Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 First Delivery Delayed By Three Months Due To Trent 1000 Issues  
User currently offlineKFlyer From Sri Lanka, joined Mar 2007, 1226 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 8 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 27340 times:

Boeing just announced that the first delivery has been pushed back to middle of 1Q 2011 due to issues with engine availability
http://www.airlineindustryreview.com...-months-due-to-trent-1000-failure/

Feel free to merge this with other threads if needed

[Edited 2010-08-26 22:04:37]


The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
123 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineManuCH From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 3007 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 2 days ago) and read 27038 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Link to the Boeing press release:

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1391

"Boeing Sets 787 First Delivery Date for Mid-First Quarter 2011"



Never trust a statistic you didn't fake yourself
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9842 posts, RR: 96
Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 2 days ago) and read 26999 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 1):
Link to the Boeing press release:
Quote:
The delivery date revision follows an assessment of the availability of an engine needed for the final phases of flight test this fall.

"An engine........."

Quote:
Boeing said last month that the cumulative impact of a series of issues, including supplier workmanship issues related to the horizontal stabilizer and instrumentation delays, could push first delivery of the 787 a few weeks into 2011. The delay in engine availability has extended that estimate to mid-first quarter 2011.

I guess RR have saved Boeings bacon anyway..  

Rgds


User currently onlineRichard28 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2003, 1597 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 2 days ago) and read 26750 times:

seems strange that delay is over one (singular) engine....

will this be shifting all deliveries back a further three months, or just the initial delivery I wonder?


User currently offlineIrishpower From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 384 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 26403 times:

The problem is with Boeing's supply chain management not with the 787. I've been in supply chain before and I can tell you that it is a huge undertaking especially when you have multiple suppliers in multiple countries across different continents.

It's like playing the "telephone game" when you were a child. One person tells a secret message to another and then they whisper it to someone else and so on and so forth. Once the secret goes around the room and back to the originator the message is completely different.

Boeing could have done a better job at managing their supply chain but in the end delays were inevitable!


User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 25761 times:

Another delay...

Unbelieveable.


Due the engine from RR?

And what is about the engine from GE?

I don´t believe that the engine suppliers are the cause.
Keeping in mind how advanced the engines are, they both did a very good job so far!


But i appreciate this delay as it takes a bit pressure out of the certification program.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25279 times:

Quoting KFlyer (Thread starter):
787 First Delivery Delayed By Three Months

Not correct, unless you are just being cynical, which is easy enough to do.

From the press release:

Quote:

Boeing said last month that the cumulative impact of a series of issues, including supplier workmanship issues related to the horizontal stabilizer and instrumentation delays, could push first delivery of the 787 a few weeks into 2011. The delay in engine availability has extended that estimate to mid-first quarter 2011.

So we went from the well known end-of-2010 to a few weeks into 2011 and now into mid-quarter of 2011. Seems like this is just adding one more month onto Boeing's announced first ship date, not three.

As Astuteman points out, the most interesting thing to see here is how the corporate blame game is being played. Boeing obviously didn't want to call out RR by name but also indeed is probably enjoying the luxury of the delay to give it more time to address the countless things that always need addressing.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9842 posts, RR: 96
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25170 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 6):
As Astuteman points out, the most interesting thing to see here is how the corporate blame game is being played. Boeing obviously didn't want to call out RR by name but also indeed is probably enjoying the luxury of the delay to give it more time to address the countless things that always need addressing.

We get to play this game with RR too   

(just a different bit of it (RR Nuclear) )

Rgds


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6126 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24942 times:

The RR problem is both a curse and a blessing, it seems.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2125 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24811 times:

There was a thread started by IAD787 (Jon) first reporting this last night that has now vanished?  

While in this case the RR uncontained engine failure is indeed a big deal, and can hardly be pinned on Boeing, I think Boeing needs to really wake up to review all the other things that went wrong on the overall 787 program. Yes, building an airliner may be a very complex task, but for this program Boeing grossly misunderestimated [sic] the contingencies. Anyway, once the 787 has been successful in service for 20 years, the painful memory of these troubles may fade. Let's hope they can meet their 1Q 2011 deadline.



The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
User currently offlineSLCGuy From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24749 times:

Hope this isn't history isn't repeating itself. RR nearly took Lockheed out of business and doomed the L-1011 to be second to the DC-10 which was an inferior airplane. Now RR has overpromised on the T1000 for the 787!
If I were running Boeing and building a new long range state of the art high capacity airliner I would want an engine thats' designation started with PW or GE!


User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24744 times:

So is RR the only engine available? Why not carry on with the non-RR engined aircraft?

It's always someone else's fault isn't it?


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24606 times:

Quoting WestWing (Reply 9):
While in this case the RR uncontained engine failure is indeed a big deal
Quoting SLCGuy (Reply 10):
Hope this isn't history isn't repeating itself

Folks, we are talking about a one month schedule adjustment here. Step away from the edge of the building!

Quoting babybus (Reply 11):
So is RR the only engine available? Why not carry on with the non-RR engined aircraft?

Because all the FAA certification data was taken with the RR engine. A lot of work would have to get re-done with the GE engine. And a lot of the early frames are being built for RR customers so having those frames sitting around while GE frames hop the queue would result in chaos.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineSwallow From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 554 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24536 times:

It will be interesting to see how many planes can be delivered after EIS. I wonder about the state of completion of the frames out of the FAL; as I recall up to 20 were supposed to go to San Antonio for completion after certification.

We may end up with a 380 style production run; the plane enters service but ramp up is slower than expected.



The grass is greener where you water it
User currently offlinemovingtin From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24506 times:

Quoting babybus (Reply 11):
So is RR the only engine available? Why not carry on with the non-RR engined aircraft?

It's always someone else's fault isn't it?

The launch customer has chosen RR, that engine just had an un-contained failure, and you insinuate Boeing is looking for a scapegoat!!

Engine choice is the customers not Boeing's!!


User currently offlinemovingtin From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24314 times:

Quoting 328JET (Reply 5):
I don´t believe that the engine suppliers are the cause.
Keeping in mind how advanced the engines are, they both did a very good job so far!

The RR 1000 is in the certification process right now, a test engine just had a major turbine failure on the test stand, on top of that it was un-contained, and you "don't believe that the engine suppliers are the cause"?


User currently offlineSLCGuy From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24244 times:

Ok the new and improved Trent 1000 version B (version A had problems) blows up, no reason to worry, right? Won't affect the 787 program? The first deliveries are all with RR engines with the Genx later. Boeing is announcing the delay to the 787 program today!

[Edited 2010-08-27 05:27:23]

[Edited 2010-08-27 05:29:29]

User currently offlinewolbo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 476 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 24094 times:

There's a surprise. In the thread on the RR engine failure it was already suggested that Boeing might use this opportunity as a convenient cover for their own inability to keep their 2010 delivery schedule. Didn't take them long did it?

[Edited 2010-08-27 05:35:34]

[Edited 2010-08-27 06:06:19]

User currently offlineSLCGuy From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23795 times:

]There's a surprise. I the thread on the RR engine failure it was already suggested that Boeing might use this opportunity as a convenient cover for their own inability to keep their 2010 delivery schedule. Didn't take them long did it?[/quote]

And the problem with the RR engines is Boeing's fault?


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2199 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23794 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 6):
Quoting KFlyer (Thread starter):
787 First Delivery Delayed By Three Months

Not correct, unless you are just being cynical, which is easy enough to do.

No, the last official and binding EIS promise was Q4 2009. See e.g. here: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1206

Now the middle of Q1 2010 is the official EIS date. That gives us a range of 1.5...4.5 months additionally. On average ... 3 months!

No, big deal anyway. Reactions show no longer signs of resignation and disillusionment. The end of the tunnel, the pain and the nightmare is close anyway. The repression of the dreamliners's dark days has started already.

Boeings's reputation no longer takes more damage by missing systematically timelines. From my perspective it started already to recover. And that is fine.


User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10746 posts, RR: 38
Reply 20, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23418 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 19):
Now the middle of Q1 2010 is the official EIS date. That gives us a range of 1.5...4.5 months additionally. On average ... 3 months!

Mr ANA CEO had given March 2011 for the first commercial flight during his last press conference so I don't see much delay in EIS at all.



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2199 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 23386 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 20):
Mr ANA CEO had given March 2011 for the first commercial flight during his last press conference so I don't see much delay in EIS at all.

By picking the right people we may even find that the 787 is ahead of the schedule!! Therefore I strictly spoke about the official EIS predicitons by Boeing...  


User currently offlinebestwestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 6959 posts, RR: 57
Reply 22, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 22792 times:

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 21):
the 787 is ahead of the schedule!!

Thats fantastic news rheinwaldner!



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16993 posts, RR: 48
Reply 23, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 22475 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):
Folks, we are talking about a one month schedule adjustment here. Step away from the edge of the building!

Given Boeing's past statements with this aircraft, I don't believe that for a second. Also related to Boeing's pattern of smoke and mirrors, I don't believe RR is the reason either.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineflybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1798 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 21809 times:

Even with this fresh delay announcement I don't think airline customers will cancel. We will see more Leasing houses reducing their orders since airlines who have not ordered 787's or have late delivery slots may be shopping for A330s as a temporary stopgap.

I'm not sure if a 3 month delay to ANA delivery means that other customers will experience similar delays. I think what might happen is that the number of delivery-ready aircraft in a month will go up substantially as Boeing begins near simultaneous work on all its affected airplanes.

To me, it looks like RR is the only supplier affected by engine delays, if I'm not mistaken, the GEnx is the more popular engine among customers so I'm assuming that other airline customers may not be affected. However, I'm unsure if Boeing will break tradition of delivering to the launch customer first even if it means delaying GEnx airline customers who have delivery-ready aircraft on the flightline.



"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
25 Post contains links Kappel : The GEnx had initially missed the target by about as much as the Trent 1000. Besides, AFAIK the GEnx 787 hasn't flown yet either, as it should have.
26 ACABlaker : Im no engineer but my guess on the delay for a single engine has something to do with the number produced. I do not have specifics but say 10 RR's hav
27 Post contains images Gonzalo : You're absolutely right. Some of us here forget sometimes how sophisticated could be a big engine like this, yes, the physical principles that make i
28 myt332 : I never knew that. This could very well be the reason for the delay though.
29 Post contains images N809FR : I'm happy about the delay, I would rather them take the time to work the issues out now rather than have a potentially catastrophic incident once the
30 Aesma : It's a new aircraft, so there will always be a delay between delivery and EIS. Boeing talks about delivery, while the customer talks about EIS. My ta
31 SEPilot : Airliners are designed to be efficient, not beautiful. We are accustomed to cars that are designed primarily by stylists; airliners canniot afford th
32 Revelation : One patter that seems quite clear is that news of some big issue pops up (horiz stab, RR engine) and the initial word seems to always be it won't cau
33 astuteman : I'd ask the question "how many certified engines have been produced, and how many 787-8's are sitting pretty much built about the factory right now?"
34 ArmchairAnalyst : Given recent experience with the A380, 787, and possibly A350 (and, to a lesser extent, 747-8; gotta try to stay neutral here), maybe a two- or three-
35 Stitch : I'm inclined to think the true reason for the delay is that Boeing won't have the 787 certification done before the end of the year. They're only half
36 tarheelwings : Except that the RR and GE test planes are continuing to fly, as a matter of fact, they've accumulated over 60 hours this week (by rough count). Since
37 kanban : I think you're reading "one engine" differently than the release intended... it is not a single unit they are talking about but a single manufacturer
38 WarpSpeed : I'm surprised to see Boeing shares trading UP roughly 2.60% at Noon US Central Time (and handily outpacing the DJIA). While there is a lot that goes i
39 frmrCapCadet : Alright aneters - Boeing fans face your counterparts Take your Airbus parners arm and DoSaDo (square dance, polka callers command) The dance goes on,
40 rbgso : In the future I suggest Boeing only issue a press release when they expect to meet a deadline, not when they will miss one. Delays are the rule rather
41 Post contains links Part147 : All this talk about missing deadlines reminds me of a nice quote from Douglas Adams I posted here exactly a year ago today!!!... "I love deadlines. I
42 Stitch : If lack of engines is the reason a 787-8 airframe cannot be delivered, then yes, because the airline has a separate contract with the engine supplier
43 Rheinbote : Building up inventory like that is prohibitively expensive. Boeing said at their last conference call that the 787 program had something like $9.7bn
44 baw716 : I just love this constant A v. B stuff. Makes me LOL!!! OK: Did Boeing screw up the supply chain on the 787? Yep. Did Boeing have anything to do with
45 ACABlaker : I have no real idea about the amount of engines/aircraft. To clarify I meant that considering the position the plane is in now, makes sense that a hi
46 MCIGuy : OK, so if understand this correctly, they were going to deliver a few frames with the pack A Trents. Now, presumably since a pack A Trent exploded on
47 WarpSpeed : Expensive but not prohibitively so. Boeing continues to build the inventory (albeit with a production catch-up pause). There is no evidence that they
48 Rheinbote : Agreed, but partners and Tier 2 and 3 suppliers may not be awash in cash.
49 ikramerica : That's what PM said would happen. He said that Boeing would use the RR issue to deflect blame from themselves for issues not related to the engine. N
50 Post contains images MaverickM11 : I don't think Airbus has really been brought up There's a total lack of credibility at Boeing. I don't think any carrier believes a Boeing deadline a
51 KC135TopBoom : You know this how? Have you spoken to NH and some of the other early delivery airlines for the B-787-8? Does Boeing have delivery problems with the B
52 2175301 : I would disagree with that. All of the airlines for the the first year or two of deliveries are certainly following very close the testing and certif
53 WarpSpeed : Perhaps A and B supporters can join forces against the C-Series and the Comac 919? Actually, it would be better for suppliers to keep the production
54 par13del : Let me make sure I word my question's correctly. The 787 is being certified with two engines, RR and GE, so far RR equipped birds have done the bulk
55 MaverickM11 : It's pretty clear that many airlines have had to rework their planned network several times because of the 787 I think the airlines are even more ske
56 Aesma : Isn't it a little early to say that ? We don't know what went wrong yet. I'm wondering how Boeing will get the ETOPS certification from the beginning
57 KC135TopBoom : The basic certification for the B-787 will be issued by the FAA and EASA for the RR equipped version, the GEnx equipped version will be a supplementi
58 frmrCapCadet : Until the RR problem is solved no one is going to fly 787s in service with RR engines. As a matter of logic it is the game stopper on deliveries. We a
59 Rheinbote : That's not how "risk-sharing" works these days. Everybody is paid on delivery of the airplane to the customer. At least that's the theory. In practic
60 AA777223 : While typically a big RR fan, I have to say, this will probably help the A350 fairly significantly, considering much of the same technology is likely
61 MaverickM11 : True, but this goes far beyond reasonable expectations. Boeing has handled delays horribly over and over in this program. We've repeated this cycle o
62 kanban : wasn't the 787 supposed to have a common engine strut that would allow swapping between engine manufacturers?
63 Post contains images Stitch : Is this an aviation forum or a tabloid? I guess every RR-powered 777 has been flying empty since G-YMMM landed short as the Trent 800's engine oil-fu
64 Post contains images EPA001 : I would think so too. If it is not, then my guess is there are other (smaller) issues as well which add to the delay time. IIRC something like that w
65 AirNZ : Sorry if I'm slow on the uptake, but the poster made a specific statement/opinion regarding the 787-8.....so why are you asking if Boeing has deliver
66 BoeingVista : For the sake of accuracy we should note that Rolls Royce has DENIED that the test bed "event" has anything to do with the 787 delays. Also everybody i
67 Stitch : When an engine undergoes not-insignificant modification, does it's certification need to be amended? And if so, does the engine and airframe certifica
68 Post contains links tdscanuck : At this point, how is that unbelievable? What about it? It (and the RR) continue to fly. Boeing says they're a partial cause (along with horizontal s
69 Post contains links flood : I asked in the other thread which was locked. Boeing's release also pointed to "instrumentation delays". Is this related to flight testing instrumenta
70 Post contains links PM : Slightly off topic, but since you ask... Boeing now says a "very high probability" exists that first deliveries of the new jumbo freighter to Cargolu
71 Post contains links and images lightsaber : Very suspicious since: Heck, Boeing can pull a non-test instimented flight test engine off an airframe to ensure timely delivery. So I call a on Boei
72 ktachiya : Is Boeing joking? How many years ago was the B787 supposed to be flying? I have never heard of any aircraft experiencing this much delays. When boeing
73 frmrCapCadet : I specifically said "787". And while there is no proof, if this test engine failure was KNOWN to be trivial it is likely that Boeing or RR would have
74 tdscanuck : No. 2 For commercial aircraft, this is exceptional. For military, it's pretty good. No. That's based on the assupmtion that Toyota's competitors are
75 lightsaber : That is because MD bought Boeing with Boeing's money. {duck] All true and well said. But the difference is Airbus took responsibility for their delay
76 328JET : Lack of engine availability for aircraft number seven? What a poor project management again. It is most likely not the result of the uncontained engin
77 Post contains links and images Swallow : That was the plan according to FI: The first four flight-test aircraft will be powered by the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000. An improved version that Boeing
78 Baroque : Only to a minor extent as the pressure ratio and therefore the temp regimes in the XWB version are going to be quite a bit different to the T1000. In
79 Post contains images astuteman : Everyone? I'd like to think that there are one or two of us who at least try to keep a bit more balance in the posting than that.... Thanks for the d
80 Rheinbote : Amen. Complexity is getting out of hand. I'm tempted to say that increasing complexity of "business models" and the underlying finance is even more c
81 Daysleeper : What astonishes me about this whole saga is that no one at Boeing, or at least no one senior has realised that they are doing far more damage to the c
82 2175301 : I totally agree with Astuteman. The computerization of project schedules to the Nth degree has in my experience slowed projects down considerably. Wh
83 Post contains links Revelation : My take on it was posted here: A350XWB : Production Ramp-up Reduced For '13-'15 (by BoogyJay Aug 26 2010 in Civil Aviation) Bottom line to me is that
84 Stitch : With the implication that because the Trent 1000 has an issue, nobody will want to fly a 787 with those engines. If that is true, then why would anyo
85 Revelation : Good point. My management tends to schedule me as if I'm 100% working on the current task, when in reality, a lot of what I do is fixing up the imper
86 Post contains images Stitch : And yet a year or so ago, he was strongly recommending people buy Boeing because of their massive cash flow.
87 par13del : This is going slightly off topic, but Boeing had numerous supporters when they started their out-sourcing programs to minimize the effects union labo
88 kanban : There is a difference between blaming a supplier for problems and identifying where the porblems impact is. Of the above list, only Alenia and RR are
89 lightsaber : Wow... Boeing made it clear the accelerated engine delivery schedule they were demanding. Compare this to the staid pace of developing the C-series.
90 Slinky09 : It's not just a matter in engineering either, short termism is endemic in all industries: top level management in businesses that limit their sights
91 Post contains links frmrCapCadet : I did not intend any sort of implications like this. Agreed, and really would like my ( and I suspect your) curiosity satisfied on this. I'm sure it
92 2175301 : Actually, costly projects did not use whiteboards and it was quite easy to adjust for dates. What existed (and still exist in some places) was planni
93 Post contains images Gonzalo : Well...some of us try: .... but not all are following the same line Rgds. G.
94 BoeingVista : Which brings us back to Boeings carefully worded statement that refers to "an engine" not a specific type. They cannot certify the 787 until they hav
95 Revelation : Thanks for your very interesting post. I think that's the core problem: newbies think the schedule IS reality, when all it is is a model of some aspec
96 JoeCanuck : The thing is, RR doesn't deny that they have delays in delivering their engines. What they are saying is that the failure of the test engine isn't re
97 Post contains images astuteman : Which of course means thinking about the consequences of what you were doing Which allows the opportunity for changes to take place without the full
98 Rheinbote : True, but I think you have to blame everyobdy else but the newbies for that. Yeah, but a powerpoint slide has room for only so many bullet points, so
99 2175301 : We now have meetings to discuss what we will talk about at a bigger meeting.... and the "Team Lead" (as if it were a real team) gets to go to a manag
100 laphroig : Fantastic post sir! Process has overcome people.
101 pnwtraveler : It is if the Bombardier C is one side of the coin of people's expectations and the 787 is the other side. Some posters are feeling that the C is alrea
102 JoeCanuck : True...but I think what is really pissing people off, (a.netters and customers alike), is the seemingly endless character of the delays. Sure, the 78
103 Post contains images lightsaber : What is pissing me off is another vendor being entirely blamed. Boeing has some internal processes that need to be fixed. I'm not saying the program
104 2175301 : I'm not sure that some of the vendors are not having the same issues... Why was the engines - ones that met the original specs - not ready years ago..
105 PM : There's certainly something odd about all this. Both GE and RR had their engines ready on time. Both, however, initially missed their fuel burn by a
106 Post contains links and images Revelation : As written earlier, the most interesting thing here is to watch the corporate blame game. Yes, a poor choice of words. I tend to think of "program ma
107 JoeCanuck : I don't get it...RR themselves are saying they don't have production engines ready. How is Boeing to blame for the lack of engines?
108 PM : Production engines or flight test engines?
109 Post contains links and images WingedMigrator : Late to the party, but here's an update to my 787 milestones comparison chart. The successive 787 slips are compared to two bracketing examples: the 7
110 Post contains images PM : Agreed! Thank you. (Tiny typo : shouldn't it be First Flight to EIS?)
111 Post contains images WingedMigrator : This discussion of the evolution of process versus common sense (in the form of human communication) reminds me of my favorite infographic. Since I'v
112 nomadd22 : Read Joe Sutter's book on 747 development. There was idiocy beyond belief from Boeing management that should have completely screwed up the project an
113 Post contains links JoeCanuck : Production engines...which were also to be used for ETOPS testing... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-for-airplane-nine-drives-787.html
114 Post contains images Chiad : Thank you so much! I've been looking for something like this!
115 astuteman : Mmmm. I refer to the quote below, which I could have (and wish I had) written verbatim. We'll all have different experiences of course But when I wer
116 Revelation : I agree, I think the central point is being missed. As bad as the "test bed event" may be, at least it's a one-time event that gets fixed and life mo
117 tdscanuck : A340 (lack of the SuperFan), 777 (P&W version), A-400M (not commercial, but same issues), L-1011. They're the same thing in the later stages of t
118 Stitch : I think what we might be seeing is "blowback" from the completely dysfunctional relationship between management and staff at Boeing Commercial Airpla
119 Post contains images ER757 : On the one hand, I understand that they wouldn't want to build a bunch of engines and have them laying around for two years. On the other, it does st
120 kanban : SPEEA really never held a program hostage, yes we struck once and I stood on the railroad tracks to prevent 737 fuselages being delivered by unionise
121 WarpSpeed : I often wonder if the "solutions" to Boeing's many problems reside on its shop floors and in its design rooms with no one empowered to act appropriat
122 JoeCanuck : Unless Boeing has other reasons for this latest delay than the engines, I really don't see how this is an outsourcing problem, per se. Engines are alw
123 kanban : From sitting on the outside , I can see where your questions make sense... however, in the last 45 years there have been major changes in how the com
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...
787 First Flight Delayed To 1Q2009 posted Wed Oct 8 2008 17:09:31 by Observer
787 First Flight Delayed Another 3 Months? posted Mon Feb 4 2008 10:54:46 by Heavierthanair
Airbus Delays A350 By Three Months... posted Tue Apr 20 2010 10:09:16 by AirbusCanada
787 First Flight Delayed At Least One Year? Part 2 posted Thu Jul 30 2009 12:36:40 by Scbriml
787 First Flight Delayed Until October posted Fri Aug 10 2007 06:43:18 by Mymiles2go
787 First Flight Delayed 2 Weeks posted Sun Jun 17 2007 23:16:44 by KLMCedric
787 First Delivery Date? posted Tue Nov 21 2006 20:22:20 by Eastern023
AC Fined By Brazilian Authority Due To Delays posted Sat Jan 28 2006 05:50:47 by MaiYYZ
CX Grounds Four 777-300s Due To Trent Issues posted Wed Dec 8 2004 16:26:33 by N328KF
Ansett Sale Delayed For One Month Due To Andersen posted Tue Jan 29 2002 17:17:24 by Singapore_Air
LH First A380 To Be Delayed By Several Months posted Tue Nov 24 2009 06:09:52 by Ssublyme
787 First Flight Delayed To 1Q2009 posted Wed Oct 8 2008 17:09:31 by Observer
787 First Flight Delayed Another 3 Months? posted Mon Feb 4 2008 10:54:46 by Heavierthanair
787 First Delivery On Monday! posted Sat Sep 24 2011 11:50:53 by WROORD
Airbus Delays A350 By Three Months... posted Tue Apr 20 2010 10:09:16 by AirbusCanada
787 First Flight Delayed At Least One Year? Part 2 posted Thu Jul 30 2009 12:36:40 by Scbriml
787 First Flight Delayed Until October posted Fri Aug 10 2007 06:43:18 by Mymiles2go
787 First Flight Delayed 2 Weeks posted Sun Jun 17 2007 23:16:44 by KLMCedric
787 First Delivery Date? posted Tue Nov 21 2006 20:22:20 by Eastern023
AC Fined By Brazilian Authority Due To Delays posted Sat Jan 28 2006 05:50:47 by MaiYYZ