STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16247 posts, RR: 52 Posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9341 times:
According to Boeing's website CO has modified their 787 order, the total of firm orders (25) has not changed. What has changed is the mix, originally it was 8 787-8s and 17 787-9s for a total of 25. Now it's showing 11 787-8s and 14 787-9s for a total of 25.
My own speculation is that CO was able to get early 787-8 delivery spots due to some carrier cancellations and deferments, and thus switched three 787-9 orders for early 787-8 spots.
Also I don't know what's going on with their 8 777-200s on order, according to Boeing there's only seven orders. But they also list CO as having only 777-200ERs, which is incorrect as they have 20.
Fun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 839 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9096 times:
The 11/14 split is an update. I would guess that it is b/c the 789 is delayed that they had to get more 788's.
If you think about what CO did this year w/o adding any widebodies it was amazing EWR>PVG (2 777's), IAH>GIG (2 762's) and IAH>FRA (1 762 or 764). They need some new iron to continue 2010 expansion - only two 777's scheduled for delivery in 2010. I still don't know the addtional 6 777's delivery schedule either.
The 10-k will be out this week. It should have more details.
RedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 8842 times:
Quoting STT757 (Thread starter): My own speculation is that CO was able to get early 787-8 delivery spots due to some carrier cancellations and deferments, and thus switched three 787-9 orders for early 787-8 spots.
Ahem... Maybe you haven't heard, but the 787 is slightly delayed. And what's more, nobody, not even Boeing, know how soon they will be able to put the 787 into service and how fast they will be able to ramp up production. But every week which is added to the delay means that a few production slots are gone.
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4532 posts, RR: 28 Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 8755 times:
Quoting Fun2fly (Reply 1): The 11/14 split is an update. I would guess that it is b/c the 789 is delayed that they had to get more 788's.
That would seem to make sense. While getting earlier delivery positions relative to the 789 slots might be possible, I can't imagine that happening right now with the delays extending out an unknown amount of time. Even if some carriers are cancelling, Boeing would probably be grabbing those slots and "retiring" them.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3667 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 8489 times:
Quoting RedChili (Reply 2): Ahem... Maybe you haven't heard, but the 787 is slightly delayed. And what's more, nobody, not even Boeing, know how soon they will be able to put the 787 into service and how fast they will be able to ramp up production. But every week which is added to the delay means that a few production slots are gone.
I'm sure STT757 has heard of the 787 program delays.
I don't quite understand your statement:
But every week which is added to the delay means that a few production slots are gone.
Do you mean to say that each new week added on to the delay results in slots being gone because new customers are signing up?
EBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8422 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 4): Do you mean to say that each new week added on to the delay results in slots being gone because new customers are signing up?
I suspect what's meant is that with each passing week, filled slots are gone and therefore slots are opening which would mean early deliveries for those interested in them.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 89 Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8342 times:
A whole lot of early delivery slots are available as carriers cancel them.
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6016 posts, RR: 55 Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7961 times:
When talking about "delivery slots", then some here at a.net understand it exactly as delivery slots, and others as "delivery sequence positions".
It's a little meaningless to talk about slots as long as there is no production, no production plan, and nobody knows when production output will be a reality.
Nevertheless we must assume that the order contracts talk about slots. Those slots have now been missed. While they keep the same sequence number, then slot dates are pushed north.
Then when orders are cancelled or deferred, then the remaining orders with higher sequence number will see their sequence number go south, and the slot date go not as far north as before.
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 3): Even if some carriers are cancelling, Boeing would probably be grabbing those slots and "retiring" them.
Sure you are right. As long as real slot dates are north of contract slot dates, then B will retire every cancelled slot in order to reduce number of compensations and magnitude of compensations which they have to pay for not meeting contract details.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
RedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6211 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 4): Do you mean to say that each new week added on to the delay results in slots being gone because new customers are signing up?
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 5): I suspect what's meant is that with each passing week, filled slots are gone and therefore slots are opening which would mean early deliveries for those interested in them.
Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 8): When talking about "delivery slots", then some here at a.net understand it exactly as delivery slots, and others as "delivery sequence positions".
Prebennorholm has got it right. I'm talking about "time slots" and not "delivery sequence positions."
It is widely assumed that this will be at least a three month delay, while some analysts believe it will take up to 18 months. In Paris, Boeing said that they were committed to go to 10 per month by 2012, which is 2.5 planes per week. Assuming that production ramp-up will continue at the same speed in spite of the current delay, it means that between 30 to 180 "time slots" will be lost by the time ramp-up has reached 10 per month.
The truth is that as of today, Boeing does not know how many "time slots" will be lost as they don't know when the 787 will EIS. I don't think Boeing would be willing to move up any airline's "delivery sequence positions" under such circumstances.
FUN2FLY From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 839 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5294 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 9): I've heard CO have canceled one of the 77E orders.
I'd hope they move the 7 77e's to 77w's. Initially they planned for 2 77e's in 2010. I never knew the addtional delivery slots for the remaining 6, now 5 units. Anyone know the plan on these. I'd bet they are moved into 2010/2011 now b/c the 788 surely won't be here in 2011. Amazing, really.
I wonder how that will affect the expansion route planning? CO had planned for more India, Sydney, etc. with the 788 - routes that the 777 can't or is too big/expensive to do. What are good candidate 777 routes?
Some thoughts:
For capacity: upgauges EWR>FRA, put a 777 back on EWR>FCO,
For volume when the economy comes back: 2nd EWR >LHR
Other expansion: IST, MUC? CO has made the 777 the long haul flagship to the likes of Asia. Any other thoughts?
Dynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 762 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5121 times:
Quoting RedChili (Reply 10): It is widely assumed that this will be at least a three month delay, while some analysts believe it will take up to 18 months. In Paris, Boeing said that they were committed to go to 10 per month by 2012, which is 2.5 planes per week. Assuming that production ramp-up will continue at the same speed in spite of the current delay, it means that between 30 to 180 "time slots" will be lost by the time ramp-up has reached 10 per month.
As it has thus far been anounced, production is suposed to continue while this delay is sorted. So the earliest slots will shift later, but once it's certified they will have a stockpile of airframes mostly ready to deliver. This was already planned, but this will mean it should be a larger stockpile. In theory they shouldn't lose a significant number of those "time slots". In practice we'll have to wait and see.
Reaching 10/month is planned for during 2012, not by 2012. I don't know whether the point of time in 2012 is public knowledge so I won't state it without checking.
AirlineAddict From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 415 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4936 times:
Quoting RedChili (Reply 10): The truth is that as of today, Boeing does not know how many "time slots" will be lost as they don't know when the 787 will EIS. I don't think Boeing would be willing to move up any airline's "delivery sequence positions" under such circumstances.
True about time slots, but regardless of when time slots happened, the delivery sequence does not change unless requested by the airline.
If an airline had an earlier delivery sequence position and cancelled, why wouldn't Boeing use the newly available delivery sequence position to help a customer that is not cancelling?
RedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4750 times:
Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 12): As it has thus far been anounced, production is suposed to continue while this delay is sorted. So the earliest slots will shift later, but once it's certified they will have a stockpile of airframes mostly ready to deliver. This was already planned, but this will mean it should be a larger stockpile. In theory they shouldn't lose a significant number of those "time slots". In practice we'll have to wait and see.
If the current problem requires a simple fix, something similar to what Airbus had to do to strenghten the wings of the 380, then I agree with you that production can continue and Boeing would be ready to deliver a huge number of airplanes as soon as the 787 is certified.
But it seems to me that most analysts agree that the biggest problem is that the Boeing models failed, and something happened in testing which the models had failed to expect. That's why they have to not only find a fix to this problem, but also resolve why their models failed, which will take a lot of time. It also raises the question of whether other models could fail later on in testing.
As I see it, if Boeing will continue producing finished airplanes while this is being fixed, there is a possibility that they will end up with lots of airframes that will have to be equipped with several "fixes" that are developed during flight testing. That would be the A380 delay all over again. All A380 frames had to be rewired because they didn't do it properly the first time. Does Boeing really want to risk producing lots of 787s, and possibly end up having to take them all apart just like Airbus had to with the 380?
Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 12): Reaching 10/month is planned for during 2012, not by 2012. I don't know whether the point of time in 2012 is public knowledge so I won't state it without checking.
Quoting AirlineAddict (Reply 13): If an airline had an earlier delivery sequence position and cancelled, why wouldn't Boeing use the newly available delivery sequence position to help a customer that is not cancelling?
Because there are other customers whose "time slots" have been messed up who would probably be quite mad at Boeing if another customer would suddenly be allowed to jump the line and get a delivery sequence position in front of their delivery sequence position.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16247 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4721 times:
Quoting FUN2FLY (Reply 11): What are good candidate 777 routes?
It depends, if they stay with the 777-200ER then I would see the new 777-200ERs replacing 767s on EWR-AMS, EWR-CDG, EWR-FRA, IAH-FRA. Those 767s freed up from those routes would go to launch new routes, such as EWR-MUC, EWR-VCE, EWR-GIG, EWR-DME.
If they are 777-300ERs they would go to EWR-TLV 2x, IAH-LHR 1x, EWR-LHR 1x etc..
They only new long haul routes I could see CO launching with the 777s would be EWR-DXB, EWR-ICN.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14313 posts, RR: 26 Reply 16, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4682 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 15): It depends, if they stay with the 777-200ER then I would see the new 777-200ERs replacing 767s on EWR-AMS, EWR-CDG,
I wouldn't think that AMS and CDG would be upguaged since CO is leaving SkyTeam and will be losing the AF/KL feed. But on the flip side, more capacity to FRA could be coming for the same reasons.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16247 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4614 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 16): I wouldn't think that AMS and CDG would be upguaged since CO is leaving SkyTeam and will be losing the AF/KL feed. But on the flip side, more capacity to FRA could be coming for the same reasons.
CO's participation in Skyteam has always been limited, and there is not one route or frequency dependent on their participation in Skyteam.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14313 posts, RR: 26 Reply 18, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4577 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 17): CO's participation in Skyteam has always been limited, and there is not one route or frequency dependent on their participation in Skyteam.
They might not lose the route, but I was thinking that they may lose some feed on the European side. Or they may not, I don't know for sure.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Frigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1194 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (3 years 10 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4455 times:
Any chance CO may pick up a couple of the first somewhat overweight 20 production 788's? NW, QF and the Chinese carriers didn't want them, other potential candidates for these frames appeared reluctant to take them. But if CO plans to use them transatlantic only, these could work fine for them.
Dynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 762 posts, RR: 8 Reply 20, posted (3 years 10 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4093 times:
Quoting RedChili (Reply 14): If the current problem requires a simple fix, something similar to what Airbus had to do to strenghten the wings of the 380, then I agree with you that production can continue and Boeing would be ready to deliver a huge number of airplanes as soon as the 787 is certified.
Sure, but that's Boeing's last public position - that they will continue production and that the fix developed can be applied either on an assembled airframe or earlier on in the production. The fix itself sounds similar in magnitude to the A380's wing fix, though the engineering effort to verify it sounds like it will be greater. It is certainly a risk that this and other changes will need to be applied.
Quoting RedChili (Reply 14): Jon Ostrower and FlightGlobal claimed that Shahanan in Paris said 10 per month by 2012.
Going back quite a way the rate was not supposed to be 10/month until well into 2012. Some reporters quoted differently. According to the Seattle Times it's by the end of 2012:
Quote: Boeing has an ambitious target of rolling out 10 Dreamliners per month by the end of 2012, which would likely require a second Dreamliner production line."
That article is also interesting in its own right as it describes the challenge facing paartners of increasing the rate to 10/month, let alone getting it high enough to justify a second final assembly line.
Quote: Boeing also maintained that its ramp-up plan is "fully coordinating with partners on production readiness and the critical design block points changes planned to meet our goal of achieving 10 airplanes per month by the end of 2012."
Quote: A Boeing spokesperson in Seattle told The Australian in September that availability for new orders of the 787 was "around the end of the next decade".
"We have previously announced that we will reach a 10-per-month rate on the 787 in 2012 but as we gain greater knowledge about this new production process and our partners' capabilities, we will continue to assess how we improve availability," the spokesman said.
Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 19): Any chance CO may pick up a couple of the first somewhat overweight 20 production 788's?
To be pedantic, there are 19 airframes. Line 20 is when the new "mission improvement" blockpoint is rolled in. Even then I'd expect a lot of customers would want to wait untl the next major blockpoint.
RedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (3 years 10 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3469 times:
Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 20): Sure, but that's Boeing's last public position - that they will continue production and that the fix developed can be applied either on an assembled airframe or earlier on in the production. The fix itself sounds similar in magnitude to the A380's wing fix, though the engineering effort to verify it sounds like it will be greater. It is certainly a risk that this and other changes will need to be applied.
According to recent news, which are hotly debated here: Boeing 787 Production Plan Slides Up To 3 Months (by SInGAPORE_AIR Jul 21 2009 in Civil Aviation) , two engineers claim that it will take between one and four months to install the fix on each airplane which is fully assembled. See:
Quote: "It's got to take at least three to four months just to get something installed on an airplane," said a structures engineer who has been briefed on the issue.
Quote: Assuming that's successful, it will take another month or two to install the fix on the first airplane to fly.
It seems to me, if this is true, that the prudent position to take would be to stop the final assembly of all planes until the issue has been solved and they know how to fix it. Otherwise they will end up with a lot of time consuming work.
And it seems that Boeing is coming around to this, as Flightblogger reports that they have delayed delivery of parts for ZA104 for at least one and a half month.
Dynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 762 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (3 years 10 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3370 times:
Quoting RedChili (Reply 21): It seems to me, if this is true, that the prudent position to take would be to stop the final assembly of all planes until the issue has been solved and they know how to fix it. Otherwise they will end up with a lot of time consuming work.
And it seems that Boeing is coming around to this, as Flightblogger reports that they have delayed delivery of parts for ZA104 for at least one and a half month.
Yep. What's come out today suggests a harder fix than Boeing had announced. I'm sure we'll get another revised delivery schedule some time. I'm tempted to get up early enough to listen to the conference call tomorrow to find out what they have to say. So we lose half a dozen of your time slots now, maybe a few more later depending how this drags on, but still not in the order of 180.
I've heard elsewhere that the generally accepted range of the delay of first flight from Boeing engineers is still 3-6 months. 3 is looking more optimistic now.
RedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (3 years 10 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3269 times:
Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 22): So we lose half a dozen of your time slots now, maybe a few more later depending how this drags on, but still not in the order of 180.
Hold on a moment, I wrote between 30 and 180. I wrote 180 as the upper limit, not as a firm number.
But I'm curious how you get half a dozen slots. That's just a two and a half week delay. How can you come up with such a number?
Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 22): I've heard elsewhere that the generally accepted range of the delay of first flight from Boeing engineers is still 3-6 months. 3 is looking more optimistic now.
Which would mean between 30 to 60 time slots, and which would fit within my guess.
25 Dynamicsguy: The delay is happening now, when the rate is extremely low, not in 2012 or so when the rate is supposed to be 10/month. I don't believe any partner i
26 RedChili: True. But Boeing and the suppliers don't have a magic production button to push once the calendar shows 2012. They have to learn how to assemble thre
27 Airbazar: Considering that the whole program is late by about 2 years, what's your definition of "early"?
29 FlyPNS1: 17 new planes in 2010, but how many retirements? I'm curious to see if CO is planning any mainline growth for 2010.
30 STT757: They're done with the retirements by the end of this year, all of the remaining 737-300s and a couple 737-500s.
31 EcuadorianMD11: Fair enough question! I mean, sure, they can continue with making certain parts of the plane that proved to be a 100% O.K........but do they really w
32 Dynamicsguy: No, but before things started going really pear shaped the suppliers had already ramped up to x (where x = a number which I don't think is public so
33 FUN2FLY: From the 10-k: Firm Order and Option Aircraft. As of June 30, 2009, we had firm commitments to purchase 83 new aircraft (51 Boeing 737 aircraft, seven
34 A340Spotter: One item that I picked up on during a tour of the facility last month was that the second Royal Air Maroc airplane, line number 6 I believe, was not w
35 RedChili: This is good news that I was not aware of. This could mean that production up will not necessarily see the same delay as the first flight. But I do a
36 RedChili: An additional note: ATW reports that Bernstein Research believes that the delay will mean the following delivery numbers: 3 in 2010 instead of 15. 25
37 Brons2: Early 787-8 delivery slots? Is that an oxymoron?
38 Dynamicsguy: It will wear the same simplified house livery as just unveiled for line 5, and which line 3 and 4 will also wear.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16247 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2053 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1134 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6016 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 762 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1194 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
