:

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 2):
So will the first 6 planes be re-fitted and sold on to airlines when the development programme is done?

Boeing and UA went through several rounds of negotiations over the years on the possible sale of the first 777, which was very nearly to UA spec (UA having been the launch customer) but they never agreed on a price. CX finally bought it in 2000.

Of the six early 787s, two would normally be destroyed/exhausted in testing. It would seem logical to sell the remaining four to bizjet customers. Because they fly fewer hours than commercial operators, the weight penalty matters less. Also, bizjet customers want immediate delivery and are often willing to compromise to get it. Even overweight, a 787-8 in a bizjet configuration probably has sufficient range to connect any two airports.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31055 posts, RR: 87
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13314 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So the first four/six frames were not planned to be delivered to existing customers?

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13135 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
So the first four/six frames were not planned to be delivered to existing customers?

One of the early frames will end up with a broken wing. Another will be subjected to repetitive stresses to simulate decades worth of cycles. Neither of those two could ever have been planned for customer delivery. The others probably are or were planned for customer delivery.


User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 12647 times:

The aircraft Boeing is talking about are not the structural test specimens or "Iron Birds". The aircraft in question are complete aircraft and will be involved in the flight test program. These aircraft are usually already allocated to customers, except for the prototype. The weight issue is usually only a few percent above the target, but Boeing will have to discuss the weight problem with those customers and they will have to decide whether they want the airplanes or not. Often, not accepting the airplane will result in a delay in the delivery of the first airplane to the operator and then it is a matter of how much hoopla they have already put into their marketing as to whether there is problem.
I was in Singapore last year and Singapore Airlines had a significant advertising campaign already in place announcing the beginning of A380 service, so the delay affected their marketing and operational plan a lot. They then made a shift to the new interiors in their 777-300ER's, which they were going to get in November, 2006.
All aircraft manufacturers have a weight problem with their first airplanes and they learn how to get down to the target empty weight as they build them.


User currently offlineCygnusChicago From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 12574 times:

Excellent news. I can't wait to hop on one of these, now if only AA would get their rear ends in order and order a 100 or so...

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
For all those hoping for bad news on the 787 program, after all, misery loves company, sorry!



Quoting Georgebush (Reply 1):
Lmao! Great to hear!

Very mature  Yeah sure Why the need to try and sour really good news with some infantile jab?



If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
User currently offlineWCS From Canada, joined Apr 2007, 255 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 12422 times:

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 2):
So will the first 6 planes be re-fitted and sold on to airlines when the development programme is done?

Well, depending where the overweight is, it could maybe be impossible to re-fit. As others said, Biz Jets are an option, just like an as planned delivery, with a limited compensation.

I'm not worry at all for Boeing and these birds. By the way, good news to see the program on track!



FLY SKYTEAM JETS
User currently offlineGeorgebush From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 679 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 12216 times:

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 9):
Very mature Why the need to try and sour really good news with some infantile jab?

Read before you post. That wasnt sarcasm.



Al Gore invented global warming.
User currently offlineLY4XELD From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 857 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11986 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 7):
One of the early frames will end up with a broken wing. Another will be subjected to repetitive stresses to simulate decades worth of cycles. Neither of those two could ever have been planned for customer delivery. The others probably are or were planned for customer delivery.

Not true. There are seperate frames for structural tests.



That's why we're here.
User currently offlineBR076 From Netherlands, joined May 2005, 1086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11950 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
The top executive of the first airline that will operate The Boeing Co.'s 787 said he has been assured the Dreamliner is on track to arrive on time.

Good news, but how can they be 100% sure? it has not flown a single mile yet.



ú
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11950 times:

Couldn't be better news. It's too bad the 787 won't be ready for Paris! BTW, have the Trent 1000's been tested on-wing yet? I know RR has been testing them, but i'm unaware if they've been put on a wing yet.


We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineTheoden From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 61 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11800 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
For all those hoping for bad news on the 787 program, after all, misery loves company, sorry!

I wonder what percentage of A fans really want to see the 787 have problems. I suspect the majority want the 787 to be successful but, being A fans, just want a competing Airbus product to be more successful. Thats the way I feel about the A350, at least.

I really hope they can do the roll out on 07/08/07. And then later, although its not worth the risk, it would be cool if they could do a barrel roll like with the 707 when it came out.

Theoden



Fear no darkness!
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11801 times:

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 12):
There are seperate frames for structural tests.

What do you mean by separate?

Quoting BR076 (Reply 13):
Good news, but how can they be 100% sure? it has not flown a single mile yet.

He didn't say that it would be on time. He said it's on track to be on time.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11689 times:

Quoting BR076 (Reply 13):
Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
The top executive of the first airline that will operate The Boeing Co.'s 787 said he has been assured the Dreamliner is on track to arrive on time.

Good news, but how can they be 100% sure? it has not flown a single mile yet.

Well, the wiring harness works, haha.

They've modeled the entire thing on the computer, anticipated all possible flaws, tested individual parts, they can be pretty certain, not entirely certain, but if something goes wrong flying it, it'll surprise a heck of a lot of very smart people.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 11689 times:

Quoting Theoden (Reply 15):
I wonder what percentage of A fans really want to see the 787 have problems.

Probably more then we'd all like to think...

Quoting Theoden (Reply 15):
I suspect the majority want the 787 to be successful

True, thankfully.

Quoting Theoden (Reply 15):
A fans, just want a competing Airbus product to be more successful

True again.

Quoting Theoden (Reply 15):
it would be cool if they could do a barrel roll like with the 707 when it came out.

A composite barrel roll?  Smile



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineLY4XELD From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 857 posts, RR: 15
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 11286 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 16):
What do you mean by separate?

There are frames built without systems, just for the purpose of structural testing, not intended to be delivered to customers (and never were), much like other Boeing programs (and Airbus). They aren't counted as serial numbers in the manufacturing sequence.



That's why we're here.
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 11265 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Thread starter):
COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- The top executive of the first airline that will operate The Boeing Co.'s 787 said he has been assured the Dreamliner is on track to arrive on time.

Probably Boeing trying to push sales to Star carriers as Star members were in Copenhagen for 10th anniversary celebration


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9635 posts, RR: 68
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 11193 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Boeing has had a lot of the same issues as the A380 program, with regards to CAITA V4 vs. CAITA V5, yet they are on schedule and not using it as a "crutch."

CussAtItTryAgain


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 11167 times:

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 19):
There are frames built without systems, just for the purpose of structural testing,

Of course.

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 19):
not intended to be delivered to customers (and never were), much like other Boeing programs (and Airbus).

Yes, as I wrote above.

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 19):
They aren't counted as serial numbers in the manufacturing sequence.

So, what you seem to be saying is: The six overweight aircraft don't include these two. Ok, fine.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31055 posts, RR: 87
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 11062 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well how "overweight" is "overweight"? Last I heard it was 2%. Is that really so terrible that an airline would scrap delivery and wait?

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 10911 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Well how "overweight" is "overweight"? Last I heard it was 2%. Is that really so terrible that an airline would scrap delivery and wait?

2% is about 4800 lbs. That's the equivalent of 23 passengers. How much is it worth to be able to carry 23 more passengers on every flight for the life of the aircraft? That the seat count is limited by cabin floor area is hardly relevant because cargo pays just about as well as passengers and the 787 has ample cargo volume.


25 Dambuster : 2% overweight means potentially 2% more fuel consumption therefore higher operating costs etc... it's not that much, (for some airlines it might be...
26 Post contains images OGGFBORefueler : Sorry, but...LMAO!!!    Aloha! Keone[Edited 2007-05-16 17:47:08]
27 XT6Wagon : Boeing said it will be using the first 6 production frames for flight test. I also doubt any airline would turn them down. Even overweight the 787 wi
28 DAYflyer : Much to the chagrin of Leahy, Keesje, and others, no doubt.
29 OGGFBORefueler : See reply #1 (Thread Starter) Aloha! Keone
30 SRT75 : Reading this post you would think it's the Gospel truth that there will never be any problems with the 787 and it will all be happy happy joy joy. I
31 Justloveplanes : This is a compelling argument for a bizjet application. Heavily discounted to bizjet customers could pay for the 4800 lbs (a Suburban SUV) and keep t
32 Post contains images Stitch : And yet neither issue with the A388 has caused any of their customers to not take delivery... Oh well. At least now we know why NH has not and will n
33 SSTsomeday : 2.5 tons is nothing to sneeze at. However, is it not typical that new A/C often come in somewhat overweight? And is it also typical that usually weigh
34 Post contains links Areopagus : Back in July 2006, Dominic Gates wrote an article for the Seattle Times about the wing section being complete that was to be tested to destruction. Bu
35 Dank : Good to see some more good news from the manufacturing side. It's been interesting that there hadn't been much chatter about the weight situation. But
36 Post contains images OyKIE : Didn't Boeing pay for the Catia V5.0 for every sub-contractor and even payed for the support? I thought I remember reading that somewhere. Anyway. Go
37 NYC777 : There were will be a more in depth update next week during Boeing's Investor Conference. They have a presentation devoted to the 787 during that confe
38 Stitch : I wonder if the weight issue is from a desire to "overbuild" the first few components to get a "baseline" to work from and then refine the process to
39 Post contains links Rheinbote : Actually, one of the Boeing chiefs was quoted saying that they haven't yet decided whether the full-up static test article would be bent to destructi
40 Post contains images Glideslope : LOL. Sour Grapes. Your just repeating what B posters were saying 2 yrs ago. Except the 380 still has no production cert.
41 Post contains images Glideslope : Yes, poor Keesje. Hope he is ok.
42 ContnlEliteCMH : I think you meant "Cuss At The Infernal Application" for CATIA.
43 BrianDromey : The 787 went on a diet, AFAIK. however, I think the 2% would be most important to those airlines who would want to push the range of the aircraft tow
44 Post contains images OyKIE : Thank you for your answer. Seems like Boeing knows how to run a business Sounds like a smart idea, to tell all your suppliers to buy a licence from B
45 CygnusChicago : Yep, with AA, BA, DL and maybe UA, I expect they'll hit 1,000 orders by the end of 2008
46 Pygmalion : There are 8 frames fabricated... before "line 7" the first to be delivered aircraft. Frames 1-6 and a static test frame and fatigue test frame. FYI R
47 SSTsomeday : Yes. I am a Boeing fan, but I'm surprised that more a-net members aren't making a meal out of this 2.5 tons. That's quite a bit of extra weight that
48 Justloveplanes : I think they will break the wing, but not for certification if they can get by with it. They will pass the cert test then, re-examine the wing, then
49 Post contains images Stitch : Perhaps some are taking the higher ground and not seeking payback for all the snide comments directed at Airbus for the A388's weight problems. It is
50 Brendows : That 2%/4000-5000lb figure was announced last fall, right? Quite a lot may have happened since then, more about that further down. That money may hav
51 DfwRevolution : It may well be +0% because the engines are projected to be slightly ahead of their performance targets. But, subsequent aircraft would naturally have
52 Beta : The way I read the referenced article that none of the first 6 overweight frames are going to ANA. Only starting from the 7th one will be delivered t
53 Post contains images Dank : Which is where it's curious as to which weight targets they are talking about. I mean, I don't doubt that they'll meet performance targets (or contra
54 Post contains images Plunaaircanada : I have a prefernce between A or B but i wont tell it here cuase i dont want it to be A vs B, if theres anyone who wants to see lets say the 787 or the
55 MCIGuy : Aren't they planning a mass delivery upon certification of 30-40 frames?
56 Post contains images MD-90 : Hey, sounds like matched hole tooling. Maybe Boeing engineers took a tour at Van's Aircraft?
57 Zvezda : To whom are they going? NZ? And? I expect Boeing will offer the airlines a chance to do their acceptance testing prior to certification so that they
58 Zeke : Most contracts are based upon the manufacturers weight empty/manufacturers empty weight (MWE/MEW), not the OEW or MTOW, generally when I see overweig
59 XT6Wagon : So ah..... you are saying that Airbus deliberately changed the specifications on a signed contract? Even AIRBUS has said that they are overweight and
60 Post contains links and images Zeke : Yes "Weight goals In late 2000, Airbus committed to major changes — including an increase in engine bypass ratio — to meet London Heathrow’s QC
61 XT6Wagon : Zeke, Ladies first... so have at it
62 Aminobwana : As I understand the 2 first planes will not be sold ??? As the other 4 are sold. but with deleveries later a sfor ANA, could it be that Boeing will m
63 Beta : I have no idea, and hope that someone here would know, but if the report were true, ANA would take delivery starting from the 7th
64 Rheinbote : Thanks for the clarification, Pygmalion. Very much appreciated. This is an alteration from the original planning, though?
65 WINGS : While many on this forum constantly bash Zeke for his information, I am one of many that actually values all the effort he puts into his posts. Why b
66 Thebry : When this additional billion dollar R&D infusion was announced, I believe it was to cover both the 787 weight issue, and further development of the 7
67 Pygmalion : No, that is the normal process. An early one is used for static to ensure the tests are done prior to first flight. And one of the later... 4th or 5t
68 Areopagus : That's interesting. Saving weight in the wheels should produce a double advantage in takeoff performance, since it's less mass to accelerate rotation
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 Briefs Journalists On 787 Refinements posted Mon Jun 12 2006 19:54:28 by BoomBoom
Boeing 737 Delays The 787? posted Fri Aug 26 2005 07:38:02 by Grantcv
Kawasaki And Boeing Team Up On 787 posted Sun May 1 2005 18:13:17 by Bhill
Why Is Boeing Confident On 787 posted Thu Nov 23 2006 20:22:08 by SJCRRPAX
FI: Boeing Focuses On 787 Weight Not Rate posted Tue Aug 15 2006 13:56:44 by Leelaw
No Smoking/Fasten Seat Belt/Lavatory Signs On 787 posted Mon Jul 10 2006 18:44:09 by 1337Delta764
Boeing Unveils Plans To Reduce Drag/Weight On 787 posted Mon Jun 12 2006 14:59:26 by Leelaw
Boeing's Bair On 787's Weight Problem posted Thu Jun 1 2006 23:32:10 by Saturn5
Boeing Close To Breakeven On 787 posted Sun May 21 2006 13:29:02 by Lumberton
Boeing Says Development Of 787-8 On Track posted Tue Feb 21 2006 17:05:06 by NYC777