Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Boeing 787 Suppliers Be Able To Keep Pace?  
User currently offlineWarpSpeed From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 591 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8035 times:

Flightblogger is reporting that Boeing has suspended 787 deliveries to Everett for 24 manufacturing days to allow suppliers to catch-up.

If true, this report is unsettling. Suppliers have had nearly two and half years of delays to work through production issues.

Larger issue is whether suppliers will be able to ramp up to meet the planned production pace. As the article notes, Boeing had intended to go from 2 to 2.5 frames a month in August. Seems like even 2/month is too much and makes 10/month appear even more daunting.


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...reaking-boeing-halting-787-de.html

[

[Edited 2010-04-27 15:29:00]


DaHjaj jaj QaQ Daghajjaj !!!!
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7737 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting WarpSpeed (Thread starter):
If true, this report is unsettling.

Doesn't seem any doubt it's true:

http://www.king5.com/news/business/B...mliner-assembly-line-92241209.html

Quote:
Boeing says after the break, the assembly line will return to a normal schedule. Boeing also says plane deliveries will remain on track.

It must be concerning for them if suppliers (of whichever smaller components) really cannot keep up at 2 per month.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31000 posts, RR: 86
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7727 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The suppliers effectively shut down for a time because neither they nor Boeing had the storage space for any additional shipsets while production was halted due to the SOB issues. Maybe coming back is taking a bit longer than planned.

User currently offlineflybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1801 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7581 times:

Quoting WarpSpeed (Thread starter):
Suppliers have had nearly two and half years of delays to work through production issues.

Don't suppliers only get paid when the final product is delivered (i.e. the aircraft handed to the customer)? If that is the case, Boeing's suppliers must have been running on fumes for those 2.5 years.



"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31000 posts, RR: 86
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7487 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing has been making pre-payments and bridge payments to their suppliers to keep them solvent. In return, the suppliers receive less money per shipset for a time.

User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 499 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7218 times:

Sigh!... it seems this is not a new problem and has been an ongoing issue for quite some time already...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...echnology/2011716906_boeing28.html

Quote:

"[The Charleston employee traced the problems back to the design changes introduced at airplane No. 20, which affected many parts within the airframe. He said suppliers didn't make the necessary changes in time.

"It's hard to do without parts. That's our biggest Achilles' heel here lately," he said.

The pieces that haven't been showing up in Charleston include both major airframe pieces and smaller fittings.

"We were looking at (fuselage) frames, floor beams, different brackets of all sorts," the Charleston employee said. "Without those parts, you are dead in the water."

"We've been fighting for months to get things up to speed," he said.]"

A worry, but hopefully it won't take long to resolve.



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlinebrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6877 times:

Quoting Part147 (Reply 5):
A worry, but hopefully it won't take long to resolve.

The part that is puzzling me the most is the following:

Quote:
The Charleston employee also said the installation of ducting and wiring in the 787 fuselage — work originally planned to be done in Charleston — has been permanently transferred to Everett.

It doesn't say if this is done only for Charleston or for all manufacturing sites, but it is a major change anyway if it's transferred permanently.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7221 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6796 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
The suppliers effectively shut down for a time because neither they nor Boeing had the storage space for any additional shipsets while production was halted due to the SOB issues

The Seattle news web sites over the weekend had an article where Boeing is rapidly running out of storage space for completed a/c, they are due to have close to 20 on premises and are looking at obtaining additional space.
This is not mentioned in the article which I read last night, but a slow down in delivery will also help, as they may be incurring additional cost for a/c storage.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 79
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6690 times:

Quoting WarpSpeed (Thread starter):
If true, this report is unsettling.

I agree it's not good, but if they just charged ahead delivering partially completed sections I'd argue that's worse. Obviously, nobody wants suppliers to be behind. But, given that it sounds like they *are* behind, it's good to see the discipline to slow down and fix things properly and in the right place, rather than blindly moving ahead. I'm curious if ZA001 would have flown earlier if Boeing hadn't tried to hit the 7/8/07 rollout and kept the sections at the suppliers until they were done.

Quoting WarpSpeed (Thread starter):
Suppliers have had nearly two and half years of delays to work through production issues.

The blockpoint airplane around line 20 is way newer than that.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 1):
It must be concerning for them if suppliers (of whichever smaller components) really cannot keep up at 2 per month.

I doesn't seem like they can't keep up, it sounds like they can't catch up...they appear to be getting a buffer to catch up to the current requirements.

Tom.


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6325 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 8):
The blockpoint airplane around line 20 is way newer than that.

Yeah, I wondered if the more optimized design wasn't part of it. The subs were offered much autonomy early in the program and flubbed that nicely so I'm guessing the optimised parts are strictly Boeing spec?
Anyway, doesn't seem like the subs are dealing with changes well, but I guess the revisions will become more minor as time goes on.



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5470 posts, RR: 30
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6090 times:

It sounds like an issue with the optimizing changes to aircraft 20 onwards and not something inherently wrong with the system.

This shouldn't be too surprising, really. It was unlikely that every last problem had been solved. As long as they keep fixing them, they shouldn't get further behind.

From the Seattle Times article...;

Quote:
This time, Leach said, the parts shortages were in part triggered by design changes introduced at airplane number 20 to save weight.

While the sections for the first 22 airplanes are already in Everett, Leach said, the sections for the next Dreamliners, numbers 23 and 24, will not be delivered "for approximately 24 manufacturing days" (a week is five manufacturing days) as Boeing works "to get the production system stabilized."



What the...?
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5485 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Part147 (Reply 5):

"[The Charleston employee traced the problems back to the design changes introduced at airplane No. 20, which affected many parts within the airframe. He said suppliers didn't make the necessary changes in time.

Thank you for reminding us of that. With a last minute change placed up suppliers who were idle for so long... they're probably scrambling to staff back up.  

At least weight is being pulled from the airframe.

What is the weight of frame 21?

Questions for the 787 fans:
What is the projected weight for frame 50? 100? (or whatever airframes are the first to see significant further weight savings). Also, which frame is scheduled to be the first with the new low-turbine Trent 1000?

Quoting par13del (Reply 7):
The Seattle news web sites over the weekend had an article where Boeing is rapidly running out of storage space for completed a/c

That shouldn't be an issue. One short hop and Boeing has plenty of room.

I'm surprised how few parking spots Everett has today. Was the Air National guard base there during early 741 production? I recall quite a number of 741's being parked (waiting on Pratt's, IIRC 30) and unless they parked them where the "Future of flight" museum is now, I'm not sure where they all went!

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...617&spn=0.019127,0.038581&t=h&z=15

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5448 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
The suppliers effectively shut down for a time because neither they nor Boeing had the storage space for any additional shipsets while production was halted due to the SOB issues.

Suppliers effectively shut down much earlier, e.g. Spirit in early 2008, others later that year. Spirit had just restarted barrel winding/baking in the second half of 2009.

If you look at the final assembly line image on Randy's blog you'll note that the ariplane on the left sports a pre-painted nose and center-fuselage, while later planes have unpainted center fuselages. That's evidence of a step back in completion at ex-Global Aeronautica. AFAIK ex-Vought never managed to deliver any pre-painted tail section. Someone over on Flighblogger suggested that Vought may have failed to deliver a tail section for LN22 in time.

Why is it that Spirit seems to have no problems at all? Mitsubishi's wings seem to arrive just in time as well.

I find it hard to believe that production is back at the point where assembly is hampered by a lack of frames and brackets, and back to the point where outstanding work is deferred to the final assembly line. Why not halt the production right in place when parts are missing, why send anything incomplete to the FAL at all?

Whatever, I never understand why Boeing is so keen to ramp up production before the redesign is complete and the configuration is mature and stable. There was so much to learn from the A380 mess. Okay, they want to accumulate revenues as fast as possible and try to limit delay penalties. But the financial risk of these production hiccups, not to mention another meltdown, is potentially huge.


User currently offlineStudeDave From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5295 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 11):
I'm surprised how few parking spots Everett has today. Was the Air National guard base there during early 741 production? I recall quite a number of 741's being parked (waiting on Pratt's, IIRC 30) and unless they parked them where the "Future of flight" museum is now, I'm not sure where they all went!

The Air Guard was where the Flying Heritage Collection is now.

Looking at Boeing's flight line-- there used to be only two paint hangers.
Also-- those last six spots to the South were added in the '90s... (or so)
The Future of Flight complex was just grass and trees before those buildings were built.



Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3558 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Note the JAL tail..behind the Royal air Maroc... there were questions about a retro crane coming back however the rudder looks like the current scheme

Quoting brendows (Reply 6):
Quote:
The Charleston employee also said the installation of ducting and wiring in the 787 fuselage — work originally planned to be done in Charleston — has been permanently transferred to Everett.

It doesn't say if this is done only for Charleston or for all manufacturing sites, but it is a major change anyway if it's transferred permanently.

Well, possibly transfered for these a/c that will be finished in Everett, however when the Charleston plant is running they may will probably be transfered back so there is a common process

Quoting par13del (Reply 7):
The Seattle news web sites over the weekend had an article where Boeing is rapidly running out of storage space for completed a/c, they are due to have close to 20 on premises and are looking at obtaining additional space.
This is not mentioned in the article which I read last night, but a slow down in delivery will also help, as they may be incurring additional cost for a/c storage.

Right... with 747-8s rolling out and 787's they will soon be putting planes in the employee parking lots at least until Jan or Feb 2011


User currently offlinebrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5188 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 11):
That shouldn't be an issue. One short hop and Boeing has plenty of room.

I'm surprised how few parking spots Everett has today. Was the Air National guard base there during early 741 production? I recall quite a number of 741's being parked (waiting on Pratt's, IIRC 30) and unless they parked them where the "Future of flight" museum is now, I'm not sure where they all went!

You can see a picture of the flight line in January 1970 here, I counted 25 747s on this picture. Since then, another 11 spots have been added on the flight line, not counting the spots over at the Future of Flight complex.
I doubt that Boeing will have much problems finding space for the remaining 787.

[Edited 2010-04-28 19:22:48]

User currently offlinemattcawby From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 208 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5108 times:

Quoting brendows (Reply 15):
Since then, another 11 spots have been added on the flight line, not counting the spots over at the Future of Flight complex.

"The Future of Flight complex" is actually the K-1 taxiway, Boeing has leased this area for 787 storage. The airport is planning on parking 787s on the south ramp, the outer ramp, and Rwy 11/29 if necessary.



Skyline Photography
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3649 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5019 times:

The blogger claims they were to ramp up to 2.5 frames a week in August.

The reporter says they will ramp up to 10 frames a month by 2013.

Who has it right?


User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4976 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 17):
The blogger claims they were to ramp up to 2.5 frames a week in August.

The reporter says they will ramp up to 10 frames a month by 2013.

Who has it right?

They are both right.


User currently offlineha763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3660 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kanban (Reply 14):
Note the JAL tail..behind the Royal air Maroc... there were questions about a retro crane coming back however the rudder looks like the current scheme

We already know what the livery on the first JAL 787 will look like.

Pic: 1st JAL 787 To Wear Special Colors (by iad787 Apr 12 2010 in Civil Aviation)


User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3649 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4859 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 18):
They are both right.

Could you be any more obtuse?


User currently offlinePart147 From Ireland, joined Dec 2008, 499 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4787 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 20):
Could you be any more obtuse?

He answered your question, what's obtuse about that?

You originally asked...

Quoting mham001 (Reply 17):
The blogger claims they were to ramp up to 2.5 frames a week in August.

The reporter says they will ramp up to 10 frames a month by 2013.

Who has it right?

2.5 frames per week = 10 frames per month!!!!!

Unless of course your worried about the extra 0.3 week added onto each month (52 weeks in a year instead of the calculated 12x4=48 weeks)
Plus each quote you mention contains the phrase 'up to' - so that means it could easily be below the 2.5p/w-10p/m values

But then I'd be pedantic for mentioning that wouldn't I?  



It's better to ask a stupid question during training, rather than make a REALLY stupid mistake later on!
User currently offlinedynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 873 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 4696 times:

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 12):
I never understand why Boeing is so keen to ramp up production before the redesign

Which particular redesign? The changes in design for the line 20 blockpoint have already been made. There'll be more blockpopints to come with more design changes, but too far off to make it worthwhile to stop production to wait for them. If they were to wait longer before they start ramping up then that delays even further the time at which they will reach the full rate.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 17):
The blogger claims they were to ramp up to 2.5 frames a week in August.

It says 2.5/month on Flightblogger, not 2.5/week. Unless you're referring to a different blogger.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4578 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mham001 (Reply 17):
The blogger claims they were to ramp up to 2.5 frames a week in August.

No, they said:

Quote:
Production was supposed to accelerate from two to two and a half aircraft per month beginning in August.

2 1/2 per month by August 2010, rising to 10 per month by 2013.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31000 posts, RR: 86
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4470 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

By the end of 2013, PAE is expected to be able to complete seven frames per month (any mix of 787-8s and 787-9s) and CHS is expected to be able to complete three 787-8 frames per month which is where the 10 come from.

While CHS is getting up to speed in 2013, PAE is expected to be able to achieve, for a time, production rates higher than seven per month, though likely not across an entire production year.


25 tdscanuck : Partly because when the 787 design and production system was being developed, Spirit was Boeing Witchita. They went through most of the stand-up of t
26 MCIGuy : Five weeks seems pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. I'm guessing the changes are relatively substantial on the Block 20 787.
27 Rheinbote : For example, I assume that there is/will be a redesign of the wing root join to address the stringer delam/fastener issue.Line 20 blockpoint changes
28 Stitch : From LN016, the SoB issue has been addressed at the component level - either at Global Aeronautica prior to mating or at Fuji prior to shipping. The
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 Aims To Keep Airbus @ Bay No 787 Delays! posted Fri Oct 20 2006 04:26:05 by Coelacanth
Carson: Boeing To Keep Cool In Hot Market posted Thu Sep 28 2006 16:31:04 by Leelaw
Mulally: Boeing To Keep Improving 777 posted Thu Jul 20 2006 10:06:59 by Leelaw
Is Boeing Planning To Keep The 787s Cockpit Window posted Sun Mar 12 2006 05:17:16 by AirCanada014
Pressure Mounting On Boeing To Keep 717 posted Fri Dec 7 2001 16:50:55 by Lindy field
AeroMexico To Keep MEX-MSY posted Sun Feb 7 2010 06:55:53 by MSYtristar
KLM663 Boeing 737 Amsterdam To Houston posted Sun Jan 31 2010 20:50:20 by TrnsWrld
Boeing 767 NG To Fill 787-3/767 Gap <5000NM posted Tue Jan 12 2010 02:23:37 by Keesje
BAA To Keep EDI, GLA And STN? posted Mon Dec 21 2009 04:51:36 by VV701
Boeing 787 Good To Go For First Flight. posted Thu Dec 10 2009 17:15:16 by NYC777