Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FlightBlogger Gives Full 787 Update  
User currently offlineRadiocheck From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 32 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 16694 times:

What's up everybody!!

Jon just posted a sweet comprehensive update on the 787 program that provides some additional insight into the status of the program. He delves into the reasons for the delayed power-on, rather than just announcing the delay itself.

Fair Use Excerpt:

"Power-on could occur as early as mid-April according to senior Boeing representatives, yet, internal assessments of the pace of work on Dreamliner One suggest that the milestone could slip to June with slightly more than half of the 600 jobs, or tasks, remaining before power-on.

At least one 787 customer, who spoke with FlightBlogger on the condition of anonymity, has been told by the manufacturer that power-on will likely slip to June."

ALSO

"One foundational tenet of the 787 program, according to program sources working with the aircraft, was the idea of a 'super-mechanic' who held all the necessary certifications to self check work to appropriate airworthiness standards.

According to sources across the program, over the past year of assembly the self-certification process has become an impediment to progress rather than an enabler of efficiency.

As a result, the 787 program has begun to shift from a system of self-certifying manufacturing staff to a more traditional system of quality assurance similar to Boeing's legacy programs. The revised system is first being implemented for out-of-sequence traveled work and is expected to be expanded to the entire final assembly process."

Dig It:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...lightblogger-analysis-787-pow.html

rc

58 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16610 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Interesting read. And it does answer some questions I had.

User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3383 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16504 times:

Interesting there's no mention of the centre wing box being a problem either SUH is mistaken or he's been mis-quoted

User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3875 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16505 times:



Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 2):
Interesting there's no mention of the centre wing box being a problem either SUH is mistaken or he's been mis-quoted

Or SUH has better all round access to the program than Jons sources  Smile


User currently offlineIAD787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 502 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16431 times:



Quoting Moo (Reply 3):
Or SUH has better all round access to the program than Jons sources Smile

He has great sources. Better than I. But I'm checking in on the center wing box issues. They are very real from what I'm hearing right now. More on this later.



Former FlightBlogger turned Wall Street Journal Aerospace Beat Reporter
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8191 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16428 times:

Spirit seems to be getting the job done - maybe Boeing should shift some of Vought's work to Spirit in Wichita & Tulsa.  Smile

At the minimum Boeing is going to need to evaluate each supplier's ability to increase production and get their job done. I wouldn't be surprised if some additional suppliers are brought in to ensure all components are delivered to Boeing fully ready to go.

While part of the blame on the delays can be placed on the decision to get one plane ready for the roll out on 7/8/08 I have a feeling that having Boeing slogging through the travel work presents a better focus on what changes (enhancements?) are needed. With both their workers and engineers on site to review production issues they should end up with a better plane in the long run.


User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3875 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 16381 times:



Quoting IAD787 (Reply 4):
He has great sources. Better than I.

Heh, sorry, no offence meant  Smile

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 4):
They are very real from what I'm hearing right now.

Oooh, that doesn't sound good :/


User currently offlineIAD787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 502 posts, RR: 44
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 16201 times:



Quoting Moo (Reply 6):
Heh, sorry, no offence meant

No offense taken.

Quoting Moo (Reply 6):
Oooh, that doesn't sound good

It's not, but everyone needs to keep in mind that building airplanes is incredibly difficult.



Former FlightBlogger turned Wall Street Journal Aerospace Beat Reporter
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3383 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 16091 times:



Quoting IAD787 (Reply 4):
But I'm checking in on the center wing box issues. They are very real from what I'm hearing right now. More on this later.

That's what I'd hoped wasn't the case

Quoting IAD787 (Reply 7):
It's not, but everyone needs to keep in mind that building airplanes is incredibly difficult.

Something that many on here forget, when you start to actually think about how complex something like an A380 or 787 is it's a wonder that they ever get finished and aren't broken all of the time!


User currently offlineNcelhr From Vatican City, joined Jul 2006, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 15759 times:



Quoting IAD787 (Reply 7):
It's not, but everyone needs to keep in mind that building airplanes is incredibly difficult.

Well done! That is just about the most correct statement I have read on A.net in the past year.

Over on other similar a.net threads, I read comments of people rejoicing regarding the new Boeing delays. Having worked for Airbus in the past, I can say that the kind of delays Airbus had, are delays which affected the morale of thousands of very hard working individuals, but they kept working to resolve them. They worked very hard. And they still are and thankfully it seems their efforts are finally paying off.

I am also sure that at the moment, thousands of Boeing and Boeing partner employees are working very hard to resolve whatever problems they have encountered and I'd just like to say that it is unfair of people on a.net discussion boards to rejoice about the delays.

The airlines industry needs at least two strong & innovative companies that will stretch the limits of imagination and forefront of technology to offer the best products possible for the world's travelers to be able to travel affordably in the future. With the rising oil prices, the B787 is *needed* by airlines. So is the A350.

Any delay in any of the programs will just serve to delay EIS whilst the clock is ticking daily with rising oil prices. Ultimately it is you, the traveler, that will have to pay more for your ticket, you, the airline employee who will see a salary cut for your employer to stay afloat and you, the aircraft manufacturer employee, who will struggle to keep your job in the face of an industry in a crisis. Even those who campaign against aviation stand to lose because not flying the next generation aircraft will mean not being able to reduce the industry's carbon footprint.

No matter what anyone thinks, none of these news are good news, neither for Boeing nor for Airbus. Building aircraft is becoming incredibly complex. These days, it's not a case of making it fly, it's a case of making it fly affordably in the future.


User currently offlineMetalinyoni From South Africa, joined Oct 2005, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 12439 times:

With regards to the compensation for the delays on the A380 did Airbus only pay compensation to airlines that would be affected initially - i.e the airlines that were to receive the earlier aeroplanes on the basis that they believed they could increase production and prevent later deliveries being late. They didn't have to pay everybody who had ordered.

The reason I ask is that the Financial Times mentioned compensation on all of Boeings 857 planes ordered so far.

surely they would increase production so that only the earlier deliveries will be delayed and therefore liable for compensation.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/59b8e998-f...d-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1



Money doesn't make you happy but I would rather cry in a BMW than on public transport.
User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3875 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 12306 times:



Quoting Metalinyoni (Reply 10):
The reason I ask is that the Financial Times mentioned compensation on all of Boeings 857 planes ordered so far.

surely they would increase production so that only the earlier deliveries will be delayed and therefore liable for compensation.

Boeing had a *very* aggressive production ramp up in the original plan, with very little slack existing in the assembly line for an increase - there was heavy talk of a second production line being setup to increase production rate last year, but Boeing decided against it.

If Boeing has any problems at all with ramp up, they start affecting every single aircraft in the sales queue.

Out of interest, how many aircraft were Boeing originally planning to have completed by now? It was quite a few, wasn't it?


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4387 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 12294 times:

Sometimes it happens that early costumors want not to take all the aircraft as early as ordered, and there are situations where the manufacturer is happy about this. Currently Boeing has no time line it can be sure about, once they have achieved this, they will have serious talks with the costumors - they are no hungry crocodiles, but serious companies who want to work together with Boeing for the next 30 years at least.

User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2219 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (6 years 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 12174 times:



Quoting Metalinyoni (Reply 10):
With regards to the compensation for the delays on the A380 did Airbus only pay compensation to airlines that would be affected initially - i.e the airlines that were to receive the earlier aeroplanes on the basis that they believed they could increase production and prevent later deliveries being late. They didn't have to pay everybody who had ordered.

With the A380, as far as I can remember, VS and AF voluntarily deferred their deliveries, plus FedEx and UPS decided to cancel the freighters. This should mean that these four airlines are not entitled to compensation, plus Airbus was able to move up other deliveries due to the slots these cancellations/deferrals created. I would guess that this leaves maximum 100 A380s that Airbus had to pay compensation for.

With the 787 it's difficult to tell today. One reason is that nobody knows today how long the delay will be, and how quickly they can ramp up production. Another reason is that if everything goes smoothly from now on, Boeing could possibly start a second assembly line in a couple of years from now. Another reason is that with the economic downturn and problems in the USA and other countries, we could see a situation where some of the 787 customers will be forced to cancel, thereby opening up slots for other customers.



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 11616 times:

The flightblogger article makes very interesting reading, particularly with regard to the completion state of the fuselage sections.
The big question is; have they been shipped incomplete to Boeing in order to meet the delivery schedule; or shipped at the maximum state acheivable, due to incomplete information from Boeing.

If it is the former, the subcontractors should be able to make fairly rapid progress on subsequent deliveries; if however they need to wait for Boeing to provide specs for the missing parts, this could roll on for quite a while yet


User currently offlineYWG747 From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 11226 times:

I have always enjoyed reading Flightbloggers blog on the 787.
Always has great insight into the program!
Keep up the good work  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineScipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 850 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 11118 times:

Quoting RedChili (Reply 13):
With the A380, as far as I can remember, VS and AF voluntarily deferred their deliveries, plus FedEx and UPS decided to cancel the freighters. This should mean that these four airlines are not entitled to compensation,

Does that necessarily follow? Perhaps VS and AF got extra compensation in return for their voluntary deferrals, since they were helping Airbus out by doing so?

I don't know about the freighter customers, but UPS seems to have gotten some implicit compensation: their A380 order was meant in part as compensation to Airbus for the cancellation of their outstanding A300 orders. So, by being able to cancel their A380 order, UPS in effect avoided paying compensation to Airbus for cancelling the A300 orders.

At least, that is my understanding.

[Edited 2008-03-20 05:12:36]

User currently offlineSh0rtybr0wn From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 528 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 10721 times:

So you read Flightblogger and it says power on slips to June. Thats really really bad.

But whats worse, is it says delivery date unclear. Thats the really scary part. Its unclear because even Boeing doesn't know.

In one of the early 7E7 videos, they state, " The 7E7 is Boeings future, one more time" . They were proud that the 787 would assure Boeings future.

But now, this screw up actually puts Boeing future in doubt, by their own definition. With the lost tanker deal and falling dollar, and further delays on the 787, and no further 747-8i sales, it could be a darker future for Boeing.


User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 10018 times:



Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 17):
But now, this screw up actually puts Boeing future in doubt, by their own definition. With the lost tanker deal and falling dollar, and further delays on the 787, and no further 747-8i sales, it could be a darker future for Boeing.

I think this delay, as much puts Boeings future in doubt, as the A380 delay put Airbuses future in doubt. If either were still a "one trick pony" a bad slip up could cause huge difficulties; but when you hve a number of successful product ranges, you can absorb a delay or two in one of them. After all the worst it could possibly get for Boeing is to have to make the bulk of their profits off the 737NG line, with a good contribution from the 777 and the ongoing 747F


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9895 times:



Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 17):
But now, this screw up actually puts Boeing future in doubt, by their own definition. With the lost tanker deal and falling dollar, and further delays on the 787, and no further 747-8i sales, it could be a darker future for Boeing.

Woah woah woah there! That is quite a statement to be making. Boeing has some problems with the 787 - but the fact is, it is Boeing's best selling widebodied aircraft! Heck, another 35 were sold last week alone!!!! The 737 is still doing extremely well; as is the 737. Boeing isn't going anywhere and I am sure that Boeing will learn from their mistakes...

Now if only they would bring back Mulally as the CEO of the Boeing Company, then I think that we would see this situation handled a little bit differently and I dare say that it might not have even happened to begin with!

James



Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9847 times:

Let's back up for a second from "darker future for Boeing."

Weak dollar is good for Boeing because it is the leading exporter in the US. Weak dollar means more orders (at least in theory).

The 787 problems will be fixed eventually, and the plane will fly. Sure Boeing will take a financial hit, but the aircraft is in demand and will go into service. Boeing made a mistake of having super aggressive schedule, and now they are paying for it.

So instead of sitting on $6-7 billion in cash reserves, they may be down to 4-5. Nobody wants to trim down cash reserves on delays, but it is far from "Boeing future in doubt."



Forever New Frontiers
User currently offlineLY4XELD From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 857 posts, RR: 15
Reply 21, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9789 times:



Quoting Ncelhr (Reply 9):
I am also sure that at the moment, thousands of Boeing and Boeing partner employees are working very hard to resolve whatever problems they have encountered and I'd just like to say that it is unfair of people on a.net discussion boards to rejoice about the delays.

 checkmark 
As one of those employees, thank you for saying this!!



That's why we're here.
User currently offlineScipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 850 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9773 times:



Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 17):
But now, this screw up actually puts Boeing future in doubt, by their own definition. With the lost tanker deal and falling dollar, and further delays on the 787, and no further 747-8i sales, it could be a darker future for Boeing.

I don't think it puts Boeing's future in doubt. However, it solidifies Boeing's position as the #2 aircraft manufacturer. The delays mean that Boeing will not overtake Airbus in terms of deliveries any time soon, and push any HGW versions of the 787 into a more distant future. Combined with the modest success of the 747-8, and provided that Airbus deliver the A350 more or less on time and on spec, it means that by the middle of the next decade, Airbus will have a significantly stronger product line-up, in particular in the 300-seat and larger category.


User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9658 times:



Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 21):
As one of those employees, thank you for saying this!!

Shouldn't you be trying to fix the problem then, rather than chatting on here  Smile

Quoting Scipio (Reply 22):
provided that Airbus deliver the A350 more or less on time and on spec

Will this happen before or after John Leahy turns water into wine?



Forever New Frontiers
User currently offlineGearup From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 578 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (6 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9591 times:

Can anyone elaborate (or post a link to any infoformation) on the wing centre box issue?


I have no memory of this place.
25 Moo : Over 3,000 new orders over a 3 year period, during which Airbus apparently lost all credibility with customers due to the A380 fiasco (according to A
26 Art : It should not need miracles for Airbus to develop the A350 in the time they allowed themselves. I can think of another manufacturer that either thoug
27 Clickhappy : The funny thing is, the wingbox/landing gear issue is old news. It was discussed here (in private) back in January.
28 Scouseflyer : I must of missed that thread! So we're looking at the possibility that the doors won't close properly and thus are being re-desgined rather than the
29 Stratofortress : I think you hit the nail on the head. It seems that the industry is pushing the development cycle in order to get sales, but assumes risk that it's n
30 CygnusChicago : Just because it was discussed here, doesn't make it old news. There's a lot of noise on this forum, and it takes a while to identify the true signal
31 Bongodog1964 : I don't know about HOT; at present more like lukewarm, or tepid. The thing is though, what's the alternative. The 767 isn't really a good choice in t
32 Stitch : And this is a bad thing? They're doing mighty nice, financially, as #2. Until Boeing launches the 777 replacement in the early 2020's... It's a cycli
33 Post contains links Revelation : Well, just last week, Boeing took in an order for another 35 frames: Boeing Weekly Orders Update For 3/11/2008 (by NYC777 Mar 13 2008 in Civil Aviati
34 Sh0rtybr0wn : I of course didn't Boeing will go bankrupt, but a 1 1/2 to 2 year delay on the first Dreamliner really affects all their plans; their ability to start
35 MCIGuy : To be honest, I'm not sure that was overly bright. Why put money down on a plane that at this point is a lead balloon? If the rumors are to be believ
36 Stitch : Because airlines have a better sense of "the big picture" of their operations then we do. A 787 (and an A350, a 737RS, an A320RS, and a 777RS) will a
37 MCIGuy : Sure Stitch, I see your point, but what about the modifications themselves? They're having to add weight to an already overweight design in fixing th
38 AndesSMF : News of Boeing's demise is greatly exaggerated. No one, but no one right now (at least those in their right mind) will complain about the delays. Rem
39 Stitch : As long as it meets the guaranteed performance targets, it doesn't really matter. And even if it doesn't meet those requirements at first, Boeing has
40 Post contains images MCIGuy : I agree, so maybe they shouldn't have set such a tight timetable. I'm of the opinion that this can be a blessing or a curse, but that's just my opini
41 Scbriml : Any new weight added at this stage will almost certainly get "thinned out" in the long run (just as the A380 will get lighter from c/n 50-something o
42 Post contains links Moo : FlightBlogger update on the wingbox situation - http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...lightblogger-exclusive-center.html
43 Post contains images RobK : That is the funniest thing I've read on here in a long time! R
44 Glideslope : Agreed. Answered quite a few I had.
45 Glideslope : Hate to do this to you, but I'm fairly sure the 764 was a dismal failure at attempting to improve performance on the 767. The only one in the history
46 Stitch : Certainly not a desirable thing, but neither is it a disaster. The wingboxes that have been completed will need to be "shored-up" which will add weig
47 Art : I don't understand why you say that. What doubt?
48 Toulouse : Totally agree with you. As IAD787 said "building an airplane is a very comlex matter". We saw this happen with Airbus over the 380 (and despite all t
49 Stitch : A bit of silver lining for Boeing today, courtesy of SUH himself: Udvar-Hazy hints at more 787 orders for ILFC this year So it looks like SUH wants mo
50 797charter : What about the 777F and 748i, - are they on schedule, - you have early hinted the 777F might be (a little-?) late???
51 AirNZ : True enough but, then again, if I was ordering 35 now I'd be damn well hoping that the problems would be sorted out with 800+ frames ahead of me!! Pr
52 Stitch : With respect, it's not "meaningless". Nor is it overtly "meaningful" since it should not be seen as some rousing endorsement of the 787 program even
53 AirNZ : Hmm! so the airlines and ILFC obviously aren't in their right minds, while you are of course. Come again.....it's what? Like what to any massive degr
54 Post contains images Danny : Or because he's getting them as compensation.
55 Post contains images Stitch : He doesn't make money having them sit around on the tarmac outside HQ, so if he didn't have lessees lined up for them, I don't think he'd be interest
56 Danny : He obviously does not haves lessees lined up yet for deliveries in 2016-2018.
57 Stitch : But he must feel he has some interest, hence his interest in acquiring additional planes if those interests turn into firm contracts.
58 Scbriml : Obviously not, but I'd also be very surprised if every frame every leasing company order has customers lined up at the time of order. A degree of spe
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...
Flightblogger:Taking Stock:787 Update W/pics posted Thu Nov 15 2007 09:59:48 by NYC777
Flightblogger Is Back-Expect 787 Update Soon posted Sun Nov 4 2007 12:48:54 by NYC777
Boeing's Saddler Gives 787 Update posted Fri Sep 8 2006 16:46:22 by NYC777
787 Update From Boeing's 3rd Quarter Earnings Call posted Wed Oct 24 2007 08:01:28 by NYC777
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update, Part 2 posted Tue Sep 4 2007 22:20:56 by IAD787
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update posted Wed Aug 29 2007 18:41:49 by Zvezda
Boeing's Carson & Bair 787 Update @ 10am ET Monday posted Mon Mar 19 2007 11:38:39 by Sangas
Boeing 787 Update From Earnings Conference Call posted Wed Jan 31 2007 16:40:51 by NYC777
Vought/Alenia: 787 Update Sheet posted Mon Jan 15 2007 20:08:10 by Beech19
Possible Aer Lingus A350/787 Update posted Tue Dec 6 2005 13:55:00 by EI321
787 Update From Boeing's 3rd Quarter Earnings Call posted Wed Oct 24 2007 08:01:28 by NYC777
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update, Part 2 posted Tue Sep 4 2007 22:20:56 by IAD787
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update posted Wed Aug 29 2007 18:41:49 by Zvezda
Boeing's Carson & Bair 787 Update @ 10am ET Monday posted Mon Mar 19 2007 11:38:39 by Sangas
Boeing 787 Update From Earnings Conference Call posted Wed Jan 31 2007 16:40:51 by NYC777
Vought/Alenia: 787 Update Sheet posted Mon Jan 15 2007 20:08:10 by Beech19
Flightblogger: Pre-Call 787 Update posted Mon Dec 10 2007 15:18:39 by NYC777
Flightblogger:Taking Stock:787 Update W/pics posted Thu Nov 15 2007 09:59:48 by NYC777
Flightblogger Is Back-Expect 787 Update Soon posted Sun Nov 4 2007 12:48:54 by NYC777
Boeing's Saddler Gives 787 Update posted Fri Sep 8 2006 16:46:22 by NYC777
787 Update From Boeing's 3rd Quarter Earnings Call posted Wed Oct 24 2007 08:01:28 by NYC777
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update, Part 2 posted Tue Sep 4 2007 22:20:56 by IAD787
Boeing Execs To Provide 787 Update posted Wed Aug 29 2007 18:41:49 by Zvezda
Boeing's Carson & Bair 787 Update @ 10am ET Monday posted Mon Mar 19 2007 11:38:39 by Sangas
Boeing 787 Update From Earnings Conference Call posted Wed Jan 31 2007 16:40:51 by NYC777
Vought/Alenia: 787 Update Sheet posted Mon Jan 15 2007 20:08:10 by Beech19