Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 Firstflight Delayed At Least One Year?  
User currently offlineRheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2457 posts, RR: 6
Posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 62003 times:

A employee from a subcontractor reported exactly above sentence.

A placard in the company revelead this information under the topic "the prospects of our company".

Is this the first public pop up of the final delay length?

The company is Premium Aerotec and they deliver the pressure shield for the 787.


411 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineBanjo76 From Italy, joined Apr 2008, 189 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61825 times:

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Thread starter):
A employee from a subcontractor reported exactly above sentence.

A placard in the company revelead this information under the topic "the prospects of our company".

Is this the first public pop up of the final delay length?

The company is Premium Aerotec and they deliver the pressure shield for the 787.


If the above is true, I think Boeing will not have any chance not to announce it today at the Quarterly update conference.
If true, I think rumors that the 787 programme is endangered start to be somehow worrying as they start to sound not that improbable.


User currently offlineRacko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4887 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61761 times:

It's not really the most reliable source. I'm waiting for Clickhappy to report details.  Wink

User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9823 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61747 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The fix has not even been "discovered" yet. Then it needs to be tested and then installed. Several weeks ago Boeing made it seem like it was so easy, remember the guy who had a handful of small titanium parts and said this was the fix?

And after "the fix" the line needs to incorporate the needed changes, more time involved.

I would say you are looking at six months minimum before the 787 will even think about flying.

User currently offlineAviationbuff From India, joined Mar 2008, 1432 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61628 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 3):
I would say you are looking at six months minimum before the 787 will even think about flying.

Ooops...this shows that the situation is grim and worse than I had thought. I was expecting a delay of not more than 3 months.

User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 30077 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61541 times:

Such a shame the way things are going for the 787. Especially as some airlines are desperate to get these as part of their fleet/product renewal efforts.

User currently offlinePaulcaz From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 93 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61446 times:

What if airlines get feed up and say we dont want this plane anymore we have lost confidence what happens then?

Paul Newman Ascot UK
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4613 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61418 times:

Quoting OA260 (Reply 6):
Especially as some airlines are desperate to get these as part of their fleet/product renewal efforts.

Every airline is extremely happy not to have to provide the cash the next year given their cash flow and the complete failure of the banking industry. I would even state that all airlines are happy with another 2 years delay, as long as the comptetion does not get new birds either... if they can get more compensation from Boeing than profit from their own operation.

[Edited 2009-07-22 05:21:42]

User currently offlineLegoguy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3318 posts, RR: 35
Reply 8, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61342 times:

Serious question... How do I buy Boeing shares? I have faith Boeing will bounce back so it almost makes sense to purchase some shares now whilst they're low.

Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61338 times:

In the light of Boeing's very brief announcement of today,

The 787 program has identified a technical solution to the previously announced requirement to reinforce an area within the side-of-body joint, and is currently evaluating alternative ways to implement that solution. The company expects to complete its assessment of the schedule and financial implications during the third quarter.

the source reporting a delay of around 1 year might be right indeed, given the fact it will take till September before we know when Boeing will start to do what to get this issue fixed.

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10919 posts, RR: 97
Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61314 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 3):
I would say you are looking at six months minimum before the 787 will even think about flying.

The comment in the half-year results about a revised scedule being "released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....


User currently offlineKL911 From Netherlands, joined Jul 2003, 5500 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 61204 times:

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 9):
Serious question... How do I buy Boeing shares? I have faith Boeing will bounce back so it almost makes sense to purchase some shares now whilst they're low.

In Holland at almost any large bank you can open a stocks account and buy/sell realtime on the internet... But I would wait till after Boeing confirms this...  Smile

User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1404 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60965 times:

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Thread starter):
The company is Premium Aerotec and they deliver the pressure shield for the 787.

This is an EADS subsidiary encompassing former operations in Nordenham, Varel and Augsburg. Its definitely not a tier-one supplier to Boeing. Based on its role as a captive subsidiary (internal manufacturing for EADS) until early this year, I'm not even sure that its a sub-tier supplier to Boeing.

User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 15362 posts, RR: 45
Reply 13, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 61005 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here's Boeing's statement:

The company expects to issue a new 787 schedule during the third quarter, at which time earnings guidance will be reevaluated.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
"released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

It might be. But, let's not forget, we're already in Q3, so the new schedule could be released tomorrow. However, I won't be holding my breath!

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineRheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2457 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60936 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
The comment in the half-year results about a revised scedule being "released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

And it is still stonewalling tactics. It must mean that the to be expected delay is much more than three months. Otherwise in september Boeing would publish the following: "we now clarified the schedule and what surprise, we have somehow solved the problem and will make first flight tomorrow!"

If they need three months to determine the ultimate schedule (3 month delay is the schedule for the schedule) the solution seems far away. Replacing only the wings on the static plane seems a minor undertaking then on the scale of potential impacts.

User currently offlineSunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 6151 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60863 times:

In my view it is crucial that Boeing come up with a significant upgrade ( >10%) to the 772 and 773 to allow present operators who have ordered the 787 to be kept on side and to have interim lift to cover off the delay. No doubt A330 sales will keep rolling!!
Does this setback affect the 789 schedule? Perhaps not if the "fix" is known in time to be incorporated in the 789 design without holding the design process up.

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12364 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60770 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 16):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
"released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

It might be. But, let's not forget, we're already in Q3, so the new schedule could be released tomorrow. However, I won't be holding my breath!

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 17):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
The comment in the half-year results about a revised scedule being "released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

And it is still stonewalling tactics. It must mean that the to be expected delay is much more than three months. Otherwise in september Boeing would publish the following: "we now clarified the schedule and what surprise, we have somehow solved the problem and will make first flight tomorrow!"

While all that speculation COULD be correct, I would expect something come out of Boeing sometime in August, they may do the repair on the static test center wing section by then first, then schedule simoltanious repairs on ZA001, ZA002, and ZA003 to get to first flight test, then well into flight testing by the end of this year.

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 17):
If they need three months to determine the ultimate schedule (3 month delay is the schedule for the schedule) the solution seems far away.

In addition to getting the flight testing underway, they still need to talk to all B-787 customers to ferm up a new delivery schedule. That could be what they are talking about.

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 17):
Replacing only the wings on the static plane seems a minor undertaking then on the scale of potential impacts.

Why replace parts worth hundreds of millions of dollars for additional parts that could cost only $100?

User currently offlineAirlineCritic From Finland, joined Mar 2009, 1190 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60645 times:

If I am reading this right, in June they promised the new schedule "in a few weeks" and now they are saying Q3. The schedule schedule has slipped?

Of course, it could come tomorrow as someone noted. But a publicly traded company would not be saying Q3 if they really believe they can do it in July (or August).

User currently onlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 3499 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60622 times:

A littlebit off topic - in most of Boeing's graphic presentations they showed the 787 with widly upward bended wings. It was definitly an eye-catcher as new airplanes never had been shown like this before (imagine a B 707 (or a KC 135  Wink ) with bended wings…).
And now it seems as if exactly this feature is the problem, life can be cynical…

It would be funny now to read all the discussions about the linguistic meaning of "several weeks" in that other thread again.  Smile

User currently offlineTarheelwings From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60481 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
The comment in the half-year results about a revised scedule being "released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

With respect......why is it cause for concern specifically? As a publicly traded company, Boeing has to give performance updates on a regular basis, if an issue that has the potential to affect earnings (such as the one in question) is identified, then Boeing has to address it. Since they don't have a definitive solution and corresponding schedule, they are stating what they know given the information presently available to them. Are you assuming that because they aren't being more specific that the predictions of one year delays or more are true?

IMO, it's too early to go down that road.

User currently offlineSirtoby From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 515 posts, RR: 22
Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60462 times:

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 21):
A littlebit off topic - in most of Boeing's graphic presentations they showed the 787 with widly upward bended wings.

That's because in the graphic presentations the plane is flying with load on/under the wings! Wait until the 787 finally flies - we might not see the bending as much as in the illustrations, but it will definitely will bend. Same story for the A350...

User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2396 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60372 times:

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 20):
If I am reading this right, in June they promised the new schedule "in a few weeks" and now they are saying Q3. The schedule schedule has slipped?

During Paris, they expected to find a fix which would allow first flight within two weeks. A week later, they announced the delay and said a new schedule would be provided within several weeks. Now, four weeks after that, they're basically saying that we may have to wait another two months.

Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60316 times:

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 20):
If I am reading this right, in June they promised the new schedule "in a few weeks" and now they are saying Q3. The schedule schedule has slipped?

Indeed, the schedule's schedule has slipped... but only slightly...  Wink

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 21):
A little bit off topic - in most of Boeing's graphic presentations they showed the 787 with widly upward bended wings. It was definitly an eye-catcher as new airplanes never had been shown like this before (imagine a B 707 with bended wings…).
And now it seems as if exactly this feature is the problem, life can be cynical…

Hey, the wings do actually bent as high as depicted, it's just that they detach at the fuselage then...  Smile

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 21):
It would be funny now to read all the discussions about the linguistic meaning of "several weeks" in that other thread again.

It was me who dared to ask how long 'several weeks' were in Boeing's mantra, given that they were already edging towards a full month without publicly announcing the new schedule, a question for which I got a whole shipload of comments over me (much has been deleted).

Here you go


Interesting reading, now that we know that a coupe of weeks at Seattle, will in fact be more than 3 months elsewhere...

User currently offlineTropical From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2008, 104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 60230 times:

I must say it sounds to me as more of the same from Boeing communications-wise: very vague statements making half-promises about expected progress, contradicting earlier claims made and, sadly for the company, likely to be disproven by Boeing's own future statements in a few weeks from now.

It does not bode well for them, and it seems lessons have still not been learnt regarding communication, openness and PR management.

Admittedly a one-year delay for first flight (if true of course) must be a difficult news to admit to cleanly...

User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4494 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 59908 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
The comment in the half-year results about a revised scedule being "released some time in Q3" is sufficiently vague to give cause for concern.....

Very vague, indeed. I read the news on this announcement before I logged into A.Net. When I first read it, I shook my head in disbelief. It's definitely a(nother) major delay. What they are saying is that they won't know the revised schedule until sometime in Q3, which is another way of saying it won't be until Q3 before they have everything figured out on how to proceed forward.

My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
25 Kappel : Certainly not every airline, there are a couple of them that can't wait to get their hands on the 787, like launch customer ANA. Indeed, wait a month
26 RedFlyer : That's based on the revenue from their Defense side of the house. The article says very little about how badly BCA is doing in light of the 787 probl
27 Burkhard : "The Chicago-based company also said it would announce a revised schedule for its long-delayed 787 jetliner in the third quarter." Yes, Boeing is doin
28 Rheinbote : EADS Augsburg (now Premium Aerotech) is a second tier supplier to Vought for the CFRP rear pressure bulkhead that is located at the rear end of Vough
29 Post contains links Slz396 : That's straight from the Boeing press release, in which they managed to dedicate exactly 3 vague lines to the biggest problem at hands and skillfully
30 Tropical : Hear hear!
31 AirlineCritic : Conventional wisdom says that scheduling something typically takes 3x to 10x less time than doing it. Based on a three month time needed to schedule t
32 Post contains links and images Keesje : If there is / surfaces a real problem scenarios could include 767-300/400ER with GENX engines. Boeing last month suggested it might be possible. http
33 Burkhard : Maybe we here take the 787 too serious, like any new aircraft. It is likely it will fly one day. It is likely it will go into service one day. It wil
34 EA772LR : I've never seen such excitement.... Indeed. This is ridiculous. I sure hope Airbus manages the A350 much better than Boeing managed the 787. I guess
35 Slz396 : That's what many here have been saying for years (i.e. the 787 is just another Boeing product to replace their 767 and will finally put them in a pos
36 Macc : cant get the webcast running at my brwoser, which will start in 2 minutes. would appreciate if someone could give updates here
37 Keesje : I think it's a natural reaction. There's only so much bad news we can / want to handle as enthousiast.
38 OA260 : Indeed and a few others also. I remember them well. Actually had a look at some recently and its amazing who has dissapeared now that we have the cur
39 Theredbaron : Exactly! This situation and this thread looks to like the one we had in 2005 abut the A380 delays... it was bad but in this case there is more riddin
40 Slz396 : It's not excitement, it's sarcasm... Is that sarcasm too, because it definitely sounds like it... Boeing's problem is that together with the merger w
41 Post contains links Mptpa : Here is a link from from MarketWatch which states there could be a 6 months delay before it flies..... MP_TPA
42 BoeingVista : Nothing new on the 787 in the conference call so far.. Challenging Identified fix Working out how to implment "prefered" fix Timeline in Q3 So blah, b
43 BrouAviation : How then do you explain: This sounds like they have a solution, but only have to evaluate how to implement it and what it's going to cost? Or do I mi
44 BoeingVista : The fix was identified in modeling There was some shuffling about the testing processes for the fix "to ensure that the fix does not casue any collat
45 Post contains links KELPkid : http://www.etrade.com/ or, google Electronic brokerage houses if you don't like that idea
46 EPA001 : Oh boy, we have discussed here on A-net so many times that the aggressive flight test schedule was a risk, especially if new problems would arise out
47 Post contains links Fxramper : An employee of an vendor speculating in a member forum isn't proof positive of any year long delay. However, MSNBC reported from the Boeing press conf
48 Stitch : There is talk of Boeing moving one of the test structures up to PAE to use it to test this "technical fix" (whatever that is). Since the structure was
49 Slz396 : As I have undertstood it, Boeing will run a pre-test test io the fix, before it decides on testing the fix... Seems like the quick fix isn't going th
50 EPA001 : But especially on the short(er) stretches the B787 will not be more economical, or at best just a little bit better which is negligible in a direct c
51 BoeingVista : The conference call is full of a lot of sceptical people, some pointed questions are being asked Also Boeing will probably go to the bond market ($2bn
52 Par13del : Boeing need to provide interim lift right now, which means it must be an a/c already in production. The are stuck on the 787, presently developing th
53 AA777223 : Do what the rest of do. Get a broker. I guess you could open a TDAmeritrade or Scottrade account and trade yourself.
54 Racko : Hm, unfortunately only Aviation Week got to ask a question in the conference call as far as aviation press goes. But I wonder if one should read somet
55 DocLightning : So my prediction of 1Q2010 is closer than anyone else's. "buffs fingernails." I'm so proud of my country. We can't even build a friggin' airplane any
56 BoeingVista : Conference call has ended. All very interesting, but not many straight answers. Q There have been reports that the delay may be a year A We are going
57 FrmrCAPCADET : And alternatively if it turns out to be a dud (which I think will not happen), the sooner they know the better
58 DocLightning : I'm beginning to have the rather immature response of HOPING that the A350 flies before the 787 as punishment for Boeing's utter ineptitude. These ar
59 Post contains images Stitch : Yup. They can cancel the program and sell off BCA to the Japanese. They're hungry enough for a commercial airliner program to pay well more than mark
60 RedFlyer : McNerney said the solution to the problem was straightforward. I find that interesting and contradictory because if it was straightforward they shoul
61 WestWing : Cessna owners might disagree with you. (Yeah, yeah, I know what you meant).
62 Shankly : What a sad, sad state of affairs. Surely now big heads must roll The Japs are rolling in cash at the moment. Not sure they will be paying top dollar f
63 NCB : 1 year to first flight is wild speculation at this point. My best guess with the actual information and projections is January/February 2010, though
64 Astuteman : Because it means.... And also.. But.. No not at all. I'm not assuming anything. But I suspect I'm not alone in hoping that "a few weeks" after the Ju
65 Stitch : You forget their government can literally print money. And on the plus side, with both commercial airplane manufacturers being (effectively) owned by
66 MCIGuy : I think this is presuming much.
67 ChrisNH : Can you imagine if the economy were GOOD during this endless bad dream? For every airline that wishes the 787 were in their fleet now, there are ten o
68 Racko : Aviation Week reads the same into it as you, from twitter: "AvWeek Bottom line? Sounds like Boeing and Airbus face the prospect their flagship progra
69 Stitch : I would hope he is referring to the face that he means that with all the front-loaded costs, it will take many, many years of deliveries in order to
70 Tarheelwings : Fair enough and apologies if I misinterpreted your comments. I guess I'm just frustrated at the fact that as an aviation enthusiast, it's bad enough
71 Post contains links C2C : Todays Seattle Times article on topic: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2009513152_boeing22.html
72 MSYtristar : Yawn. Another 787 delay. Wake me up when the plane flies.
73 Par13del : Except with the dems in power and the military industrial complex not in their good books, the actions / bills that they pass now will have long term
74 Gigneil : That's not true. A lot of the airlines are PISSED and a number have ordered other aircraft to cover. NS
75 RJ111 : If only Airbus had had the courage to go for the original A350. Can anyone remember when that was supposed to be in the air?
76 BrouAviation : How would you describe the 747-8?
77 Gigneil : Late. NS
78 PlanesNTrains : As always, you are keen to accept the worst case scenario when it comes to Boeing. Why bother with the smiley? Coming from you it was a joke in poor
79 RedFlyer : Hindsight is always 20/20. The very original concept that was to have new engines slung on the A330's wings was, I believe, to EIS around 2008. The n
80 Sxf24 : Stock price is meaningless. Boeing's market capitalization is greater than Lockheed's.
81 Art : At this point I don't see the need for Boeing to hurry this project along. Demand has collapsed, hasn't it? I get the impression that penalties are no
82 RedFlyer : Although it sounds sensible, the real reason for the planned long development cycle could be as simple as financial and resource considerations that
83 Stitch : I am in complete agreement with RedFlyer. If Airbus could have brought it to market sooner, they would have. Remember they planned the original A350
84 Rheinbote : If the 787 had worked out anywhere close to spec and schedule, the A350 Mk.I would have become just another short-lived program like the A3456.
85 Par13del : They did, somehow their customers thought that their opinion should count also X Files conspiracy on: If Boeing's compensation to airlines does not g
86 Art : My feeling is that Airbus could have set out to do it faster. Given the sweeping sales success of the 787 at the time, I guess there was a lot of pre
87 Iwok : When its all said and done, the total delay will probably be 3-years. No problem: its just money If I were airbus, I resurrect the A350 V1 and get it
88 Stitch : I think it could have held it's own against the 787 better than the A340 did against the 777. Even the 767 was able to maintain a 2:3 sales ratio to
89 Post contains images EPA001 : Imho: the answer is yes. Resources are not the problem. The debate on RLI for the A350-XWB is still going on. Until any decision is reached the devel
90 PlanesNTrains : It isn't so much the current vagueness as the multi-year "vague...vague...SURPRISE!" thing. They've lost credibility, so now that they may truly be r
91 RedFlyer : Without starting yet another discussion on RLI's, I don't believe Airbus needs or needed the RLI to move forward on the A350. If and when they get it
92 EPA001 : We are in full agreement here RedFlyer. Such a "come clean statement" is what the B787-program needs now as well. The question is: does the Boeing ma
93 Flighty : Boeing said today that the 787 engineers have "settled on" a solution to fix the 787 wing. Presuming that's false, why haven't they settled on a solut
94 Post contains links Racko : I found this interesting article (or "rant", as he calls it) about the 787 delays from Bob Bogash, a former director in Boeing's supplier-purchasing o
95 YULWinterSkies : We have a recent precedent: the A380. Who really has cancelled their orders due to the delays ONLY, besides UPS and FedEx for the freighters? Airline
96 Scipio : The one difference is that the A380 is in a field of its own, whereas the B787 has close competitors (the A350, the still-improving A330, and even th
97 Stitch : The 777-300ER has proven to be a pretty capable competitor to the A380. A good number of 747-400s that Airbus expected to be replaced with A380-800s
98 EPA001 : " target=_blank>http://www.rbogash.com/boeing_delay.html Thanks for this very interesting link. It is very revealing to read.
99 Gigneil : That plane was not as far along in its design phase as this current A350 is. The current A350 will get to the sky faster. NS
100 Stitch : So the current IAM can't build a plane and the current SPEEA can't design one. Maybe moving engineering and production to South Carolina isn't such a
101 Rheinbote : From the earnings conference: Howard Rubel - Jefferies "So we’ll continue to see an inventory build for the next 18 to 24 months?" James Bell "We wi
102 Stitch : It probably means they don't have a clue and will just build inventory in the hope that deliveries start sooner than later.
103 Scipio : But there have been no A380 cancelations in favor of the 77W. The way I see it, airlines had a choice of one in the B747 era. Now they can replace th
104 Shankly : Agree on the second point but not on the first. Print money to save an existing Japanese heavy industry - yes. To save Boeing - No. Just real estate
105 Osteogenesis : Airbus will profit from the delay anyway. Taking customer requirements into consideration is always correct. Maybe in the long run the A350 will do t
106 Post contains links Keesje : Lets turn back the clock (almost exactly) 5 years. Colin Stuart, Airbus vice-president of marketing, said composites should be introduced with cautio
107 Flood : He didn't sound too convincing, did he. While I can't imagine the program won't be seeing a profit, ironically the record-breaking racking up of orde
108 Legoguy : Many thanks for the many replies with regards to my question about purchasing Boeing shares
109 BoeingVista : Yes, I counted at least 4 questions specifically on the block numbers that they are calculating the program profit / loss on and eventually the CFO c
110 DocLightning : Was almost two years late, not three years late. Totally different scenario.
111 JayinKitsap : What seems crazy is things have ground to a halt just before a lot of data would be gathered to see if there are other glitches in the systems. I thin
112 Post contains links Mariner : You need to go to a stockbroker, which you can do online. You open an account, deposit money and then buy shares. There are many of them - Ameritrade
113 Post contains links and images Arniepie : Interesting explanation of the problem. Also some interesting info; http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/07/787-dreamliner-delay/
114 Stitch : I made a mint on my initial Boeing investment, and I'm still up some 50% on my current one.
115 APChigoSea : I have not read all the posts so if I am repeating I apologize. With that being said on to my point. I am going to be critically flamed for this howev
116 Scipio : With the A380 at least airlines could enjoy the reassuring view of seeing the bird fly and Airbus had real flight test data to keep its customers on
117 BoeingVista : Or maybe as simple as taking the time to understanding your materials and complete a robust design before you start cutting CF.
118 Blrsea : I believe Boeing did the design for the interfaces between Wing and the body. Since Boeing was the integrating agency, it has to specify the exact in
119 Dynamicsguy : It sounds like the repair is being designed in-house, not by MHI. Even if it was MHI, Boeing could well and truly put pressure on them. Nothing like
120 Flyingwaeldar : If ZA001 could fly wouldn't it better to use if for further test and start gathering flight data that might uncover further problems? If the problems
121 APChigoSea : Thank you for the input. Is it possible to find a more reliable source than the Seattle Times for the quote on the computer model. My understanding i
122 DAL1044 : They will make changes to correct the problems at hand. When such a new aircraft incorporatiing such new technology enters there will be issues to res
123 Aloha717200 : I wonder if this will lead to further cancellations. What a headache. I just hope they manage to get things back on track. Not to stir the pot or anyt
124 Ken777 : I think that Boeing is waitin until they have a solid answer to this problem before commenting in public. Not a bad idea in view of all the other pro
125 Spr773 : Perhaps the 787 program is heading the way of MD-11...good jet but came out at the wrong time and did not sell well except for the freighters...
126 Tdscanuck : The importance of this all hinges on what they mean by "hot spot". The termination of a stringer is always going to be a "hot spot," in the sense of
127 Post contains links Baroque : Cannot help going back to my long running hobby horse, aside from problems in getting one to fly, most of the information seems to suggest building c
128 Stitch : But is is interesting in it's own way that with all the experience and advances in design and modeling and prototyping tools, so many programs are st
129 PM : Mmmm. You may be "uninformed" but I'm inclined to agree that the cost of building each frame may indeed rise by as much as $50. Perhaps even more!
130 FlyMD : Japs........ really. Did I just wake up in the 1940's?!
131 Astuteman : Whilst they have an existing aircraft that they can deliver today with a backlog of some 450 frames, I can't see the point of diverting resources fro
132 ADent : Is this is the same Cessna that has crashed the SkyCatcher not once, but twice. And production of it will be in China?
133 Dynamicsguy : This sort of change would have such a small impact on the modal characteristics (and therefore flutter) that it would be well and truly in the noise,
134 Pellegrine : The Fed and BOE have conducted quantitative easing also, BOJ is not alone in that regard. Too low, $10Bn was circa 2007.
135 Post contains images Rheinwaldner : Both are engineering marvels. But the quality of aircraft design is usually so high that the 787 now breaks a new negative record. What plane has eve
136 PlanesNTrains : I apologize. I was mixing up my thoughts, but meant to refer to the A350 saga, where they kept making changes and stringing customers along increment
137 EPA001 : That is incorrect. On the A380 development the usage of Catia V in France and the older Catia IV in Germany was well known. A system interface would
138 Dynamicsguy : And an implausible scenario. This comes up time and time again, and it just isn't how airliners are certified.
139 Pylon101 : The problem of 787 project was and is and will be the whole CFRM concept. I keep telling this from time to time since 2005 after several conversations
140 Slz396 : This topic is going around in circles, which is no surprise since Boeing and the 787 are too, but since you've singled me out in person, PlanesNTrains
141 Mariner : Oh. Is that how it was? I thought that others kept demanding more of the original A350. I thought the complaint was that it wasn't as good as the 787
142 Keesje : Well that's what I was tod here for yrs. Its just bigger No it doesn't meet FAA/EASA requirements. That 150% isn't a bureaucratic number. A also had
143 Slz396 : The new rounds of delays as well as the costs of fixing the structural design error must cost them another few hundred of sales before they brake eve
144 Rheinwaldner : IMO the A400 is another example of announcing a large delay vs. the appeasment information politics that admits only in small steps. I know that some
145 PlanesNTrains : I'm not necessarily saying that they did so purposely, but rather that that is what the end result was. In other words, whether it was the customer r
146 Dynamicsguy : The requirement is no permanent detrimental damage at 100%, and no structural failure at 150%. We don't know at what point the permanent damage happe
147 Rheinwaldner : Except that in the case of the A380 the gap to cross by fix+analysis was much smaller. With the 787 the mismatch with the expectations started 20..30
148 Art : Good point. The sooner further issues (if any) come to liight, the better. Would be good. The 787 needs some good news. And Boeing have a tendency to
149 EPA001 : As of the B787-program I think it is safe to say that Boeing has lost this quality. See also the document of Mr.Bogash. " target=_blank>http://www.rb
150 Mariner : I didn't take it as a criticism, I just remembered it differently. And it amused me that after all the crap that was thrown at the A350 (non-XWB). ma
151 Dynamicsguy : The difference I was proposing be certified by analysis is between the test on the wing after the fix, versus the ongoing production wing. There shou
152 Burkhard : Just change your username to Rosebud and test if the forum software takes car of this Why? The A330 line is fully busy even in hard times, washing in
153 Art : Thanks for the link to Mr Bogash's site. Having had a quick skim through and having read the 787 section, it is a searing indictment of Boeing manage
154 Rheinbote : That's a myth. There are lots of projects that made use of hybrid Catia 4 and 5 environments, it can be done. The real issue is data management, comm
155 Rheinwaldner : My suggestion would be: design -> test -> failure -> analysis -> build new undamaged parts with fix -> re-test -> certification But I see now what yo
156 Post contains images EPA001 : I am not saying that I believe in single causes and I for sure am not naive. This opinion of mine was based on what I know of the situation. I do not
157 Dynamicsguy : I'm not sure that's the right approach. With what's emerging it seems like the stringer is peeling away at or close to the bond with the wing skin. T
158 Rheinwaldner : The "a new mold could be required" statement sounds like a different solution could be prefered. And it points into another direction than on the pic
159 Dynamicsguy : I must have missed that one. Can you elaborate? I would expect the wing skin to be laid up on a female layup mandrel - that is a mould where the firs
160 Post contains links Rheinwaldner : It's from this link: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/jsp_i...=news/aw062909p1.xml&headLine=null (Caution: the paragraph starts with "Fancher says"...
161 PlanesNTrains : I think the members who might normally state that are walking around with paper bags over their heads these days. I guess that was what I was trying
162 Brendows : I've seen pictures of the wing mandrel, and your assumption regarding the mandrel is correct.
163 SEPilot : " target=_blank>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html From an engineering standpoint, this looks like a classic stress concentration problem,
164 Post contains images RedChili : I'm not sure what's the worst thing. If you're blindsided by something you never expected, it means that there could be more surprises around the cor
165 FrmrCAPCADET : To be fair Boeing has not revealed who messed up, they or the partners. And this is probably wise, they are all in it together and have a long era of
166 SEPilot : Yes, there could. But with modern analytical tools this is not really likely; I am referring to management competence. Any new project is going to in
167 EbbUK : Yes this point has been raised before. I am not sure that they stuck their head in the proverbial sand more like Boeing focussed on hitting the PR mi
168 Baroque : Mmm. Probably Airbus. MSN 026 is just about sorted out which means that it has taken 2 years from EIS to get the definitive fix applied to new produc
169 Tdscanuck : Which part of the problem is related to CFRP? Bad analysis is bad analysis, whether you're talking CFRP or metal. How is a material invented ~15 year
170 Sparkingwave : Better that Boeing finds out about the problems now and fixes them before rather than after the plane is out and delivered. I thought that the purpose
171 Astuteman : I think that largely depends on whether the market actually thinks the plane is worth waiting for. In the A380's case it obviously was, but it's inte
172 Rheinwaldner : But we did not hear about 747 firstflight delays because the design was so screwed that the flight envelope would have been largely compromised. If i
173 Banjo76 : I think the 50% margin is the same as the usual safety coefficient in regular mechanical engineering. The "you-never-know" coefficient. The aircrafat
174 Rheinwaldner : Thanks for explanation, that sounds all clear to me! I just don't get why the testflights are postponed infinitely if that would be the case. Even cl
175 WithaK : I think flight envelope is limited due to the need for Boeing to change the structure of the aircraft. The aircraft as is could very well be fine for
176 EC777 : Do Boeing know when the damage started? I mean, was it at 120% to 130% of limit load or did it happen before they reached that level?
177 Post contains images EPA001 : First of all: Boeing has missed its own deadlines which were no doubt written in the sales contracts to the customers. No way any company "can take i
178 Flyingwaeldar : Does anybody know the actual situation, is ZA001 still doing ground tests? Has any of the other frames moved under their own power?
179 Rheinwaldner : Sounds plausible to me too but the term "restricted envelope" seems to point in another direction. It is only Boeing who said "first flight is postpo
180 Racko : They probably know, but they refuse to say. The 120-130% number came from an Australian blog.
181 WithaK : I never meant a change in weight would make the tests before the modification void. As you mentioned the weight penalty for the fix is quite small. W
182 Par13del : Unfortunately, engineers do not purchase a/c, I am one of those folks who still maintains that if ZA001 can fly safely, they shoud let her take to th
183 Post contains links Rheinwaldner : From this link there could be a hint when Boeing sees EIS realy: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2009520585_boeing23.html Every figur
184 Slz396 : Who says she can??? We know that unexpected structural damage was discovered during static testing around 120% or so, but it may have been present (b
185 Post contains images Revelation : LOL! In the MilAv A400M thread I suggested 787 be called the Ostrich because it's a flightless bird and because management has its head in the sand!
186 Stitch : Boeing says. And yes, I am fully aware you are on record as saying Boeing's statements cannot be trusted and (most) everything they say is a lie, but
187 Post contains images Cerecl : At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I fully agree with both statements above. This brings the sad but inescapable possibility that for one
188 Par13del : Stitch beat me to the response, I am going by what Boeing said when they announced the delay. Until they are proven false, and so far no one has prov
189 Slz396 : At the conference call, I remember somebody making the same quick calculation and asking it that meant Boeing are looking at EIS somewhere in 2011, b
190 Stitch : It's perfectly safe to fly. Folks REALLY need to read the information being presented by the credible and informed sources linked in this thread and
191 Astuteman : Either way, holding that amount of inventory costs a LOT of money...... Rgds
192 Cerecl : With due respect, Boeing also said the fix was a simple one... But they don't need to break this "limited performance envelope". Taking off and landi
193 Slz396 : Oh, I think that in principle see could fly too, but the question is, what usefull things can see do once airborn? If the aim is to just let her take
194 Aerodog : Not sure what Cessna's policy is today, but when I worked there, new designs would be flown once the static test article was loaded to what they term
195 Post contains links Michlis : Looks like Qatar isn't going to wait for Boeing's public announcement: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...oeing-tomorrow-to-discuss-787.html
196 Art : " target=_blank>http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html But Qatar has an unusual problem. The 787's were ordered because Qatar needed increased
197 Astuteman : I wonder when Airbus could give them a few A330 IGW's... Rgds
198 Stitch : It's the only really option as an A330-200 replacement, since the A350-800XWB will be significantly larger. If he swaps his 787s for more 77Ls and 77
199 PITIngres : There may possibly be another factor at work as well: elements within the program may be using this to force the issue within Boeing itself. Many of
200 Post contains links WingedMigrator : Third clue: Bernstein Research estimates the following delivery totals (see ATW Daily News story) 2010 - 3 (was 15) 2011 - 25 (was 35) 2012 - 50 (was
201 Stitch : I'd like to know how Bernstein Research came to those estimates. To my knowledge, Boeing has not stopped all 787 production down to the individual com
202 RedChili : I believe that the reason for not carrying out a first flight is that Boeing has learned that photo ops like the 7/8/7 rollout won't do the program a
203 Rheinbote : I still wonder why Boeing claims to have 40 or so airplanes in progress while production of fuselage barrel sections stopped at Spirit, Alenia, and V
204 N14AZ : Come on, as LH said (analogous) about the A380: "it will be a good plane in 2008 but it will be a good plane in 2010 as well". Typical scene in 2015:
205 Scipio : The reality is that there will be far less B787s and A380s in the sky in 2015 than all of us expected just a few years ago. The combination of delays
206 Kire : The point is that ZA001 is NOT damaged. And if I were Boeing - having FULL understanding of what happened (or not, we all don't know even that) - I'd
207 AirNZ : But to be fair Stitch, it's not really a matter of someone on record stating that such statements can't be trusted for the sake of it.......the evide
208 EPA001 : Unfortunately this is the truth about Boeing and the way they have run this program from the start. I think the workforce deserves a better managemen
209 Stitch : I would think that if Boeing felt that ZA001 would break-apart shortly after rotation from 34L they would never have continued to claim so close to J
210 Brons2 : It is time to fire the current CEO and bring Mulally home. Even a blind squirrel gets a nut every once in a while :D I think we're as all clear as da
211 CaptainX : Given what I know about the 787, the 787 prices, and taking into account the investment and penalty values, it's failrly clear in my model that the br
212 Revelation : Strangely, I miss your particular brand of doom and gloom... It certainly fits the times.... Cheers, CaptainX!
213 DocLightning : The A380 is a spectacular feat of aeronautical engineering, and it had its issues. I think it's ugly, but it is no less a spectacular piece of work.
214 EPA001 : Well said, actually, very well said. Though I admit I am bit more oriented or leaning towards the Airbus side of things, your comment describes exact
215 Stitch : If it is true that Airbus and Boeing can no longer build commercial airliners (at least profitably), Tupolev may be the next global leader in commerc
216 EPA001 : That sounds reasonable. I wonder what the exact number will be after the B787 has finally entered service. Who knows (let us hope so that this will n
217 DocLightning : Oh that would be SO cool. The Russians proved themselves to be very capable engineers during the Cold War. Their big weaknesses were computers and ma
218 Revelation : Hey, that sounds just like Boeing!
219 Pellegrine : What is "the unthinkable"? Another program delay?
220 Stitch : I am going to guess program cancellation.
221 FrmrCAPCADET : Don't think Ford will let him go.
222 Iwok : What do you think is the chance of that? It sounds like doom and gloom, but certainly a possibility. If the delay is another year, I think it might b
223 Part147 : Holy Crap lads... that would be just the icing on the cake for me, I mean c'mon.... Boeing has been building aircraft for years and years and it's al
224 Tdscanuck : At the moment, no (assuming that the FAA isn't sitting on a giant secret). It's certainly possible, and probably lower risk, to do it as you suggest,
225 Pellegrine : K. Just sayin', but I don't think Boeing is prepared to cede the whole 767/A330-size market to the Airbus A332/A358. Even if it means a 5 year delay,
226 Kire : They can't afford cancellation because they need the market share and every market demands at least 2 competitors. In worst case I'd expect to see "ev
227 Tdscanuck : Oh, I agree with you. I was just pointing out that, when CaptainX says "the unthinkable" s/he means program cancellation. I don't personally think th
228 Astuteman : Fortunately you and I both know that this isn't true Given the huge costs associated with cancelling 850 orders, weighed against receiving the huge r
229 Asiaflyer : Very true. The market is just to big to give up. Which means that a 787 program cancellation is not in the cards. If Boeing did cancel the program, w
230 DocLightning : Welcome back, sir! Fair 'nuff!
231 EPA001 : I think it is simple: If Boeing had been right this beauty was already flying with the first customer. If Captain X is right the program is unfortuna
232 Macc : I think cancelling the whole program would effectively kill Boeing Company the way it is now, and not only Boeing, but many of their suppliers, espec
233 AeroVega : But revenue is not the issue here. It is profit, or rather, the lack thereof. If I understand CaptainX correctly, he believes that those 850 orders w
234 Astuteman : I completely and totally understand that. Opportunity cost.. If Boeing (and partners) will, say, spend $15Bn developing the plane, and there is curre
235 Flyglobal : I do not believe that Boeing would consider stopping the program. This may kill the Boeing Company and I do not believe that The Obama administration
236 Baroque : " target=_blank>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html Not a lot of great news there! Yes, welcome back CaptainX, what kept you?!!!! Still a bi
237 Kappel : Well, I have to very much disagree. The a330 is a very sleek looking aircraft, the a345 and a346 are beautiful quads, and IMHO even the a380 has a ce
238 Flyglobal : Due to the financial problems,Boeing may not be able (for financial reasons) to give huge compensation, and probably it wouldn't even be needed to ac
239 Art : It does sound ridiculous to even contemplate cancellation... ...unless this is indeed a possibility. I find it very difficult to believe Boeing has s
240 Phollingsworth : Most of the evidence out there now points to the 787 program, in its entirety, as being a value destroyer for Boeing. The program may still turn a ca
241 Par13del : Unfortunately, engineers are not in charge or making the financial decisions, ultimately, thats the major problem with industries world wide, the tec
242 Aerodog : Think gust response for a kernel of popcorn flying thru the air vs. a rock. Critical condition more apt to be max gust with full payload and minimum
243 Stitch : Boeing wouldn't cancel the program out of spite, folks. However, if the 787's design proves "unworkable" (which is what I believe some people are impl
244 RedChili : Well said. It's truly fortunate for Boeing that their only competitor is Airbus. It's truly fortunate for Airbus that their only competitor is Boeing
245 Tdscanuck : Not that I've heard yet. Historically, we had the the completely false freak-out about the distorted barrel section about 2 years ago when then first
246 Chiad : Good too see you back CaptainX! Cancellation is indeed unthinkable for me! But if it happens and Airbus is successful with the A350, and perhaps with
247 Astuteman : Please don't take the numbers literally. I simply used $10m per frame as a "for example". Although that doesn't sound wildly unplausible to my ears.
248 Sphealey : I am not any type of lawyer, much less a bankruptcy lawyer, but a quick review of the Monsanto/Solutia case will demonstrate the the US federal Bankr
249 EPA001 : No, that is not what I have written. I wrote that Airbus management published the bad A380 news at a big press conference at a major air show. The be
250 PlaneInsomniac : Don't forget that the wing box had to be redesigned because of early structural failure. A pretty significant part, I would say. Also, historically w
251 Castillo : No, think 2.5g (x1.5 SF) maneuver at MTOW. Max fuel, max payload, max maneuver, low altitude, low speed = max wing bending moment.
252 Castillo : Technically they don't need to move the delamination initiation to past 150% limit, they just need to make sure that 1) the delam does not occur belo
253 Aerodog : Not likely you can have max fuel and max payload at the same time so your statement is wrong from the start. I did not say it would produce the max w
254 Tomcat : With this ever increasing delay of the 787, I'd be curious to see the evolution of the lease rates of the 777's and 330's... Even with the recession a
255 Castillo : Agreed, of course. And keep in mind that wing sweep tends to push all this load (whether gust or maneuver) towards the rear spar as you get to the fu
256 Aerodog : As does maneuvering or gusts with the spoilers deployed which forces the center of lift outboard and aft. There are a myriad of flight and landing co
257 DocLightning : The problem is that in the market of flights up to 10 hours, the 772 is a lot of plane when an A333 carries almost as many. So the new longer-range A
258 Gorgos : A380-800? A340-500? A340-600?
259 EPA001 : And these options are also still very much available, and easier to do, for the A333. Remember the original A350-non XWB? With that new wing and the
260 Astuteman : Not sure I understand this. The two are usually more directly related, than inversely related, I would have thought. Rgds
261 Rheinbote : That begs the question what is your scenario that would lead to business case failure? 1. Risk sharing partner(s) bailing out of program being unable
262 Aeropix : Not really, considering Cessna's 172 model is essentially 50 year old design with new seats and avionics. I liked Aerospatiale's adverts for the Carr
263 Macc : Thats the point which I would be extremely interested in. In which way is risk sharing involved already? Who is paying for the inventory which is pil
264 Stitch : #1 clearly won't happen, since Boeing has stepped in to buy suppliers and subs who can no longer perform (Vought / Global Aeronautica). #2 and #3 are
265 Dynamicsguy : A few weeks ago? A few weeks ago someone suggested that a completely anonymous and un-supported rumor from before any structural testing on the stati
266 Cosmofly : It may be that Boeing will terminate the 788. With all that they have learn, they totally redesign the 789 with delayed EIS, but it will be a very go
267 AirbusA370 : Boeing stated a few years ago, that the development of the -9 variant came to a halt, because they would need the flight test data from -8 to refine
268 Cosmofly : If Boeing is to terminate 788, then they can fly the test planes now since there will be no certification requirements.
269 Stitch : Terminating the 787-8 just leaves the sub-250 plane market to Airbus with the A330-200 and A330-300 unless the 787-9 has such amazing trip costs that
270 2175301 : ..... I don't think so. Astuteman has a good grasp on how business cases are laid out and executed. The fate of the 787 program will be decided like
271 AirNZ : You don't think what exactly? The poster actually gave no breakdowns whatsoever so thus how do you know what it is you are obviously disagreeing with
272 Zeke : From a past Boeing annual report, not sure if it still current. Development costs in the Airbus system are charged in the year they are spent, with p
273 Stitch : 2175301 (and Astuteman) have the right general idea. Even if the 787 doesn't make any money, if the revenues from it fund the 737RS and that goes on t
274 Ikramerica : Boeings projections are to sell 2000 787s, so turning a profit after 800 is not the concern. If the plane ever flies, 2000 seems doable, though not wi
275 2175301 : R&D cost are all charged in the year they occur under standard US Acounting Practices (You will not pass an audit if you do otherwise). Program cost:
276 Macc : i would not doubt the profitability of the program over its life time, provided they can get that plane up in the air and fulfilling the targets. I t
277 Tdscanuck : I must have missed that...I remember reports of delamination something like a year ago, which was denied vigorously. Since the issue currently brough
278 Ikramerica : Nor were they talking about the same thing. The delamination rumors at the time were not about what happened this spring. Different part of wing, dif
279 Pellegrine : What kind of company is this! Because this is quite the statement! Maybe these are public companies who don't care about destroying shareholder value
280 Post contains links Asiaflyer : Just to refresh peoples memory. The first delamination rumours occured in Dec 2008. FlightBlogger: 787 Composite Wings Delaminating (by 797charter De
281 Ikramerica : Right, and the failure mode and location was rumored to be in another place, and the tests that caused the separation we are talking about now happen
282 WingedMigrator : Why would Boeing be hiding anything? They aren't bound to reveal every test result or even every test failure. And test do failures happen, or you'd
283 Phollingsworth : Yes, the creditors would make such moves. However, depending on how Boeing setup the subsidiary it could effectively isolate itself from everything b
284 Brendows : Boeing is reported to have spent nearly 100% more than budgeted on the development of the 777, and still they managed to reach break even within abou
285 Keesje : They would have to shave 18 tonnes / 37 k lbs from the 777 fusealge, wings, engines, controls, landing gear basicly everywhere. I believe weight gain
286 Rheinbote : That suggests to me that we will see re-engined 737s and A320s, but no all-new replacement anytime soon.
287 Rheinwaldner : But surely not to a degree that Boeing has to confess: "the flight envelope would be so restricted that flight testing would be of no use". If only a
288 Dynamicsguy : For the same reason as you have a factor of safety for the aircraft in operation you want to maintain a factor of safety for the flight tests. The 1.
289 RayChuang : I think someone mentioned here that Boeing could offer an alternative using a modified 767-300ER: a improved 767-300ER with GENx engines and Aviation
290 AirNZ : Thanks for your answer, and I found it most interesting. Whilst I certainly respect your background and knowledge of financial aspects it is remains
291 ArniePie : I don't believe hanging on an entirely other enginetype will be so straightforward; -How about the extra weight and the need for structural reinforce
292 Post contains links ArniePie : 787 also starts to wheigh heavily on the books it seems http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKBNG50642020090727
293 Post contains links Faro : If you know this for a *fact*, then you can be sure it's point N° 1 on the agenda of the next Boeing Board of Directors meeting. You can also be sur
294 ArniePie : Not disputing that in the longrun the 787 could be a potential cash-cow ,but as stated in the article , FOR NOW it is putting Boeing under severe fin
295 Stitch : I wonder if Boeing is taking a page from Airbus and the A380 - just "front-loading" all the costs of the program now, to get it off the books and behi
296 Starrion : I've been on vacation and come back to this? I was hoping to see a not-so-distant date that we might have first flight. Let me see if I have this stra
297 Faro : Fully agree, I was talking re their next quarterly financial disclose *only*. We all hope that the 787 will ride this out in the end and prove as suc
298 Revelation : How do we know this has anything to do with methods used to model the composites? Seems to me the diagram from Seattle Times posted twice or more abo
299 Post contains images EPA001 : Considering some of the posts placed here on A-net, I am not so sure "we all hope for this". Just as there were many posters a couple of years ago wh
300 Baroque : It would seem more sensible to do this rather than effectively stuff more food into the albatross around the neck. Whatever the cause, the extra cost
301 Post contains links ArniePie : A Boeing engineer on a competing forum seems to believe that the 748 will have first flight before the 787, don't know if linking is permitted but her
302 Tdscanuck : All companies do this. You're confusing the initial business model planning with the "in-the-middle" decision making. Boeing would never have underta
303 Ikramerica : It would make financial sense to do so during the economic downturn, so that when (if) things are rosier in the future for Boeing and the world, Boei
304 Astuteman : I think this is the point that the "programme cancellation" brokers miss out on hidsight is a great place to make decisions from. And I can't see any
305 Aviationbuff : I will be very glad to see 748 in the air. Some of the engineers working on 748 can move to 787 and make the first flight possible at an earliest.
306 Osteogenesis : And the loss of credibility and reputation with all those airlines. This decision could not just lose money it could kill Boeing.
307 Rheinbote : In a risk sharing partnership, you probably cannot unilaterally withdraw from a program without prohibitive penalties unless your reason for withdraw
308 Pellegrine : I understand well. I don't think Boeing would have gone down this route (spending so much R&D for a 'revolutionary' airliner) if they didn't think th
309 Starrion : Actually it's NOT what I want to believe, but I am afraid that it is reality. If any of those points are wrong, then say so. Right now, the best case
310 Theredbaron : The main thing here is than anyway you look at it, this is a very bad situation for Boeing: a) Lack of delivering on time. b) Not telling the custome
311 Tdscanuck : I haven't seen any article say that the spots were a problem on the model. I've seen several indicate they were "hot spots," but you'd expect that at
312 Soon7x7 : Love your logic!...'cept the Global Warming thing....it doesn't exist...j
313 Oldeuropean : Yeah, like the crap, that smoking is a risk for health. Axel
314 RedChili : All the data that I've seen indicates that global warming is going on at an alarming speed and is becoming a serious problem on Venus.
315 Swallow : My $0.02 to Boeing A fastener in time saves nine Too many cooks spoil the broth (keep core design in-house) You cannot till your garden from the livin
316 DocLightning : And those people, as we discussed earlier, are not true airplane enthusiasts. A true airplane enthusiast welcomes any new type to the sky, no matter
317 PlanesNTrains : Please, let the bankrolling of these companies come to an end. If Boeing needs to die, then they need to die. Let someone (Airbus, Lockheed, etc) pic
318 474218 : When did Lockheed die? Am I going to get my retirement check this month? The last time I looked Lockheed (now Lockheed Martin) was very much alive an
319 EPA001 : I think we share the same opinion on this matter.
320 Stitch : Lockheed Commercial Aircraft died because the L-1011 was the only model they made. Even if it had proved very successful, they only offered a product
321 474218 : The L-1011 TriStar was designed and produced by the Lockheed California Company (a division of Lockheed Aircraft Corporation). Lockheed also designed
322 MasseyBrown : On July 23 Boeing reported borrowing $1.95 billion in three tranches (5, 10, and 30 years) at an average interest rate during the first five years of
323 RedChili : That's what I like about A and B: When they take a big step forward and bring some bold new project into the world. (On the other hand, I hate it whe
324 MSNDC9 : That makes no sense what-so-ever. Are you suggesting Airbus cancel the A380 too? I mean, when was the last order for one? How many did they need to s
325 Theredbaron : Its not silly, A and B have very successful planes and they keep the company afloat, the very fact that Douglas and Lockheed are out of the commercial
326 Astuteman : I'd be surprised if anyone questioned the logic that you can't keep executing programmes that don't make money. The strength that A+B have, and the r
327 Tarheelwings : Well said Say what you want about Boeing's mismanagement of the 787 program, as Stitch correctly points out, they at least had the cojones to come ou
328 747megatop : Well, they were pretty much check-mated and it was a question of survival. The only way Boeing could have survived in the Commercial aviation market
329 UALWN : I'm sure you know what "cojones" means in Spanish. What you may not know is that it's a rather offensive word, much stronger than, say, "balls." I fi
330 Stitch : The 747-400's days as a passenger plane might have been through, but it still had a decent life ahead of it as a freighter platform. And as loudly as
331 Planemaker : You really should know better, and I believe that you do. While Boeing was not on the "ropes", everyone... and I mean virtually everyone in industry,
332 Ken777 : If Boeing know that the plane would continue to be unsafe to fly they have some major legal obligations to advise the SEC and the shareholders. Proba
333 Stitch : That is like saying if Airbus had not launched the A350XWB, they would have eventually gone bankrupt. Both statements strike me as bloody ludicrous.
334 Planemaker : No it is not at all. And no one but you have said that... but the industry did say that BCA would have gone the way of MDD if it hadn't launched the
335 Racko : Go back to 2005 and 2006 and read the A vs. B topics. What we see with the 787 is nothing like the beating Airbus took back then. Boeing were conside
336 Soon7x7 : Al Gore claims the problem started with the sun... Personally I think that global warming cycle will have ended and the new ice age will be knocking
337 747megatop : Well, Boeing pretty much had the wind knocked out of them and were a step or two away from being on the ropes, at which point they desperately needed
338 747megatop : Sound more like the "5 commandments" to Boeing
339 EcuadorianMD11 : Well put, and now the A380 is flying and it satisfies both owners and pax............and still people are bashing it for not selling enough units at
340 Stitch : I'd appreciate you not trying to drag me into the sniping, thank you. I'm not interested.
341 Nomadd22 : The A380 was being ripped in 2006 mostly for being a poor business decision. The number of sales since then hasn't done much to contradict that. The n
342 Rheinwaldner : That $'s are good to demonstrate but I would rephrase it: Kepp on and the reduce the amount of lost $$$$ with each delivered plane! - or - Cancel and
343 Osteogenesis : The sales where great because of the promised performance. Now it has to be delivered. When I read this thread you get the impression Airbus and Boei
344 Rheinwaldner : I agree with that. The 787 program performed best in the product strategy and the sales departement. In those areas the 787 is almost unbeatable even
345 Astuteman : I don't actually agree with that, for two reasons. Number one. Based on Airbus's orignal projections of a 250 frame break-even, I'd say it was smack
346 EPA001 : No, she was not. The A380 was practically ripped apart here on A-net for just about everything you can imagine. So much for aviation lovers back then
347 Tropical : That's what I saw as well. For some people 'biggest is best' and IMHO a few deeply resented that the 747 was going to lose the title of biggest passe
348 Phollingsworth : Except that the L-1011 did effectively kill Lockheed. Because of issues with the program and the issues that RR had with the engines the company was
349 Rheinwaldner : IMO the original specs were not unreasonable. The promised efficiency boost (and coupled with that the performance boost) is more or less an icrement
350 Astuteman : The good side of that as far as Airbus is concerned, I guess, is that, sure, while their schedule delivery credibility has taken a hit, the A380 hasn
351 Post contains links ArniePie : I certainly hope the old problems wont complicate the problems needlessly further. Talks between B and the IAM seem to have gone into heavy watters ag
352 TISTPAA727 : Americans have always (for some silly reason) felt that the bigger the car, boat, building, plane, etc. the better and in many ways the U.S. had (not
353 474218 : There is no law that requires OEM support after delivery of an aircraft. Support is negotiated between the operators and the OEM during sales negatio
354 Faro : They will make it; and if that entails deeper financials difficulties, I believe the federal government will spontaneously pitch in with the cash. Un
355 UALWN : Iberia kept buying them, together with Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Virgin, Finnair, Swiss, South African, Thai...
356 Phollingsworth : There is a minimum amount of support that must be provided to maintain the TC. To do this the TC holder has to provide and maintain manuals and ensur
357 Banjo76 : That is 100% the point, the business case makes sense on a projected performance promise by the manufacturer. If I were a well known and reliable car
358 474218 : Could you provide details of this. I was involved with the L-1011 from 1970 until 2002, with the last 20 years in customer/product support and I don'
359 Andhen : Well, I would say that this is quite optimistic.. I was never convinced the 787 was flightready in the end of June 09, not even in the days before th
360 Post contains links CaptainX : Brakes and supplier chatter: http://tiny.cc/XRVDe
361 DocLightning : I quite agree. Although I accuse Airbus of that same pride. They made a big plane. But I think it's a very risky move. I just don't see ground facili
362 Blrsea : " target=_blank>http://tiny.cc/XRVDe From the article link above: So what necessitated the brake change? Crane says it was due to the "aircraft level
363 EPA001 : That, combined with the long delays, would be a good explanation why Boeing probably needs a thousand or even more copies of the B787 to be sold to m
364 Post contains links Tropical : Well, we've got a fresh update on the 787, courtesy of... Qatar: "787 to fly by end of 2009, Qatar to receive 4 frames by end of 2011" http://www.hera
365 EPA001 : Indeed good news. Now lets hope Boeing can deliver on these dates.
366 Post contains links RedChili : It's not a fresh update at all. If you go to the original news link, http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN2928604820090729 you can find th
367 Baroque : " target=_blank>http://www.reuters.com/article/marke...90729 And that contains this gem from Al B: "And if they cannot sort it out at this time then
368 Art : The 787 is going to be extraordinarily late, agreed. It is IIRC overweight. But it may hit its performance targets as promised and deliver or even ov
369 Post contains links JPRM1 : It seems the problem is much more complicated and we have now to really think of more delay than one year and financial impact is growing. http://seat
370 Slz396 : Here's the reason why the 787 isn't airborne yet.... The damage at the end of each of the 17 long stiffening rods, called stringers, on each wing's up
371 Scouseflyer : Isn't that what prevents any Concordes from returning to flight - Airbus has withdrawn manufacturer support for the type?
372 Slz396 : Indeed, it seems the problems have spread around: ....there is corresponding damage on the fuselage side of the wing join too, which adds to the comp
373 Rheinwaldner : I agree. Late EIS is the biggest contributor to my assertion. Performance and efficiency may eventually be as promised or better (after a significant
374 Astuteman : An analysts viewpoint. Be interesting to hear Boeing give us a formal view on this. When they announced the final A380 programme delay, Airbus said t
375 CaptainX : They are going to have to yank the wings now on all frames.
376 Slz396 : Whereas this is not confirmed yet, it does sound plausible indeed that to get to the centre wing box, they wings will have to be removed. So far, Boe
377 WINGS : How many frames are we looking at? 5 - 6 frames ? How long would such a process take? (excluding any fix) Regards, Wings
378 Dynamicsguy : I wonder if these are the same 2 engineers who were quoted last time. The previous article said 4-6 months. Next year is a minimum 6 month delay if r
379 Flyglobal : Again, I get more and more the feeling that an option to make a new set of fusalages and basically throw away Nr 1-6 is on the table. Take what is in
380 Slz396 : Didn't I just read some 10 sets of completed wings/wingboxes were affected? There was an earlier estimate it would take about a month to apply the fi
381 Slz396 : So far, I've failed to see a single reference by Boeing that the 'quick fix' needs to be aplied to the wingbox too. Haven't they always said it was j
382 Rheinwaldner : That is not plausible to me. If local fixing works (I am with you that this is by far not certain, but assumed it works), then the same solution coul
383 Dynamicsguy : What do you think is more likely - that a newspaper which can't get the difference between limit and ultimate loads right didn't know the entire stor
384 Slz396 : The Seattle Times confused the word 'limit' to 'ultimate' in their article, but they got the idea right and nobody got confused by it. A typo does no
385 Swallow : If the delam is extending into the fuse and a new schedule is yet to be released, I don't see how first flight will occur this year. This may be good
386 Post contains links Michlis : Looks like Qatar and Boeing made nice over their weekend meeting: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...escues-qatar-airways-787-deal.html
387 Post contains links Blrsea : New news. Seattle times state that the wing delamination occured just beyond limit load and not near ultimate load. That was the reason why the first
388 Post contains links Dynamicsguy : I find it hard to believe that an aerospace industry reporter doesn't understand the meanings of those terms. And if they don't understand them, then
389 Tdscanuck : It's not more complicated, it's just more time consuming. From the article: "Though a single fix, once designed and tested, will work on both sides o
390 EbbUK : Got to agree with Siz, Boeing's track record on the 7evenL8r7 is shockingly bad. Seattle Times anyday. Thing is Boeing have been caught with their pa
391 Post contains links Dynamicsguy : And for what it's worth, from the earlier article: As a print journalist getting facts wrong does discredit you, and from the quote it wasn't just a
392 474218 : The outer wing-box (that area between the front and rear spar) mates with the center wing-box (that area that carries the wing through the fuselage)
393 Aerodog : With nearly 400 comments, time for a new thread. Check 787 - Recipe for Disaster[Edited 2009-07-30 07:40:16]
394 Stitch : Check out the "A380 at Oshkosh" thread where hundreds of people have been ripping on the two commentators - one a 777 pilot - for their comments on t
395 LY4XELD : Where did anyone or anything state such a thing?
396 Slz396 : In which case Boeing thus knows for some time already not only the wing design needs to be structurally reworked, but also the wingbox will need to b
397 Wolbo : Interesting comment made by a poster to the Seattle Times article. "I recently worked for Boeing as a contractor on the 747-8. Before that I was in th
398 Tomcat : Slz396, you seem a bit confused about what a "wingbox" is. It can be any part of the wing, as long as it forms a box, ie front and rear spars + upper
399 EbbUK : You think it is bad for the journalist, it has got to be worse for the Boeing designers, managers, workers, partners, fans, families, customers, a ne
400 Dougbr2006 : There was an article here some time ago that reported de-lamination of the wing and it was rebuffed indirectly by Boeing through FlightBlogger. Anoth
401 Gatorman96 : Part 2 perhaps? Great thread but getting too long to sort through...
402 SEPilot : Is this inside information or speculation? From what I have seen about the proposed fix it would have to be applied to the wingbox as well as the win
403 Ikramerica : It's been reported on and off that it would be required, based on which Boeing inside source was being quoted (all anonymous, of course). There is li
404 SixtySeven : I said this last November. The airplane will not fly this year.
405 Slz396 : She must have been misinformed then... No wonder, given Boeing's way of communicating recently. That must be one of those times than non-native speek
406 RedChili : I agree with the other posters who commented that this does in no way contradict with what Boeing has said the whole time. It's just that the reporte
407 Post contains links Slz396 : As so often, it all depends how you read the events.. Fact 1- in NO detailed article so far, a location for the fix has cited other than the wings...
408 Castillo : Damage from delamination like the one reported by Boeing can and will occur in composite airframes below 150% limit load, there is nothing in the FAR
409 RedChili : Yes, but my understanding of the article which you linked to is that Flightblogger is indeed talking about a wing/wingbox fix. One of many pieces I c
410 Castillo : Sorry, should read: Damage from delamination like the one reported by Boeing can and will occur in composite airframes below 150% LIMIT load, there is
411 Post contains links Scbriml : This thread is now too long. Please continue discussion in part 2 787 First Flight Delayed At Least One Year? Part 2 (by Scbriml Jul 30 2009 in Civil
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...
Varig Brasil (RG) To Get At Least One More 777 posted Wed Feb 16 2005 19:17:20 by The777Man
FX Still Getting At Least One LX MD-11 posted Sat May 15 2004 11:31:24 by N754PR
FlightBlogger: "One Year On: The Story Of The 787" posted Tue May 6 2008 02:29:32 by 797charter
Boeing 787 - Only One Year Left! posted Sun Mar 25 2007 19:12:51 by AcroAirFun
787-3/8/958? El Al Interested In At Least 11 787s! posted Sat Nov 26 2005 20:38:15 by El Al 001
CO: Moscow Launched Delayed One Year posted Tue Dec 7 2004 01:50:33 by MAH4546
WN Service To RIC Delayed Until At Least 2005 posted Wed Aug 27 2003 16:18:27 by LoneStarMike
Booking A Flight On US (or At Least Trying) posted Tue Apr 14 2009 20:06:20 by Silentbob
Aloha Airlines -- One Year Later... posted Tue Mar 31 2009 13:32:28 by AVION826
At Least A Pair Of Unidentified 77W Belongs To TAM posted Mon Mar 30 2009 21:01:04 by C010T3