Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight  
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2674 posts, RR: 4
Posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22857 times:

Quote:
EVERETT, Jan. 16, 2008 -- Boeing [NYSE:BA] today announced that first flight of the 787 has been moved from the end of the first quarter of this year to around the end of the second quarter to provide additional time to complete assembly of the first airplane. Deliveries are now expected to begin in early 2009, rather than late 2008.

"The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "However, we continue to be challenged by start-up issues in our factory and in our extended global supply-chain."

Carson said that while solid progress has been made on the assembly of Airplane #1, the rate at which jobs are being completed has not improved sufficiently to maintain the current schedule.

"Our revised schedule is based upon updated assessments from the 787 management team of the progress we have made and the lessons we have learned to date. This includes our experience on the factory floor completing production work on the airplane that was originally intended to be done by our suppliers," Carson said.

Over the next several weeks, Boeing will be working with its customers and suppliers to assess the specific impacts of the schedule change on the 787's flight test program and entry into service. This effort will include an assessment of supplier progress in meeting their commitments to deliver more complete assemblies on subsequent airplanes.

"We are deeply disappointed by what this delay means for our customers, and we are committed to working closely with them as we assess the impact on our delivery schedules," Carson said.

Under 787 Vice President and General Manager Pat Shanahan, who assumed leadership of the 787 program last October, Boeing has provided additional resources to more effectively manage the 787 global supply chain. The company has assembled a team of experienced executives, business managers and planning specialists that will be based at the supplier partners, as well as in its own final assembly facility.

"We have brought together the right skills and leadership from around the company to ensure a successful start-up of our global production system," said Shanahan. "We have put the people, structure and processes in place to execute our plan and we will take additional steps to strengthen our team if needed. We have made significant progress in reducing parts shortages, improving fastener availability and achieving static and systems test milestones. We are focused on getting the 787 flying, certified and delivered to our customers."

Boeing's 2008 financial guidance will be updated with the impact of these changes when the company holds its fourth-quarter 2007 earnings conference call on January 30. There will be no impact from the schedule change on 2007 financial results and the company does not expect the impact on 2008 earnings guidance to be significant. Financial guidance for 2009 now will be provided when the company issues its first quarter 2008 earnings report in late April, which will follow the assessment of the impact of 787 schedule changes. The company continues to expect strong earnings per share growth in 2009. The outlook for the company's defense business and in-production commercial airplane programs remains very strong.

Boeing will hold a conference call with Scott Carson and Pat Shanahan to discuss the 787 schedule changes today at 11:00 a.m. EST, 8:00 a.m. PST. The call will be accessible by clicking here.

[Edited 2008-01-16 06:14:59]



[Edited 2008-01-16 06:18:44]

[Edited 2008-01-16 06:19:13]


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
157 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8646 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22869 times:

link for above is http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2008/q1/080116a_nr.html

the 787 Conference Call Webcast http://phx.corporate-ir.net/playerlink.zhtml?c=85482&s=wm&e=1743044



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2674 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22787 times:

This was expected, but since the other thread with the WSJ article, that was only based on rumors, whereas this is the official statement from Boeing. That is why I believe this is not a double thread.

I hope Boeing are able to deliver as many planes as their original schedule, although I guess, they are not able to peak production rates just yet. They better get it right this time



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineLotsamiles From United States of America, joined May 2005, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22670 times:



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
The fundamental design and technologies of the 787 remain sound," said Scott Carson, president and CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "However, we continue to be challenged by start-up issues in our factory and in our extended global supply-chain."

No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".


User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22653 times:



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 2):
I hope Boeing are able to deliver as many planes as their original schedule, although I guess, they are not able to peak production rates just yet. They better get it right this time

Me too. I don't know if it was Boeing or not, but I heard some suggesting that the suppliers build factories around the Everett plant, so it would lessen logistics. I think that would be a great idea and the state of Washington would love it because it would create a ton of new jobs.


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2674 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 22619 times:



Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 3):
No mention of the known design problems. They choose rather to stay generic with "start up issues".

What known design problems?

Quoting Iloveboeing (Reply 4):
Me too. I don't know if it was Boeing or not, but I heard some suggesting that the suppliers build factories around the Everett plant, so it would lessen logistics. I think that would be a great idea and the state of Washington would love it because it would create a ton of new jobs.

That could be a good idea. I know that for the detailed designing Washington State does not have enough engineers. But for production I guess that will not be the same kind of problem



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12046 posts, RR: 47
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 22561 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing haven't really told us very much there. Hopefully, there will be more meat at the conference call.


Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently onlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6683 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 22404 times:

Having been involved in designing radically new products myself, I can attest to the fact that management dictated schedules are nothing more than WAG's, and if they actually get met it is usually due to extraordinary dedication on the part of the workers and very good luck. Previous Boeing new products since the 747 have been more evolutionary than revolutionary, and so there was much more relevant experience to base the schedules on. With the 787 there have obviously been many more unexpected problems encountered, as well as the issue of many more major suppliers. The result is what we see now in delays. But while it is obviously costing Boeing a lot more (in both money and time) than expected to get the 787 into production, it has also sold far better than expected, and therefore Boeing will end up faring very well once it does get in service. Boeing is in much better financial shape now than when they spent more than the net worth of the company in developing the 707, and again on the 747, so in the end they should be in very good shape indeed. All of us enthusiasts are disappointed in the delays, but everyone should agree that it is far more important to get it right than get it on time.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 22350 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 7):
Boeing haven't really told us very much there. Hopefully, there will be more meat at the conference call.

In fact I doubt it....

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Boeing today announced that first flight of the 787 has been moved from the end of the first quarter of this year to around the end of the second quarter to provide additional time to complete assembly of the first airplane.

In short, they don't know it will be ready in 3 months....

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Over the next several weeks, Boeing will be working with its customers and suppliers to assess the specific impacts of the schedule change on the 787's flight test program and entry into service

This is even more important as it means that just as I have been expecting, even if first flight happens in June, the later milestones will have to be moved to the right more than just by 3 months as basically not enough test planes will be flying to complete the condensed flight schedule... Boeing will likely have to revert to a standard test schedule, given the shortage of test planes, and as such EIS will take a second more serious hit.

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Boeing's 2008 financial guidance will be updated with the impact of these changes when the company holds its fourth-quarter 2007 earnings conference call on January 30. There will be no impact from the schedule change on 2007 financial results and the company does not expect the impact on 2008 earnings guidance to be significant. Financial guidance for 2009 now will be provided when the company issues its first quarter 2008 earnings report in late April, which will follow the assessment of the impact of 787 schedule changes

No impact on 2007, obviously.
Minor impact on 2008, as this was already covered last time.
The big issue is going to be 2009, but guess what, it will take them 3 months to figure out the impact, meaning they need 3 months to see how many 787s they are actually just going to be able to deliver that year at best... Note how this 3 months period keeps popping up: first delay announced about 3 months ago, now a new delay of 3 months, Boeing will only know the real impact of the problems in 3 months... Anybody gets the impression that for the past 3 months there hasn't been much progress booked?   

With all the outsourcing on the 787, Boeing is just a customer waiting for its shipments really and simply doesn't know when it will get them so it seems. Hence this very fuzzy, but not really reassuring statement.

[Edited 2008-01-16 07:10:47]

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29699 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 22133 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So in the "making lemonade out of lemons" department, let's look at the positives...

By having the suppliers deliver just the raw fuselage barrels and wings for ZA001, Boeing is able to build a complete 787 from the ground up. So the Type and Production Certificates will cover every model because Boeing will be able to show how to build a 787 from the ground up and prove it can be done using ZA001. I think this is why Boeing keeps working on it, rather then towing it down to the Museum of Flight as a permanent static display and use ZA002 as the first 787.

Boeing is now also able to write a "787 Assembly for Dummies" picture book and send it off to the contractors, who can follow along and build the rest of the planes. And they have also been able to train a group of machinists on how to build a 787 from a kit. Those machinists can train other machinists so, if necessary, Boeing can quickly have a ready-to-go workforce if they need to intervene with a supplier or two, or help a new supplier take over for one who will be given the boot.

Airbus "benefited" from having the A380 fall during a huge order boom, so they were able to convert penalties to orders. Boeing has likely been doing some of that last year and will be doing it in earnest this year. And if Boeing just needs to provide cash to the customers, that's not a terrible thing since it binds them even tighter to their 787 orders and away from the A350.

While earnings for the next year or two will take a hit just as Airbus' did because of the A380 delays, Boeing's stronger margins and widebody deliveries along with less planned 787 deliveries (and those deliveries at the lowest margins) will insulate much of that for 2008. 2009 will be when it really hits home, but by 2010-2011 production should be at the planned rate, so the duration of the weakness will be less then Airbus, which needed more time to reach their full production rate.

I'm hoping Boeing has scrapped any plans for a 787HGW and is instead looking at Y3. I still think a 250t 787-10 makes sense, but a true 10-abreast Y3 will be a better 777 replacement and expansion platform and could EIS as early as 2020. It can bracket the A350-900 and A350-1000 as well as a hypothetical A350-1100. It would replace the 747-8I (leaving just the freighter) and provide a nice bridge to the A380-800. It would also, with Y1, give Boeing a complete modern product line with no real gaps between ~150 and ~450 passengers.

And it might just earn Boeing some sympathy with the KC-45A RFP (the original deal was designed in part to help Boeing weather the 50% drop in commercial aviation production after 9/11).


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 22020 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
"making lemonade out of lemons"

I noticed too you have been making a lot of lemonade recently.

You hopefully have a school or something like that next door, because otherwise you'll be drinking of it till the 787 finally takes to the skies.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
By having the suppliers deliver just the raw fuselage barrels and wings for ZA001, Boeing is able to build a complete 787 from the ground up. So the Type and Production Certificates will cover every model because Boeing will be able to show how to build a 787 from the ground up and prove it can be done using ZA001. I think this is why Boeing keeps working on it, rather then towing it down to the Museum of Flight as a permanent static display and use ZA002 as the first 787.

I don't know if this is true.

Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it. If the FAA would certify the production process used, Boeing would have to build all 787s this way: meaning getting only empty hulls delivered to them and fitting them themselves. I thought the entire fast production concept of the 787 depended on them getting everything delivered to them pre-fitted?

Depending on how soon Boeing get's the parts delivered fully fitted as previously planned, they may have no option but to seek individual certification for the first planes (just like Airbus did on the A380).


User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1493 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 21972 times:

Well so much for the notion that Boeing can build a 787 in three days! I think this must be the slowest production line ever!  duck 

User currently offlineStarrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1122 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21864 times:

Given the amount of the delay wouldn't it have made more sense to pull the prototype out of the way and complete LN002 instead? If the delivery and assembly can be completed in a couple of weeks, that would be a hell of a lot more effective than disassembling and reassembling LN001....


Knowledge Replaces Fear
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2674 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21788 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Boeing is now also able to write a "787 Assembly for Dummies" picture book and send it off to the contractors, who can follow along and build the rest of the planes.

Stitch! You really made me smile while reading your post  Smile

It is exaggerated, but at the same time there is some truth in it and a bit of irony,

So keep up the spirit!

Continuing what you said, do some of you believe that it would have been cheaper for Boeing either to send back the unfinished sections rather than finish them indoors?

Anyone know if the second 787 will be pre assembled like it was intended?



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21766 times:

Quoting Starrion (Reply 16):
Given the amount of the delay wouldn't it have made more sense to pull the prototype out of the way and complete LN002 instead? If the delivery and assembly can be completed in a couple of weeks, that would be a hell of a lot more effective than disassembling and reassembling LN001....

On the flightblogger site, there is an indirect reference to the fact that LN2 might be taking to the sky first indeed, however, this will not solve the problem, it will just make one specific delay less long: that of the first flight.

For certification, Boeing still needs several airworthy planes and since production is also having severe problems, they can't just add another prototype in between so they definitely need to complete LN1 too unless they want to turn flight testing into something which will span 12 months at least!

Besides, it is not like LN2 is ready to go within weeks either.

[Edited 2008-01-16 08:14:39]

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29699 posts, RR: 84
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
I noticed too you have been making a lot of lemonade recently.

I got really bloody tired of constantly defending the A380 and the A380 program from spurious, baseless, and ignorant claims. I'm trying to save myself some of the effort when it comes time to doing so with the 787, but if Airbus fans like yourself are bound and determined to make Boeing fans pay for their slander, then I likely just won't bother.

Boeing will have the last laugh when ZA007 enters service with NH just as Airbus did when MSN003 was handed over to SQ.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it.

They have said they will, which is why they keep fighting to get ZA001 done. It would have been far easier to scrap her and start with ZA002, which is already more complete at the sub-assembly level.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9841 posts, RR: 96
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21622 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Having been involved in designing radically new products myself, I can attest to the fact that management dictated schedules are nothing more than WAG's, and if they actually get met it is usually due to extraordinary dedication on the part of the workers and very good luck.

I'd prefer to think that a complex programme like this would have a formal process for identifying, mitigating, and retiring risks to both cost and schedule. WAG should be an exaggeration  Smile

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Previous Boeing new products since the 747 have been more evolutionary than revolutionary,

However, when too many things change at once, the experience that people have in order to construct the risk management structure proves to have gaps in it which catch the project unawares.

Regards


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21604 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
if Airbus fans like yourself are bound and determined to make Boeing fans pay for their slander, then I likely just won't bother.

Just pointing out that you will have a hard time finding any sign of huge schadenfreude in any of my posts on this. I tend to limit myself trying to come up with a reasonable forward looking statement which does not suffer from the Boeing 'all is well up here' sentiments.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
They have said they will, which is why they keep fighting to get ZA001 done

Given the fact the production process of ZA001 is very different than what the serial production should normally look like, I have a strong impression Boeing is just preparing for the case they learn their subcontractors are unable to deliver pre-fitted parts for a loooong time to come.

Better have a production certificate 'old style' too then, but needless to say they can then forget about the 3-day assembly time, with great consequences to the customers lined up on the order list!


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5675 posts, RR: 48
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 21454 times:

Here's a syopsis of Boeing's conference calltoday. Please add inany information that I might have missed:

Boeing January 16th Conference Call

FF at end of 2nd quarter 2008
• First deliveries moved into early 2009
• Tested technology and plan and it continues to be validated
• Fasteners are no longer a pacing issue
• Good progress on LN 1 and getting production back in sequence.
• Travel work is the issue
• Working with suppliers to reduce the amount of traveled work
• The assessment (undertaken with suppliers and customers) will be done at the end of 1st quarter 2008 at which time they’ll have more detailed delivery and flight test schedule
• Credibility is being tested on this program say Carson
• Supply chain holding up the program? – LN 1 is pacing item to first flight – underestimated how long it would take to complete someone else’s work. Thought they could accommodate the traveled work from others but were wrong.
• Problems with the systems, what are the long poles for first flight? – Travel work is the long pole. System components – several thousand system components that go into activating the airplanes (computers, actuators, pumps, generators)…need 27 more parts and will have all 27 parts by Monday. What’s the maturity of those system components? Tests are being done on the components. Need another 20 system parts to get through taxi tests. Get the traveled work completed.
• How confident are you that parts are going to come in? Parts are not pacing item. Fasteners shortages are done to a few hundred. Thought that they would turn the corner in December with structural completion. That is the pacing item so that they could start system and wiring installation.
• Power on delayed to end of March? Yes, Will LN 2 make first flight? Doubt it...it’s not the plan. Production schedule…no definitive schedule...no 109 deliveries by end of 2009. Still working through the numbers by end of March 2009.
• Is the delay getting the parts to spec? 1st airplane will get its full complement of parts, static and fatigue will not. Not a rate production issue but a work sequence issue.
• No obstacles in working with the FAA. Can do a significant amount of work with FAA certification with out the airplane flying.
• Can see a path forward based on the work down and the reduction of parts shortages. Wiring bundles are done and in a few weeks will be installed in LN 1.
• What about the other airplanes after LN 1? – Won’t comment on other airplanes until after the assessment. Assessment is going to be critical for flight test and production ramp up.
• No technology issues with the program



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21408 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 14):
Since ZA001 isn't producted even remotely the way it should be, I have a hard time believing they will seek a production certification based on it. If the FAA would certify the production process used, Boeing would have to build all 787s this way: meaning getting only empty hulls delivered to them and fitting them themselves.

That's not how production certificates work. The production certificate certifies the processes of the OEM, not the individual steps taken to build a particular airplane. Boeing just has to show that the processes used on LN1 produced an airplane that conforms to the type design and that the processes they will use on LN2+ will do the same. There's no requirement that LN1 and LN2 be produced the same way, otherwise Boeing would have to get a new production certificate every time they changed something in their production lines (which happens all the time).

Tom.


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21377 times:

 brokenheart   mad   mad 

This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineDavescj From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 2292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 21024 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
Those machinists can train other machinists so, if necessary, Boeing can quickly have a ready-to-go workforce if they need to intervene with a supplier or two, or help a new supplier take over for one who will be given the boot.

They have said different suppliers will be used in the future. Though I agree with others -- I wonder if Boeing would bring more production to WA. I'm sure they'd be able to get some massive tax deal if they did. And WA would love to have more well paying jobs (obviously).

My question -- how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380? Also, will this impact (in a negative way) a new plane/redesigned 737?

Dave



Can I have a mojito on this flight?
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 20869 times:



Quoting Davescj (Reply 27):
how will this impact Boeing credibility with customers in light of all the mud they were slinging about the A380?

Mud-slinging? Don't confuse the dregs of A.net with Boeing or Airbus. Other than Randy's Blog and Leahy, these are two professional companies that engage in the design and manufacture of Aerospace Products.

Mud-slinging is for the lowlifes of Aviation Forums.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 


User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2453 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 20749 times:

Time to talk about compensation!

Airbus lost big bucks for its 2 year delay on the A380 with fewer than 200 orders.

Boeing has 4 times the backlog and half the delay approximately. Any guesstimate of the compensation payable?

Will they play the same card Airbus did by offering steep discounts on further purchases from carriers to whom compensation is due?



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21419 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 20634 times:

Conference call was REALLY straightforward. No sugar coating.

109 deliveries by YE2009 will not happen. Assembly chain is now critical path issue, not fasteners, not parts, NOT STRUCTURE, NOT SYSTEMS (sorry CaptainX).

Certification is still going on with FAA while on the ground, but obviously flight hours become the critical path item in the end (in other progams, that isn't always the case.)

Sounds like the revolutionary, risk sharing, cost saving global assembly system is biting them in the ass. Wonder if after penalties and deferred revenue if the savings are lost.

Expect 797 not to be built this way, and if Y3 ever gets built, NOT to be built this way.

Would assume 787-10 launch isn't pending...

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 26):
This second delay raises serious credibility issues and damages the companies reputation.

Carson says as much. He says credibility is being tested in the program.

So EIS delay is now 8 months and counting... tick, tock.

I'm just annoyed because I wanted to go up to Seattle for FF and it keeps getting put off!!!



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 Ken777 : The question I have is how "normal production schedules" are going with Boeing's suppliers? The planning goes rather deep - like to the delivery of th
26 BrianDromey : I think this is a very valid point. It might not have been the original plan but Boeing has gained a lot of intimate experience with the 787. It will
27 Post contains links Observer : Two podcasts on topic: After the conference call http://airinsight.podOmatic.com/entry/eg/2008-01-16T09_14_15-08_00 10 minutes After the press release
28 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Surprise, surprise. I think the unions have themselves a handy bargaining card now. Two years ago, the company I interned at wound up giving LM grief
29 DBCC : Global supply chain problems? I though that the main problems are with the parts from the suppliers in the US (i.e. local), and not the stuff that is
30 Tdscanuck : Boeing didn't actually sling any mud, nor will Airbus sling any over the 787 delays. They're both very much in a "There but for the grace of god go I
31 Nycbjr : someone mentioned the possibility of NW canceling its order earlier in this thread (or the other one).. anyone want to comment or confirm the rumor?
32 PlaneInsomniac : I am not entirely sure whether this is such a clever thing to say at all. While I absolutely believe this to be true, actually spelling it out in a p
33 Manfredj : Non-sense talk. You ever tell your boss you'll have a report for him, and not be able to deliver it in time because of outside factors? I think we al
34 Tdscanuck : Most of the stuff goes thousands of miles regardless of who built it. For example, the raw carbon fiber comes from a plant in Washington, get shipped
35 474218 : That was (and is) never going to happen on one production line. The plan was to move the production line every three days, not build a 787 in three d
36 Post contains images R2rho : Everybody saw this one coming. (sigh)... has Boeing learned nothing from Airbus and their mistakes? And why the hurry to do everything so quickly, set
37 Checksixx : No it doesn't...at all. They're being open and honest about a MINOR delay. Also, anyone comparing them to Airbus is not up to par on either company.
38 SEPilot : As I see it both sides have made mistakes, but they are very different ones. Boeing has been overly optimistic about implementing new technology; Air
39 Glideslope : Boeing made a HUGE mistake letting Alan go. Carson is not up the task in the least. If he were, things with Mike Baire would have never be let to get
40 Tdscanuck : Given that there are three line positions, doesn't that work out to the same thing? Not counting time spend before final assembly, obviously. So far,
41 Stitch : Thank you. I really don't think it is a case of Boeing trying to shift the blame to the suppliers and away from themselves. Boeing has consistently s
42 474218 : No it doesn't mean the same time. If and when everything is up and running as planned, each aircraft will stay in each position for three days. I thi
43 Rheinbote : The positive thing for me was that they refrained from providing a new guidance on production ramp-up and deliveries until they have a clear assessmen
44 Post contains images 797charter : I have never heard of any fundamental design issues - what are they referring to???          Will never happen - NW has some early positions wor
45 ComairGuyCVG : Looks like the standard 6 month (or more) delay of a new airliner is coming right on schedule.
46 Dougbr2006 : Would not exactly be good propaganda if the roll out aircraft doesn't take to the skies first, plus, what is the order and function of each aircraft
47 Post contains links RedChili : I believe this means that final assembly will take nine days. The airplane enters the first position, spends three days there, goes to the second pos
48 Lotsamiles : Certain systems hardware is being redesigned and the associated code is being re-written to this day. How Boeing plans to install these parts on Mond
49 Tdscanuck : Ah, there's the problem...I thought they were shifting line positions every day. Thank you for the clarification. Tom.
50 Rheinbote : The original concept was to complete final assembly of a 787 in three days - total. Later Boeing stated that at the beginning of the learning curve i
51 Oldtimer : Stitch Thank you for your balanced posts in this thread. I cannot say I have always agreed with all your posts on the threads I have read over the yea
52 Post contains images Rheinbote : I'll light a candle for all you sentimental guys, okay?
53 PITIngres : In the real world, things aren't that nice and neat. The fact that you don't know what you don't know is fatal to any notion that a large project of
54 AndesSMF : Key words used: similar project This has never been done before, and it was a very aggressive (still is?) schedule. Not only was it a new airplane de
55 Scbriml : A minor delay? In the space of a little over three months, we've gone from "on track", through a six-month delay, and now have an additional three-mo
56 Post contains images ScrubbsYWG : i think one of the biggest problems is it is tough to estimate the amount of time a task will take when you have never done it before. Sure, boeing ha
57 Tdscanuck : That's because they're not exactly clear on where they are and what the exact schedule is. That's an unknowable quantity...it drives people, especial
58 Post contains images ER757 : Based on what's taken place thus far, this is a pretty optimistic premise. I do hope you are right, but at this point, there's nothing I can see that
59 PITIngres : Uh, because they thought they could make it? Maybe with a few minor hitches? I'm sure that if they really thought the original schedule was a stretch
60 Stitch : I believe Boeing does have a pre-scheduled pattern to when they do these calls, so if a call falls before they're fully ready to disclose (for whatev
61 Beta : Majorly disappointed in Boeing! These setbacks make ones appreciate even more what a monumental effort and achievement Joe Sutter and his teams did in
62 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : I think that was the point of the update. Stitch, you go out of your way to be fair and balanced. You don't need to take anyone's crap. Good news for
63 ER757 : The point is these guys are paid BIG MONEY to know what can and can't be done within a certain time-frame. To be overly ambitious and try to build an
64 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : There are more a$$es on the line than Boeing's. These companies have spent a lot of money on this program, and their companies - and careers - are at
65 ER757 : Oh yeah - Heavy emphasis on that for sure - that's why I don't get paid like Carson and McNerny - LOL
66 Stitch : Suddenly? No. But time is what the suppliers need and time is what they are getting. Boeing doesn't have the space to receive a significant influx of
67 Post contains images BCBHokie : Well, big surprise. Whispers around the Seattle tech community 'round these parts have pointed to extended delays for quite a while. That said, pretty
68 Post contains images Astuteman : Hence my VERY next sentence was......... Regards
69 Braybuddy : Just who is going to keep the suppliers solvent? If they aren't being paid until the 787s are delivered (or Boeing gets paid, can't remember which) th
70 Scbriml : Hence suggestions/hints/rumours/gossip that suppliers are pressing Boeing to renegotiate contracts to ease their cash-flow situation. The risk, if Bo
71 Slz396 : For all the bashing of the de-centralized construction method Airbus has been using for decades ('Well, they need to set up plants everywhere in Euro
72 AndesSMF : If not long ago Airbus and its contractors went thru a similar situation and survived, then so will Boeing.
73 Scbriml : But were Airbus's contractors risk-sharing the way Boeing's are? My understanding (from media articles) is that the partners are not scheduled to be
74 AndesSMF : For the short term, sure. But with a swollen order book, unless some real bad problems crop up later, their future earnings potential can be used to
75 Post contains images PHKLM : Especially so when you are a manufacturer sticking to your promises but payments are deferred because of others being late. I reckon Boeing will have
76 Babybus : Not sure many of us are waiting with baited breath for this one. Boeing should take its time and roll it out when its ready.
77 Stitch : Boeing will, of course. They're sitting on tens of billions in cash, so liquidity is hardly an issue. Plus they helped many smaller suppliers with th
78 Post contains images Baroque : Jetstar/QF seem to be getting quite anxious according to the SMH for 17 Jan 08, link archived now. You would think they would be. You would hope they
79 EBJ1248650 : Appears the problems are logistics and production line issues.
80 PITIngres : I don't mean to beat a dead horse, or pick on you personally, but I think there might be a fundamental misunderstanding here: sometimes you CAN'T kno
81 Tdscanuck : That was Boeing's A team, actually. How has he proven unsuccessful? Carson's job is to run Boeing Commercial Airplanes...the whole thing, not just th
82 ER757 : Not taken personally at all - I love a good discussion. This one will probably end up very similar to a case where a sports team is doing badly after
83 PlaneWasted : Sad news... Am I the only one a bit worried for Boeing? If something goes badly wrong in the flight testing, or at the ramp up, or with certification
84 Stitch : A complete and total failure of the 787 program would be devastating and would likely trigger a sale of Boeing Commercial to a foreign buyer - my gues
85 Post contains images Astuteman : That's a thought It's a (retrospective) argument for not trying to push quite as many boundaries, in the business sense, all at the same time.... IIR
86 Post contains images Baroque : Yep, too many boundaries, that is Rummie's field of expertise. I presume that Boeing kept possession of ALL design information in its outsourcing. Do
87 Post contains links CaptainX : More media coverage. http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...eamliner_0116jan16,0,6882616.story
88 Tdscanuck : Doubtful. There are many components on current production aircraft that Boeing doesn't have all the design information for. Yes, but that's nothing n
89 Post contains images Stitch : Does Boeing have the specifications for every component on that plane in a CATIA file somewhere? Sure. But they have the same for every component on
90 Tdscanuck : Actually, even that isn't true (at least for some stuff). Once you drop below the component level the vendor only needs to supply the parts list, not
91 Post contains images Baroque : Thanks Stitch and Tdscanuck. It sort of makes it very clear, that parts of the system at least have the potential to be NOT all that clear. I can see
92 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Airbus's issues weren't completely supplier related though. The past few years have been a clear demonstration that it is not as easy to get a commer
93 SEPilot : No amount of money enables people to accurately predict next week's weather; a project of this magnitude is similarly beyond the abilities of mere mo
94 474218 : Why do you think the Justice Department would let Boeing buy Northrup Grumman when Lockheed Martin's proposal to buy them was turned down?
95 Stitch : My view is that the suppliers that successfully learn to execute to plan on the 787 will be the ones chosen for the 737RS. And those suppliers will p
96 Stitch : Because Boeing would not have a commercial airplanes side anymore so you'd have two pure defense and space contractors who would likely be on relativ
97 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Indeed. But I forsee Boeing scaling back the level of out-sourcing in the future. I'm not saying a return to 767, 777, and 747 levels, but perhaps no
98 Scbriml : However, by the time Boeing is ready for the 737RS, the teething pains of the 787 will be a distant memory. Boeing, and its contractors, will have le
99 Post contains images Baroque : It seems to have been very like that. But at a distance you would have thought that the A380 woes would have set alarm bells ringing about checking o
100 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Companies like Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, and Embraer don't get to be where they are without learning lessons...be it from failures, teething issues
101 Stitch : I believe Boeing will push to have suppliers source near the factory and will likely build a new factory complex. That way, if something goes wrong, B
102 Flighty : Especially because they are so clearly lying. Again. About what is wrong. Obviously some parts, and processes, are being resdesigned from the ground
103 Art : I wonder why Boeing set themselves such an ambitious schedule without giving themselves a lot of latitude in promised delivery dates to customers, th
104 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Based on? If it's so obvious, perhaps you'd be willing to show us proof. B4e-Forever New Frontiers
105 474218 : But Boeing currently makes more money off their military division than they do off commerical aircraft. Add the Northrup Grumman sales to Boeing and
106 Flighty : The difference between parts and assembly is small. Boeing is in effect creating "parts" they thought suppliers were going to create. The parts are n
107 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Thanks for clearing that up. But that is hardly "from the ground up redesign". Rather this is taking over the design process from the suppliers. Othe
108 Flighty : Oh, no no no. Boeing knows exactly what they want the 787 to be. But, I do not trust they can build it yet. They are very close, but all the v1.0 par
109 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Glad we cleared that up. Though I stress that their reputation rests on specific facts. Frankly the suppliers, Boeing, and the customers know the mos
110 Flighty : Yup and I wish they would tell us that info. But it's not very likely. Unless the delays stretch out again. Airbus maintained their facade as long as
111 Stitch : Being first to market, especially with such a (r)evolutionary plane, is huge, as we have seen with the 787's orders. This is especially important whe
112 Post contains images Boeing4ever : The thing is, those that actually need to know, probably do. The rest of us are left guessing. Refusal to set a new firmer schedule may also be a way
113 Pygmalion : From what I hear the parts fit fine and Boeing has stated so many times as well. They were all designed in the same CATIA system (and version!) and B
114 BestWestern : Who owns the project? Boeing Whos responsiblity is it to get the aircraft out the door on schedule? Boeing Who is project managing the constuction? B
115 Stitch : Boeing has said so. But people want to know why the bleedin thing is not in the air and part of the reason is because the suppliers are to blame. Say
116 Rheinbote : Boeing people are on site, everywhere. Whatever happens - seconds away. Above that, what makes you assume that it's always the suppliers' people who
117 Zeke : Was it always the fault of suppliers ? Suppliers can only build something if Boeing has told them when to build, I remember hearing that Boeing was "
118 Post contains links and images Keesje : Increasing I hear info the cockpit is still kind of empty. This section was build in Wichita & most of its content is from US contractors. It seems th
119 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Addressed and already suggested here: B4e-Forever New Frontiers
120 PVG : This is what i don't get (I may be proposing something stupid and expensive, but..): I assume that the later frames (LN0002 etc.....) are being deliv
121 Post contains images Stitch : I believe it is because Boeing needs to ensure that the first six frames are all built to a common spec so their data can all be combined to get a si
122 PVG : Thanks!
123 Baroque : A curious and worrying symmetry. Airbus "blamed" airlines for complex specifications after offering carte blanche, and Boeing "blames" the components
124 Post contains images PM : "duck shovelling"? Is that an Australian thing?
125 Post contains links Baroque : With all the water about at present, there will be shed loads of duck to shovel! An example of the term in full flight, as it were. http://blogs.thea
126 Post contains images PM : As a bird watcher and quite a fan of ducks, Id rather not!
127 Post contains images Astuteman : In my experience, it's overly simplisitic to "blame" suppliers when a programme is set up as a risk-sharing partnership in the way the 787 is. It's m
128 BestWestern : The cheerleader is turning on the supply chain to deflect critical analysis of boeing. If you buy a new house, and there are no windows in it when yo
129 Post contains images Scbriml : Unless things go smoothly form here on in, the 787 will earn the inevitable sobriquet "Nightmareliner" (having already laid claim to 7-late-7*) *To b
130 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Not doubting you at all Astuteman. I've already covered that with Reply 109. What we're seeing here is what happens in such a well spread out program
131 Post contains links Rheinbote : Are you sure? What's the e2Open Platform good for then? "Exostar Enables Boeing's 787 Supply Chain" December 13, 2006: http://www.exostar.com/news/pr
132 Baroque : Something odd happening with post numbers. As I just checked 127 was from Astuteman 128 from has been incorrectly numbered.
133 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Sorry about that. It was my quote function. I noticed as I was typing that it incorrectly stated "Astuteman" instead of "BestWestern"...I only correc
134 Beta : Tom Precisely, Carson is the president of BCA, overseeing one of the most important commercial airplane development in the company's history since th
135 Stitch : With respect, you cannot have a critical analysis of Boeing without including the supply chain when it comes to discussing any of their programs - no
136 Art : Does a multi-month delay provide Boeing with an opportunity to make detail improvements to the 787 (eg reduce its weight) that might otherwise have co
137 Post contains images Astuteman : You did indeed. My apologies. Boeing DID publicly state that this was planned in... FWIW I agree completely, but I know from my own experience on Ast
138 Stitch : Boeing has subsequently learned this lesson. They thought their own people could take care of it quickly, but they were wrong. Boeing's focus now has
139 Post contains images Rheinbote : Not quite, I think. They did state indeed that the first airframes would involve travel work that would be progressively reduced to get to fully stuf
140 JoeCanuck : Boeing and Airbus are under no obligation to satisfy the attitudes, opinions, curiosities and/or whims of a.netters. In building any plane, their resp
141 Post contains images Boeing4ever : The focus right now is just on getting the first plane in the air. Such improvements will happen anyway as more and more Dreamliners are built, but i
142 Post contains images Scbriml : On this side of the pond, quite a few of us have an indirect investment in Airbus.
143 Post contains images Astuteman : So we're regularly told anyway...
144 Post contains images BestWestern : We are always told here that our governments own, and our taxes subsidise airbus? In effect, we own the goddammed company - it is there at our pleasu
145 Pygmalion : those tools were intended to cope with some traveled work from a top tier to another top tier supplier. the integrated planning is at that level as w
146 Flighty : Boeing releases Press Releases to the general public. Most of us are in that category. If we have a problem with that public communication, we say so
147 WingedMigrator : Custom stove pipes between e-tools, bursting at the seams from an overwhelming pressure to meet schedule, resulting in a perilous near-loss of config
148 474218 : Not to worry, I am sure Airbus will see to it that all EU citizens are will compensated for their contributions. If this were true they would be call
149 Post contains images Stitch : Well they do come from Boeing's "Public Relations" department...
150 Post contains images Boeing4ever : Reposted, this time more in keeping with the forum rules... Who knew about Boeing's schedule? Suppliers Who signed contracts knowing full well the sch
151 Baroque : Is not the real trick to find which country does not have at least an indirect investment in BOTH Airbus and Boeing among, the US, EU (taken there to
152 Astuteman : Again, from personal experience, It's quite possible you've hit the nail squarely on the head here, Pygmalion. As an example, I received a submarine
153 Tdscanuck : Well, they've slid almost a year already and nobody has been paid any penalties (a few operators are making noises about it but nobody has said their
154 Scbriml : Probably due in large part to the fact that Boeing will not be able to tell them when they're going to get their planes for another two months. So at
155 Post contains images Rheinbote : as an engineer I have to agree. Weight issues (2-3% is normal at this stage) and a lousy execution on production ramp-up (endemic in the industry?) a
156 Post contains images Astuteman : An occupational hazard of massive programmes like this, whatever industry they're in... REgards
157 AndesSMF : But it will take years to get everyone up to par using the new processes. I have gone thru several 'paradigm shifts' in our engineering side (constru
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...
The Official "787 First Flight" Countdown posted Thu Nov 1 2007 11:31:36 by Andhen
Boeing 787-8 First Flight posted Thu Apr 5 2007 01:11:35 by AeroplaneFreak
Schedule For 787 Rollout/Maiden Flight "On-Track" posted Fri Feb 16 2007 07:14:14 by Leelaw
Dreamliner 787 First Flight? posted Thu Jan 3 2008 16:44:28 by Vulindlela744
FlightBlogger: 787 First Flight Set posted Tue Nov 27 2007 13:11:56 by JetBlueGuy2006
787 First Flight Could Slip Even More posted Tue Sep 18 2007 22:01:07 by RedChili
787 First Flight Delayed Until October posted Fri Aug 10 2007 06:43:18 by Mymiles2go
Randy's Journal - No 787 First Flight Delay posted Tue Jun 19 2007 16:30:56 by Clickhappy
787 First Flight Delayed 2 Weeks posted Sun Jun 17 2007 23:16:44 by KLMCedric
Did Boeing Fix A Date For The First 747-8i? posted Wed Apr 25 2007 16:11:27 by CARST