Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing 787 Production Plan Slides Up To 3 Months  
User currently offlineSInGAPORE_AIR From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13744 posts, RR: 19
Posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 14043 times:

All credit to Jon Ostrower the FlightBlogger.

A month later, Boeing continues work developing 787 wing fix

With almost a month since Boeing announced it was forced to ground its 787s for structural reinforcement, the company continues to work to develop, install and test a fix that can get its troubled Dreamliner into the sky after more than two years of delays.

According to a senior program source: "There is good news and bad news. The good news is we know what to fix, and how to fix it. The bad news is the location is a [expletive] to get to."

While the fix is being developed and a fully revised schedule finalized for airlines, sources at both Boeing and partner suppliers indicate that the existing production plan has slid roughly one and a half to three months for the delivery of Airplane Ten's components to Everett, even as suppliers continue to prep parts for shipment.

FlightBlogger via FlightGlobal




I suppose 1.5 to 3 months isn't too bad considering the potential complexity of the issue ?


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
71 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19927 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 13998 times:

OMG.

Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it. That poor bird has been poked and prodded and patched and primped so many times that she can't be anything remotely similar to the production model.

Really, Boeing, just back up and start fresh. It'll hurt a bit, but be better in the long run.


User currently offlineZBBYLW From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 1986 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 13971 times:

In all honestly the 1.5 to 3 month estimate don't read anything into. Just wait to see when it happens.


Keep the shinny side up!
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6481 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 13852 times:



Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
...the existing production plan has slid roughly one and a half to three months for the delivery of Airplane Ten's components to Everett...



Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
I suppose 1.5 to 3 months isn't too bad considering the potential complexity of the issue

Unfortunately the delivery of components of plane #10 doesn't tell much about when the lower numbers can be fixed and be ready to initiate the flight test program.

It only tells a little about production and delivery ramp up when flight test is done and the plane has been certified.

It doesn't indicate anything like "possible initiation of flight test 1.5 to 3 months after the previous schedule, end June 09". We still wait for a new test schedule.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 13661 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
OMG.

Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it.

It wouldn't be scrap ZA001, it would be scrap all birds currently in production (up through 8-ish, I think). That would absolutely crater any chance of getting deliveries to customers in the next couple of years. I don't see that being well received by the customers.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
That poor bird has been poked and prodded and patched and primped so many times that she can't be anything remotely similar to the production model.

So? This keeps popping up on a.net as some kind of flight test obstacle and I don't get it. There's no requirement (nothing in the FAR's) at all that ZA001 be full production configuration.

Tom.


User currently offline787atPAE From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 143 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 13599 times:

I'm surprised we haven't seen the Boeing logo on failblog.org.

I think the 1.5-3 month plan seems rather optimistic considering Boeing has to fix the static plane, test that wing, then while that testing is going on, install the fix to the rest of the airplanes. It sounds like according to Flightblogger that the fix is a pain in the rear and will take at least a month per airplane.

We will all be reading between the lines of Boeing's prepared statements and Q&A after the teleconference tomorrow morning.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it. That poor bird has been poked and prodded and patched and primped so many times that she can't be anything remotely similar to the production model.

Good comment. But I wonder how much ZA001 is worth these days with all the special attention paid to her, via the humpty-dumpty rollout and the subsequent installation of hardware and the fasteners and now the wing-to-body joint.


User currently offlineTISTPAA727 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 330 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 13462 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Anywhere within 3 months would be great news for Boeing. From reading the article it sounds like they still need to figure out where in the supply chain to start incorporating the fix. There are some 40 planes at various stages of development at partners so I wonder what the magic number is to start seeing the fix. Since not all 40 planes are at the stage where the wingbox has been started the number (one would assume) is lower. Even it is at 20, does that mean 20 planes will require the 'patch'?

I guess we will learn more during the conference call tomorrow.



Don't sweat the little things.
User currently offlineFlood From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1381 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13389 times:

We're already pushing a month since the problem was announced and, apparently, a team of Boeing engineers working 80-hour weeks haven't finalized the designs to a modification which Fancher labeled "really quite simple" and "not complicated by any means".

Quoting 787atPAE (Reply 5):
I think the 1.5-3 month plan seems rather optimistic

I don't believe the 1.5 to 3 month timeframe was in reference to the fix but, rather, referring to existing delays in deliveries for components of frame 10. Boeing is merely using the delays to these components to develop and test "the fix".


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13324 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it.

That may be the best way to fix people, Doc, but not airplanes  Wink

Acutally, I know you're kidding. Still, that would be disastrous from many different standpoints. I've been up close and personal with a good amount of "first-off-the-line" airplanes and they're usually not all that pretty of a sight up close. There are usually all kinds of design changes, ill-fitting one-off parts, patches, etc. With all the mods, especially the fastener issues, I will be really surprised if ZA001 is ever taken up by an operator other than Boeing--but it's still a much more valuable airplane in one functional piece than scrapped.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31098 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well the easiest thing to do would be to remove the wings and drop Section 11 out from under Section 44 to do the repairs/modifications. However, I can understand why they don't want to take the "easy" route since I am sure that putting them back together would require significant re-work considering how muffed up the fasteners and their holes become every time they've had to do so in the past.

User currently offlinePellegrine From France, joined Mar 2007, 2468 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13159 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
It wouldn't be scrap ZA001, it would be scrap all birds currently in production (up through 8-ish, I think). That would absolutely crater any chance of getting deliveries to customers in the next couple of years. I don't see that being well received by the customers.

The first 6 frames are no longer placed, and many customers have come out and have said they don't want the first 20 anyway.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2301 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 13115 times:



Quoting 787atPAE (Reply 5):
I think the 1.5-3 month plan seems rather optimistic considering Boeing has to fix the static plane, test that wing, then while that testing is going on, install the fix to the rest of the airplanes.



Quoting TISTPAA727 (Reply 6):
Anywhere within 3 months would be great news for Boeing.

Read the article. Flightblogger is not talking about a three month delay to the program. He's talking about a three month delay to the parts for airplane 10 into Everett. The program as a whole could see a bigger or smaller delay.

We're not given much new and hard timing information in this article, but there are a few indications:

"The development phase moves into the installation phase" in August. I understand this to mean that they will start to install the fix on the static test airframe in August.

"With installation times around one month for each already assembled airplane." Which could mean that the static test bird would be ready for new tests around the middle of September.

But it does not say whether Boeing can install fixes on several airplanes simultaneously, i.e. will they be able to fix all six test airplanes in a month? Or will it take six months to fix all test airplanes because they can only install at one airplane a time?



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1581 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 13113 times:

I hoped that Jon had learnt from being used as a mouth piece by Boeing but aparently not. Lets see now, this 1.5 to 3 months relates to the "production" schedule not the first flight so they can keep stacking on on the taxiways but have no clear path to first flight... also we are already 1 month into the hiatus so is Jon telling us that the fix could be fitted and tested in the next 2 weeks? Er no because the article goes on to say they haven't manufactured the fix or decided on the method of application.

So I'm calling Bulldust on this. If the 787 flies in Q3 I will eat my hat live on webcam whilst twittering.



BV
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 13097 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
So? This keeps popping up on a.net as some kind of flight test obstacle and I don't get it. There's no requirement (nothing in the FAR's) at all that ZA001 be full production configuration.

People were so worried about ramp rash, Boeing must have had time to perfect the procedure and technology of the patches.

ZA001's scars are not in vain  Wink



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 13096 times:



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 10):


Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
It wouldn't be scrap ZA001, it would be scrap all birds currently in production (up through 8-ish, I think). That would absolutely crater any chance of getting deliveries to customers in the next couple of years. I don't see that being well received by the customers.

The first 6 frames are no longer placed, and many customers have come out and have said they don't want the first 20 anyway.

Yes, but you have to flight test with something. If they scrap the first 6, that means the full flight test program doesn't get going until 7-12 are built. There's no way that wouldn't delay delivery.

Tom.


User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2301 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 13029 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 14):
Yes, but you have to flight test with something. If they scrap the first 6, that means the full flight test program doesn't get going until 7-12 are built. There's no way that wouldn't delay delivery.

It depends.

Let me do some speculation based upon the assumption that what Flightblogger is telling us are the real facts:

Installation of the fix for ZA997 starts in mid-August. In mid-September, they're ready to test 997. That takes a month. In mid-October, they're ready to start installing the fix to the test birds. That will take one month per bird, so the whole test fleet will take to the air between November 2009 and April 2010.

Could they build six other airplanes and get them into the air before April 2010? If they cannot, I fear that Boeing has serious problems with the production process. They're supposed to be able to spit out one new airplane every three days in three years from now.

Remember that installing the fix on a new airplane which has not been assembled yet is a far easier task than fixing a fully assembled airplane. Personally, I believe that Boeing could assemble a new airplane from scratch, with the fix, quicker than they could install the fix into the already assembled airplanes (assuming that what we're reading at FB is true).



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12702 times:



Quoting RedChili (Reply 15):
Let me do some speculation based upon the assumption that what Flightblogger is telling us are the real facts:

Installation of the fix for ZA997 starts in mid-August. In mid-September, they're ready to test 997. That takes a month. In mid-October, they're ready to start installing the fix to the test birds. That will take one month per bird, so the whole test fleet will take to the air between November 2009 and April 2010.

That presupposes two things, neither of which I've seen evidence for so far:
1) That they will install the fix on the airplanes in series, when they could do it in parallel.
2) That they will wait until the test is complete before starting installation.

If they can do parallel install, and/or parallel test & install, that would massively change the timeline.

Quoting RedChili (Reply 15):
Could they build six other airplanes and get them into the air before April 2010? If they cannot, I fear that Boeing has serious problems with the production process. They're supposed to be able to spit out one new airplane every three days in three years from now.

The question isn't can they build 6 generic airplanes before April 2010. It's can they build 6 *flight test* airplanes before April 2010. Each flight test airplane has gobs of customized instrumentation built in during the manufacturing process. A process that, I can only assume, neither Boeing nor the suppliers ever expected to do more than once per airplane.

Tom.


User currently offlineLY4XELD From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 858 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12661 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
OMG.

Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it. That poor bird has been poked and prodded and patched and primped so many times that she can't be anything remotely similar to the production model.

Really, Boeing, just back up and start fresh. It'll hurt a bit, but be better in the long run.

You're kidding, right?

And just to put things in perspective, here's an article from Forbes. Boeing is riding a lot on the success of the 787, but there's a lot more "stuff" going on.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/08...airplanes-boeing-not-grounded.html



That's why we're here.
User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2301 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12509 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
That presupposes two things, neither of which I've seen evidence for so far:
1) That they will install the fix on the airplanes in series, when they could do it in parallel.
2) That they will wait until the test is complete before starting installation.

If they can do parallel install, and/or parallel test & install, that would massively change the timeline.

Yes, I freely admit that my "analysis" above is based upon lots of presuppositions. It was just an attempt at explaning a scenario whereby perhaps it could make sense to do what DocLightning proposed in reply 1. But there are other scenarios, which are probably more realistic, where it wouldn't make sense to scrap birds 1-6.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
The question isn't can they build 6 generic airplanes before April 2010. It's can they build 6 *flight test* airplanes before April 2010. Each flight test airplane has gobs of customized instrumentation built in during the manufacturing process. A process that, I can only assume, neither Boeing nor the suppliers ever expected to do more than once per airplane.

True, I didn't think about that.



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12349 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
That presupposes two things, neither of which I've seen evidence for so far:
1) That they will install the fix on the airplanes in series, when they could do it in parallel.
2) That they will wait until the test is complete before starting installation.

That presupposes that there is ONE fix for all aircraft, which is unlikely to be the case, given the differences in wing/wing box designs within the first three lots.


User currently onlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5622 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12298 times:



Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 12):
I hoped that Jon had learnt from being used as a mouth piece by Boeing but aparently not.

I don't know the guy, but these off-the-cuff insults are starting to get old.

The 1.5 to 3 month timeframe appeared to relate to the delivery of Frame Ten components to Everett. This seems to be a particularly narrow statement, not some broad "Well, that's it then. Only a 1.5 to 3 month delay for the program" statement.

It must be nice to just sit back and cast aspirsions.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12151 times:

Quoting 787atPAE (Reply 5):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Just scrap ZA001 and build a bird from scratch the right way the first time so that you can show that you know how to do it. That poor bird has been poked and prodded and patched and primped so many times that she can't be anything remotely similar to the production model.

Good comment. But I wonder how much ZA001 is worth these days with all the special attention paid to her, via the humpty-dumpty rollout and the subsequent installation of hardware and the fasteners and now the wing-to-body joint.

ZA001 is full of sensors and test equipment.. it's an experimental.

Quoting Flood (Reply 7):
I don't believe the 1.5 to 3 month timeframe was in reference to the fix but, rather, referring to existing delays in deliveries for components of frame 10. Boeing is merely using the delays to these components to develop and test "the fix".

Today w'll hear more. Airlines will demand delivery dates, think Qatar.

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 17):
And just to put things in perspective, here's an article from Forbes. Boeing is riding a lot on the success of the 787, but there's a lot more "stuff" going on.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/08....html

A naive article IMO. The 787 fix is simple they'll quickly start producing & everything will be fine. The A350 is 3 yrs later, the airlines still love the 787. After they'll quickly start a new 737, get the tanker contract, IDS will be fine, C17s will be sold everywhere but only if the Uncle Sam allows others to buy. A remarkable piece of wishfull thinking. Thnx for sharing.  

[Edited 2009-07-22 01:20:51]

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 12018 times:



Quoting Flood (Reply 7):
We're already pushing a month since the problem was announced and, apparently, a team of Boeing engineers working 80-hour weeks haven't finalized the designs to a modification which Fancher labeled "really quite simple" and "not complicated by any means".

My thoughts exactly........were we not clearly told by Boeing that this was a simple fix, using a handful of parts and which can easily be done in-situ???????? I mean, come on, they still haven't even manufactured the 'fix', or even decided how to apply it!
Hmmm! thank God it wasn't something 'serious' then!!

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
That would absolutely crater any chance of getting deliveries to customers in the next couple of years. I don't see that being well received by the customers.

Hmmm! where's that very different from what is actually happening though?

Quoting TISTPAA727 (Reply 6):
From reading the article it sounds like they still need to figure out where in the supply chain to start incorporating the fix.

If they know the 'problem' where is the difficulty in knowing where in the supply chain to start fixing it?


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11685 times:



Quoting Flood (Reply 7):
We're already pushing a month since the problem was announced and, apparently, a team of Boeing engineers working 80-hour weeks haven't finalized the designs to a modification which Fancher labeled "really quite simple" and "not complicated by any means".

It's Boeing remember?
Every time they had to announce yet another delay, at was 'just a small technical thing holding them back for the time being, but soon they'd been kickstaring production, no worries'.

Well, they're over 2 years late and they're basically still saying the same thing while going around in circles...

Incredibly enough, some people actually do still buy it!

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 16):
If they can do parallel install, and/or parallel test & install, that would massively change the timeline.

They can't even install in serie right now, because, guess what???

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2009513152_boeing22.html

The structural flaw that delayed the first flight of the 787 Dreamliner is more complex than originally described by the company, and the plane's inaugural takeoff is likely at least four to six months away, say two engineers with knowledge of Boeing's problem.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 12):
If the 787 flies in Q3 I will eat my hat live on webcam whilst twittering.

No need to take the ketchup yet....

Quoting LY4XELD (Reply 17):
And just to put things in perspective, here's an article from Forbes

That was funny... really, had a good laugh with it, thanks!
Now read the seattletimes link above for a real world update...

If we're indeed looking at a likely FF early next year at best, that pushes EIS to mid 2011!
And remember we're talking about the first overweight (20Klbs) lemons then!
Before anybody can get its hands on a 787 built to specifications, we're 2012 at best!
QR is definitely not going to like this if true...
Has anybody given Mr. Al-Bakr his valium shot already? Big grin


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11683 times:

According to an article in the Seattle PI t, mentioned in this thread:
Boeing Quarterly Update Wednesday 21 July (by Keesje Jul 21 2009 in Civil Aviation)

the situation is much worse. The 787 may not even fly this year.  Sad



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
25 Post contains links BoeingVista : He needs to take a reality check, the situation is much more likely as described here by 2 unnamed Boeing engineers in an article by Dominic Gates in
26 Post contains links Rheinwaldner : Here is a source that says the first flight is delayed by another year: http://www.aero.de/community/topic.php?id=3977&page=5 (Boeing informed a subco
27 RedChili : According to the link by BoeingVista in reply 25: Another quote from the same article: In addition:
28 NCB : It's pretty simple actually. The fix will require 3 months to develop but there will be installation and more testings required once ZA001 is partiall
29 Slz396 : The Seattletimes article gives a good and detailed insight in what Boeing us currently considering as a "fix"... Engineers are focusing on a solution
30 Burkhard : Reading that article, at least good news is that these had been hot spot in the computer model, and just has been ignored. So, there is no real techni
31 A380900 : " target=_blank>http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/08....html Why does anyone believe the press that was conveniently sleepwalking during the subprime
32 Slz396 : Knowing how the previous delays got out, this source could very well be more credible than Boeing's spokes(wo)man. Will 787 customers again have to b
33 Pblanker : From an IT perspective, this is the oldest trick in the book... As long as you keep telling your customers it's going to be late, you can pretty much
34 Post contains links Flood : Pardon my lack of knowledge on the program, haven't been around these parts long. I was surprised to come across an old article from Forbes dated 4/4/
35 BALHRWWCC : I guess it is Boeings round again to give out compensation. I bet there are a few cash strapped airlines out there who will gladly take it off them!!
36 StickShaker : " target=_blank>http://www.aero.de/community/topic.p...age=5 From reading this article I get the impression that the interim fix to the existing flig
37 Swallow : I am puzzled by this statement from Jon's blog ZA002 will remain on the Everett flight line and the area around the side of body will be covered with
38 Post contains images Keesje : I'm dying for some positive (but realistic) perspectives.. He's not. The article proves it.
39 Kappel : I haven't read anything about cancellations, but I think that the airlines just plainly NEED the 787. There's no way around it. The a330, while a gre
40 Rheinbote : False Has to be different. Airplanes LN1-LN6 plus ZY997/998 already received interim fixes to the center wing box due to a previous structural issue.
41 Avek00 : It depends. All the airlines who ordered the 787 want it, of course, but not all of them NEED it. In fact, changing market conditions might well make
42 Post contains links LY4XELD : And just released....no news on the 787 schedule. http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=759
43 Post contains links SInGAPORE_AIR : Boeing Reports Second-Quarter Financial Results The 787 program has identified a technical solution to the previously announced requirement to reinfor
44 Scouseflyer : Gulp, so they may not even define the schedule by the end of the 3rd quarter
45 BMI727 : I think that you are right on. They will need them - just not now. No point in flying a plane that is so efficient if it's half empty. Quite frankly,
46 Macc : From the press release: The company expects to issue a new 787 schedule during the third quarter... That indeed is a hint for the longer version of de
47 Aviationbuff : " target=_blank>http://www.aero.de/community/topic.p...age=5 The situation looks bad. In the current economic crisis the loss making airlines will be
48 Racko : 3 months is a long time to announce a schedule for a fix that is supposed to be easy.
49 Slz396 : Correction, they all ordered a plane that did what Boeing promissed them the 787 could do. However, it has since become obvious that Boeing greatly o
50 EbbUK : " target=_blank>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html The difference between a good time bambi blogger and a hard nosed journalist ferreting o
51 Slz396 : In short, We now have an idea of how we can solve this structural design error, but we still need to figure out how to incorporate that idea into eac
52 KC135TopBoom : It seems all the anti-Boeing folks know the exact extent of the problem and that this is ther death nail for the B-787? Since the problem was discove
53 EbbUK : More like yanking on their own chain. A lot of us stopped believing them ages ago.
54 Banjo76 : At this point such a statement is simply laughable. I hope airlines are getting different updates. Banjo
55 Post contains links 757GB : Something that was mentiobned in NYC777's blog was that the delay would give a chance to include the SFC improvements planned for the RR Trents on ZA1
56 BMI727 : Maybe they should just let Airbus build the plane. Heck, Airbus is just about the only people left who aren't building some bit of it, and even some
57 Slz396 : It seems Boeing either: doesn't have a clue as to the real extent of the problem at hands. (hence them making contradictory statements like 'quick fi
58 Keesje : Doubt that. Doubt that. I think even friends of Boeing in the press become critical after being ticket of multiple times. "experts" on forums / blogs
59 Flood : So you're betting Boeing flat-out lied at Le Bourget? Any knowledge of the potential extent of the problem isn't coming from any anti-Boeing folks he
60 PITIngres : I guess you have inside info as to who they are? It says nothing of the kind in the linked news piece. In fact, the article implies differently. You'
61 BMI727 : Was info about any such problem leaked around Nov. 08? People are pretty adept at getting information, and I find it hard to believe that such a prob
62 KC135TopBoom : So, either Boeing should place orders with Airbus for compensation A-330s for the delayed B-787 (much like the give away A-330s for the failed A-380
63 Kalvado : Looks like I missed the wing break test in october, and by now the plane is perfectly flyworthy, being able to handle 150% design load. Is it just me
64 MBJ2000 : This just can't be true! All those managers at Boeing that have been openly lying to the public in the past are still there and keep telling tales whe
65 Slz396 : I am assuming engineers who get briefed on the fix by Boeing, are involved in dealing with the fix... Given Boeing's stiff lipped attitude concerning
66 BMI727 : That is only if they are filled, and I don't think that some of the 787 customers can fill 777s.
67 PITIngres : Ah, assuming. When you said it sounded like you were speaking from a factual basis. Silly me. I have zero stake in the timing of first flight, emotio
68 Dynamicsguy : The exact configurations are different, but once the fix is identified for the first lot I can't see it being much different for the second lot, then
69 Post contains links and images Slz396 : Customers seem to think otherwise: exit 777-200ER View Large View MediumPhoto © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages welcome A330-300 View Large View Med
70 Slz396 : If I genuinely assume something to be a fact based on the overwhelming evidence deemed credible to me as explained above, then I may use the wording
71 Post contains links WILCO737 : Please continue to discuss further B787 delay in this thread: 787 Firstflight Delayed At Least One Year (by Rheinwaldner Jul 22 2009 in Civil Aviation
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing 787-9 Entry Into Service Delayed To 2013 posted Sat Jan 10 2009 04:57:55 by WINGS
Boeing 787 Production Frozen. posted Mon Nov 24 2008 08:40:30 by WINGS
Boeing 787 Production Rate May Hit 16 Per Month posted Mon May 29 2006 16:42:16 by Keesje
Boeing 787 Production & Logistics Detailed. posted Sun Sep 11 2005 13:07:35 by Keesje
Boeing's 787 Production Capability? posted Wed Apr 27 2005 22:03:00 by Byrdluvs747
Boeing's Everett Plant Gears Up To Start 787 Assem posted Wed Feb 28 2007 15:09:41 by NYC777
Boeing May Build A Second 787 Production Line posted Wed Jun 17 2009 06:40:47 by NCB
787 Production Ramp-up - Progress Being Made? posted Mon Oct 20 2008 22:58:11 by OyKIE
Etihad To Order Up To 100 Aircrafts In 2 Months posted Sat May 10 2008 05:09:25 by Aviationbuff
How To Hack Into A Boeing 787 posted Tue Feb 19 2008 12:41:01 by WepaMan