Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Reviewing 787 Delivery Schedule  
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1079 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 33400 times:

FI and Flight blogger reports that a mountain of "rework" remains that could possibly delay EIS to 2012.

Quote:
The report states that issues such as "a flight deck window popping sound discovered during flight test, addressing cabin condensation issues, reworking passenger doors, resolving workmanship issues on the aircraft's horizontal stabiliser and incorporating changes to the Trent 1000 engine, are among the issues that add up to slide the deliveries to the 787's earliest customers well into 2011 or potentially even 2012."

FI: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...amining-787-delivery-schedule.html

Flightblogger: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...xclusive-boeing-reviewing-787.html

161 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10742 posts, RR: 38
Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 33420 times:

Quoting Chiad (Thread starter):
FI and Flight blogger reports that a mountain of "rework" remains that could possibly delay EIS to 2012.

I would rather see a EIS in 2012 with Boeing delivering a perfect aircraft that will go a long way with many many sales and big success. I am convinced that the B-787 is a fantastic aircraft. Airbus will have to go a long way with the A350 to match the B-787.

I will do everything possible to be on board the opening commercial flight in Japan.

        



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3349 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 33302 times:

Quoting Chiad (Thread starter):
addressing cabin condensation issues

That's unfortunate, given that one of the 787 sales points is/was? that the cabin would have a higher humidity level than non-carbon fibre fuselages. Surely cabin condensation issues would have been discovered a long time ago eg on static test frame.


User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1079 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 33268 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 1):
I would rather see a EIS in 2012 with Boeing delivering a perfect aircraft that will go a long way with many many sales and big success

That's fine enough.
But I suspect that if you were ANA and expected to have this aircraft making revenue for you in 2008, you might be a little less than happy.
But that' just me.
A delay to 2012 might not happen though. But so far every hint of a delay has proved to come true.

That being said .. I cant wait to fly on this aircraft either. And in 2020 the B787 will probably provide the most common widebody service on the planet.


User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 33181 times:

Quoting Chiad (Thread starter):
slide the deliveries to the 787's earliest customers well into 2011 or potentially even 2012

Some further delay in EIS beyond February 2011 now seems inevitable but 2012?! How bad would it have to be that it would take another fourteen months to get this thing in service?


User currently offlineBlueFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 33179 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Forgive me if this is a stupid question as I am not intimately familiar with all the processes involved in building the Dreamliner, but if the delays necessary for rework are as bad as the most pessimistic projections reported, could it come to a point that a plane that has yet to enter the FAL might be the first to actually be delivered as it would require no rework. or will Boeing slow/stop assembly to re-assign more engineers to rework operations?


I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineslz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 33172 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 3):
in 2020 the B787 will probably provide the most common widebody service on the planet.

I'd be very surprised if it would.

After all, Airbus is pumping out A330s at incredible rates and it's not like there aren't any flying yet, is it?
By 2020, they'll probably have delivered well over 1,000 A330s...

In contrast, the 787 production is going to ramp up much slower than once planned and the EIS keeps shifting and shifting and shifting to the right, so there's really no way they can match the A330 in numbers by 2020....

Its going to be a very long time before the 787 is going to be the most common widebody plane out there, that's for sure!

[Edited 2010-11-02 02:40:33]

User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 33166 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 1):
I would rather see a EIS in 2012 with Boeing delivering a perfect aircraft that will go a long way with many many sales and big success. I am convinced that the B-787 is a fantastic aircraft. Airbus will have to go a long way with the A350 to match the B-787.

It may very well be a fantastic aircraft but the amount of rework backlog that Boeing is building for itself, as it continues production ahead of resolving all the issues could be very significant. The items themselves do not appear to be major items on their own but it is the compounding of multiple problems that seems to be the concern. Any further delays to delivery is probably going to get a lot of airlines very upset. The industry is starting to see improvements in demand, so while a delay two years ago may not have been too bad for some airlines to handle, delays going forward could start to hurt the bottom line of airlines as they don't have the capacity and efficiency available as they expected. The financial impacts to Boeing could be very severe.

For sure, once the aircraft does enter service it better be meeting or beating performance expectations (and there is no indication it won't) and be that fantastic aircraft otherwise Boeing's reputation would take an even bigger hit.


User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1079 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 33024 times:

Quoting slz396 (Reply 6):
After all, Airbus is pumping out A330s at incredible rates and it's not like there aren't any flying yet, is it?
By 2020, they'll probably have delivered well over 1,000 A330s...

Oh yes. I forgot about the A330. I dont know how I could. God forbid.
And if a 2012 EIS delays materialises it will only fuel the A330 success even more.


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3349 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 32893 times:

From the Flightblogger link:

The aircraft's highly integrated systems, says one industry source, means "you can't touch one thing in isolation."

Post-certification rework is meant to pool everything Boeing learned about the 787 during flight test and feed the required changes back into aircraft's structure and systems before they are deemed ready for delivery. Part of the review includes determining how much post-certification rework can and cannot be done concurrently with other modifications.


I guess Boeing's approach is to identify all the issues and the most efficient way to fix them rather than fixing indvidual issues one by one. Makes sense, doesn't it?

[Edited 2010-11-02 03:17:21]

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5321 posts, RR: 30
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting slz396 (Reply 6):
After all, Airbus is pumping out A330s at incredible rates and it's not like there aren't any flying yet, is it?
By 2020, they'll probably have delivered well over 1,000 A330s...

...and Boeing is cranking out record numbers of the 777 with over 1000 orders and there are over 1000 orders for the 767...They'll both be at 1000 well before 2020...so what...?

The 787 is getting more late all the time...which sucks for customers who are waiting for their airliners, and have every right to be pissed and to get compensation, but let's not pretend this is just a Boeing problem...it's an industry problem.

With very little effort, I could come up with more examples of late airplanes...the fact that this seems to be the norm instead of the exception for recent aircraft should be protested much more loudly by customers.



What the...?
User currently offlinesofianec From Germany, joined Aug 2007, 235 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32646 times:

It is unbelievable how some people still defend the 787 fiasco. I remember when A380 was delayed it was killed on A.Net as a total fiasco. If/when Boeing announces 787 delay up to 2020 EIS is an even growing possibility.

Boeing is playing a dangerous game with it's customers. A bite of info every 3 months hence the deferrals and cancellations and calls for 100's of millions of compensation.

...



A350WARP
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1834 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32564 times:

People, let's not get ahead of ourselves here, shall we? While most of us cannot wait for the 787 to enter service with airlines, the delay itself is not yet confirmed, although the report from Jon follows the same delay scheme 787 is known to follow - i.e. nothing official from Boeing, then scuttlebutt from "industry sources", then the "schedule review" and finally the official schedule updates.

Just look at it this way: it is better to have safe, reliable product enter service later than originally scheduled, 100% compliant with safety regulations than to rush entry to service and have the famous Fuji Mountain tragedy repeat itself because of the poor workmanship not attended to.

[Edited 2010-11-02 04:01:58]


All Hail Mighty Triple Seven, The MURDERER of the so-called "Queen"!!!!
User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1091 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32440 times:

Quoting sofianec (Reply 11):
It is unbelievable how some people still defend the 787 fiasco.

Not that many people defend it.

If they have problem of humidity in the plane, it is likely that Airbus will encounter the exact same difficulty.

At some point you wonder: what was so wrong with a gradual approach to including composites in airframes? I'd be surprised if Airbus had no problems implementing their version of full composite fuselage.


User currently offlineshankly From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 1529 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 32425 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 12):
Fuji Mountain tragedy repeat itself because of the poor workmanship not attended to.

Do you mean the 707 that was ripped apart by a mountain wave? Would have happened to any other comparable airliner at the time (except perhaps the VC-10, one of which survived a similar incident over the Andes)

Perhaps you mean the JAL 744 that hit the ridge after the failure of the repaired rear pressure bulkhead?

Neither relevant to the beleaguered 787

Only one short term upside of Boeing taking their time to get this plane right and thats for the people that work on the A330 line



L1011 - P F M
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 15, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32349 times:

Quoting shankly (Reply 14):
Perhaps you mean the JAL 744 that hit the ridge after the failure of the repaired rear pressure bulkhead?

Certainly not a 744. The plane that "hit the ridge" was a 747SR and the accident happened in 1985 - long before the 744 even flew.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6739 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32287 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 12):
Just look at it this way: it is better to have safe, reliable product enter service later than originally scheduled

Really, you still believe that this is about the a/c?
This is about business, a/c can enter service with problems noted at design, the authorities allow such as long as a plan is in place to correct / repair the issues and users are notified of the specifics.
Disregard the AF crash, a certain brand pitot tubes was known to be an issue, fuel pump/exchanger (experts chime in on the correct terminology) on the RR engines on 777's after the BA incident was known to be an issue, 737 rudder issue, A320 nose wheel's (at least in the USA), I am sure other's can add more, how many of these a/c were ordered grounded immediately until repaired?
OEM's outline the specifics to the regulators and if approved the a/c can enter service, if pax knew the minute details of MEL's etc. on daily a/c use we would think air travel is not safe in spite of the realities faced each day, it may be more accurate to say we think of them as chances.

Relate the 787 to the Lockheed L1011 and ask whether Lockheed was glad that they waited until they had their perfect engine to place the a/c in service, that above all is the closest comparison for the 787. The longer the EIS shifts to the right, the more customers will go to Airbus, not because the 777 is not a good a/c, but because the other a/c Boeing has in this size / range (767) is being produced at a snails pace, Boeing has not attempted to ramp up production to cater for the 787 delays, a situation which will affect the company for decades to come. A lot of folks purchasing the 787 could have purchased the 767 or A330, they elected the 787 due to its better economics, so if it is late, the 767 could hold them until, since Boeing has not pushed that option, the A330 is taking off and once customers switch OEM's even for temporary lift, do you expect them to dump A330's for 787's or stay with the OEM and go to the A350?


User currently offlinemax550 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32148 times:

If I remember correctly the 7E7 was launched in April of '04 with deliveries set to begin in 2008. I love Boeing (and Airbus) and I hope they have an excellent product once it gets delivered, but for it to be delayed nearly as long as the entire launch-delivery process should have taken means they have some serious issues. Not much they can do now but get a good product out there and try to salvage their credibility.

User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2199 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32070 times:

More potential 787 delays? I thought we could call them settled!

Up to 9 additional months more would make the EIS delay 3.5 years.
The overall program duration from launch to EIS would increase 70% compared to the initial plans.
Such a delay applied to the A350 schedule would mean an EIS of 2017.

This is a very poor performance of the vendor   


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1462 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 32024 times:

Well, I'm quite sure Boeing will do everything to implement all necessary rework after flight testing and hand over ANA's first 787 in Q1 2011. Just to avoid another PR disaster. Airbus did the same to deliver their first A380 to SQ in 2007. How many 787's will follow and how frequent the deliveries will be, is a very different matter. I think we shouldn't expect all frames currently stored to be delivered in 2011.

Quoting art (Reply 9):

From the Flightblogger link:

The aircraft's highly integrated systems, says one industry source, means "you can't touch one thing in isolation."

I know everything about it. At my work we're implementing new ERP software, and every time we debug something here, another thing that did work earlier doesn't anymore - totally frustrating   

Also from Flightblogger, according to a Boeing engineer:
"The line is littered with bins that are filled with parts removed to gain access to areas that need to be reworked. It would be impossible to assess how much of the work going on out there is out of sequence."
That sounds a bit like the mess Boeing was in after the first (incomplete) shipsets were delivered. I sincerely hope it doesn't take as long to clear that up as it did during assembly of the first test aircraft... But I fear that it may take years before production of the 787 goes smoothly, without any backlog of rework   Just like Airbus experienced with the first production years of the A380, unfortunately.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT3,ATP,E90,F50/70,M11,
User currently offlinecerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 706 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 31977 times:

Quoting sofianec (Reply 11):
If/when Boeing announces 787 delay up to 2020 EIS is an even growing possibility

Surely you meant 2012? A delay of 787 to 2020 would probably kill the program. Even a delay to 2012 is extraordinary because as PM pointed out, it means Boeing needs more than a year to sort out issues and it is very hard not to think something other than what Boeing admitted to is happening behind the scene.
The other thing to consider is the EIS of 787-9, which is currently scheduled to happen in late 2013. I think it will be impossible to argue that a delay of 787-8 of this magnitude would not materially impact on this schedule. And what of the hypothetical 787-10/777NG?


User currently offlineN809FR From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 181 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 31425 times:

As someone who is partial to Boeing, I find the delay inexcusable. Boeing should not have ever let the program get this out of control, hopefully anyone who could be terminated over this program already has.

User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 31011 times:

Quoting art (Reply 2):
That's unfortunate, given that one of the 787 sales points is/was? that the cabin would have a higher humidity level than non-carbon fibre fuselages. Surely cabin condensation issues would have been discovered a long time ago eg on static test frame.

You don't generally put systems on a static test frame, it's just for structure. You can't find condensation without an ECS system.

Quoting sofianec (Reply 11):
Boeing is playing a dangerous game with it's customers. A bite of info every 3 months hence the deferrals and cancellations and calls for 100's of millions of compensation.

There is a *huge* difference between what OEM's communicate to the public and what they communicate to customers.

Quoting par13del (Reply 16):
a certain brand pitot tubes was known to be an issue

They weren't known to have an issue that could bring down an airplane...if they were, you'd have had a much faster required replacement.

Quoting par13del (Reply 16):
fuel pump/exchanger (experts chime in on the correct terminology) on the RR engines on 777's after the BA incident was known to be an issue

No to the extent of shutting down an engine.

Quoting par13del (Reply 16):
737 rudder issue

That wasn't even thought about until after two crashes. The root cause (a PCU that could reverse under very specific circumstances) was only found as a result of the crash investigations.

You're absolutely right that there's a mechanism in place for non-nominal systems to be certified and fly safely, but there is no (legal) way to fly something in revenue service that's actually unsafe.

Tom.


User currently offlineAAExecPlat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 633 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 30981 times:

There can be no doubt that the 787 will be a fantastic aircraft for airlines and consumers alike. That said, the delays in this program are now so long and continue to cascade in such a manner that I think we'll see some of the following happen:

- customers will purchase A330s to tide them over until delivery
- customers will ask for further compensation from Boeing
- customers will cancel orders
- prospective customers will go with A350

None of those events will be conducive for Boeings bottom line and I can only hope they are not playing shell games behind closed doors with larger issues hidden from public view.


User currently offlinesofianec From Germany, joined Aug 2007, 235 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 30585 times:

Quoting cerecl (Reply 20):
Surely you meant 2012? A delay of 787 to 2020 would probably kill the program. Even a delay to 2012 is extraordinary because as PM pointed out, it means Boeing needs more than a year to sort out issues and it is very hard not to think something other than what Boeing admitted to is happening behind the scene.

I meant 2020. I mean let's not forget that even "IF" EIS materializes some time in 2012 or 2013/2014 for -9 most airlines will receive their birds with a huge delay - well into the 20's of 21st century.

It is inexcusable on Boeing's part to overlook so many issues. We all remember the "buzz" on the Dreamliner - we are so far off anything that was envisioned.

On another note I am sure Airbus will also delay A350 accordingly. They will not EIS anything from the A350 line before 787. And it makes me totally mad that Boeing's marketing buzz and Mr Hazy killed the "original" A350 which would have been a wonderful upgrade and would have made lots of $$$$ for Airbus.

Note that right after Hazy criticized Airbus for not offering a clean sheet A320 replacement - many airlines voiced their preference for a re-engine. Hope this time Airbus listens to them not Udvar-Hazy.

---



A350WARP
25 Post contains links and images keesje : It seems 28 Dreamliners have been build, most of them need extensive modifications. # 7-20 are for ANA now. I guess ANA have a big engineering staff s
26 frigatebird : Not correct. LN10&LN16: LAN. LN17&LN19: RAM. LN20: JAL. Not all 800+ 787's will be delayed because of these issues. Very likely only the ones
27 shankly : Thanks PM. Keyboard and brain disconnect. T'was of course an SR Wow. That looks like a breakers yard picture, not a production line
28 Post contains links keesje : It moves dealys the total production back x months though. Probably some cancellations will create some air down the line. The scheduled production r
29 oldeuropean : It's also remarkable that they use Jon to spread the bad news and that beside of him, no other public sources are informed about this further mess. A
30 Post contains links keesje : I think everybody is holding his breath. Ben Sandiland has a comment from down under on QF, Jetstar and ANZ consequences.. http://blogs.crikey.com.au
31 ckfred : This all goes back to Boeing trying to do too many new things at once. It tried to design a revolutionary airplane while changing the model as to how
32 bonusonus : Boeing would be very stupid to delay the EIS past Q1 or Q2 of 2011 at the very latest. As frigatebird mentioned, it really would be a PR disaster. I'm
33 Stitch : Alan M's decision to launch the 787 program they way he did really put the knife into Boeing Commercial's kidneys. He must be thanking Boeing's Board
34 LAXtoATL : I was thinking the same thing.
35 max550 : They would be very stupid not to delay it if it's going to end up having problems once it enters service.
36 SU184 : Seems very likely now that the A350 will have its first flight before a 787 is delivered, but what I'm afraid of now is to see the A350 delivered befo
37 incitatus : Ahhaaa. Airbus is no role model for getting new aircraft in service on time.
38 Post contains images mdword1959 : They generally don't put protective coverings over the gear/wheels/tires of candidates for the breakers yard.
39 Post contains images EPA001 : That is the real million Dollar question. Every delayed plane means more compensation payments and means the cash will flow to Boeing later and later
40 ER757 : It would certainly be yet another hit to their PR and to their credibility, but they wouldn't be stupid for doing so if the aircraft they would other
41 Post contains links Lumberton : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...0Remains%20On%20Track&channel=comm
42 AAExecPlat : Nobody is saying that the A350 is going to be on time, nor that Airbus somehow always beats Boeing about EIS of new planes. But what is clear is that
43 Post contains links cosmofly : I created a thread titled "Further 787 Delay?" yesterday based on the following. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...787-in-second-quarter-of-2011.
44 Stitch : I imagine because the moderators created the "787 Production Thread" for these kinds of discussions.
45 cosmofly : I would imagine that the title is TOO SENSITIVE for some.
46 Rheinbote : Unlikely, as liquidated damages are usually capped at x% of overall contract value. That cap is likely to have come into effect a long time ago. Not
47 JoeCanuck : I would think that they are based on more of a floating formula. Late by a certain time means X compensation. Further delays mean X+ compensation.
48 LAXtoATL : I have no knowledge of these contracts, but I suspect they are more likely fluid contracts instead of firm. I can't imagine an airline signing a cont
49 r2rho : Looks like Boeing might be heading towards a similar situation as Airbus with their initial batch of A380's. They could end up with a "Wave 1" of a/c
50 tropical : Those images of parked 787s don't sit very well with me tbh. I know they're brand new aircraft and will in time be delivered to start revenue service,
51 DocLightning : Yes, but the A350 and 787 don't really compete. Maybe the 7810, if it ever happens, might compete with the A358.
52 JoeCanuck : From Boeing.com and Airbus.com; 787-8 210 - 250 passengers, MTOW 502,500lbs 787-9 250-290 passengers, MTOW 545,000lbs 350-800 270 (3 class), MTOW 546
53 tdscanuck : All of what you list there has already happened. Define "extensive". It's a given, for *any* airliner program, that you need to roll design changes f
54 WarpSpeed : ...and the sky has not fallen.... that is to say the significance of this "news" could be way out of proportion with reality. Certainly the news does
55 Post contains links mdword1959 : Some hard confirmation of Mr. Ostrower's earlier report. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...by-further-787-delivery-delay.html
56 tdscanuck : Interesting that ANA hasn't come out and said the same thing...I wonder if they're sacrificing later deliveries to hold the EIS date with ANA? Tom.
57 mdword1959 : Perhaps, but weren't GEnx deliveries scheduled to lag Rolls/Trent by several weeks anyway?
58 328JET : It is the old game: Airbus and Boeing try to avoid same sized airliners whenever possible to avoid to be compared directly. Only the A318/B736 and A3
59 tdscanuck : Always, but I find it interesting that the GE EIS moved when the RR didn't...if it was a general certification/rework problem you'd expect the entire
60 cuban8 : Does anybody know if these rumours have had any effects on the Boeing share on the stock market? For me, that would give an indication if there is any
61 MDShady : I guess the speculation will never end. All of you by now have seen the test videos, this is not just a stretch/shrink of existing a/c this is a BRAND
62 tdscanuck : It's been going up ever since this "news" broke. Although the entire US market has been going up thanks to the election, so it's hard to tell what's
63 WarpSpeed : In theory, a stock price reflects all publicly available information. The share price you see today should account for the rumors. In fact, the share
64 Post contains links mdword1959 : Drip, drip, drip: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...prospect-of-further-787-delay.html
65 B777LRF : I suppose someone in marketing is seriously regretting coming up with the name Dreamliner. Unless, of course, they rather enjoy the kind of dreams whe
66 Stitch : Guy Norris over at AviationWeek reports that Boeing still believes ZA007 will be delivered to NH on schedule in mid-Q1 2011 even with the re-work that
67 WarpSpeed : Facts or calculations to back this up, please! Second! Regardless of your preferred air-framer, give peace a chance....[Edited 2010-11-05 11:24:11]
68 Baroque : Agreed. But also noted that maybe some of it has been spilling over from the copious quantities being poured on parts of the QF engine problems threa
69 Post contains images Rheinbote : I guess that - provided certification is granted in time - Boeing will try to deliver LN7 no matter what, to achive the first delivery milestone. ANA
70 B777LRF : I notice how some of the B-fanboys have a hard time with my posting. Fair enough, but I shall maintain my highly sceptical position regarding the hone
71 Post contains links WarpSpeed : Unless ANA charges pilots for the privilege, training looks to be accomplished in-line with revenue service. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-
72 cloudyapple : I call that 3 years late, not on schedule.
73 BMI727 : As far as I'm concerned, when Boeing hands the plane over the ANA is what counts. What the airline chooses to do with it is their business.
74 keesje : I don't think overestimation of issues at the 787 program has been a problem sofar. Sofar even the most pessimistic people following the program prove
75 Post contains images Stitch : Considering QF chose GEnx... My problem was with the incorrect statements you made which, considering the truth of the matter should be common knowle
76 Post contains images ER757 : Spot on - agree wholeheartedly. Keesje, did you get a chance to go see ZA006 at AMS?
77 wolbo : You would think that Boeing has learned it's lesson after the Potemkin roll-out fiasco and is not so foolish to follow it up with a Potemkin delivery
78 Post contains links keesje : No, I had other obligations. It arrived after dark anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYAvmpaHJAM KLM current CEO Peter Hartman is a long term Bo
79 ChrisNH : The chances are extremely high that the 787 will be late AND imperfect, and that's a disaster for Boeing any way you slice it. I don't know how anyon
80 Stitch : I imagine almost every aircraft program - general, commercial or military - was not delivered "perfect". And yet the industry survives...
81 328JET : To be honest, in case of the B787, problems are found which everybody expected to be solved two years ago... Also i am a really alerted, that neither
82 art : Past performance suggests that Boing has not. Time and again Boeing has shown its reluctance - inability even - to learn where the 787 is concerned.
83 AirNZ : In which case you obviously didn't bother reading what it was responding to, but just jumped on the A330 angle!! Why is "likely"......based on what g
84 Post contains images Stitch : They have stated that the planes will meet performance targets. I don't understand why people keep (conveniently?) forgetting this.
85 Post contains images Hamlet69 : Because it's easier to jump on the bandwagon than jump off. Look what happened with the fiasco Airbus went thru with the A380. People kept saying all
86 328JET : How many 787 flight test hours are passed already and how many were passed when Boeing announced the better than expected performance of the B77W...?
87 Post contains images Hamlet69 : How many 787 flight test hours have been performed with an engine that meets SFC targets? Regards, Hamlet69
88 328JET : THAT was part of my question. Apparently GE did a better Job on the B77W as on the B787 - no to mention RR.
89 Post contains images Hamlet69 : No argument here!! I have no doubt they will both get there, and beyond. But the fact that they have not yet, especially in light of the extensive de
90 328JET : I have the feeling that both GE and RR do not meet their targets because of the bleedless engine technology. It seems to be great on paper, but not i
91 mdword1959 : This goes way beyond a natural tendency to procrastinate, it seems increasingly clear that the extraordinary events afflicting the engine makers begi
92 328JET : Aah, the A380 delay is the reason for the B787 delay...?
93 mdword1959 : Not what I said.
94 328JET : THIS is what you said in reply 91. And for me it sounds as you mean the slow-go on the A380 resulted in the actual delay of the B787 engines.
95 Stitch : I would think not having to bleed air from an engine would improve it's performance, not detract. As to an "at spec" engine, ZA004 is preparing to be
96 328JET : That was the idea behind bleedless engines, but it did not work out as we learned from GE. According GE the GEnx with and without bleedless technolog
97 BMI727 : That's what I thought too, unless using more or larger generators is an issue for them. Going bleedless would make more work for the airframe manufac
98 art : How come that when you stop sapping some of the engine's power, the SFC stays the same? Seems strange to me.
99 BMI727 : Well, having to generate more electrical power will sap some too, but less than bleed air in Boeing's calculations. Plus, I would guess that wiring i
100 WarpSpeed : Which is why we have not heard about fuel burn performance. The stakes are high. Contractual guaranties are in play. There's not much incentive to re
101 328JET : The opposite seems to be the case as the bleedless equipment (generators, a/c system, etc) is heavier than the "old" equipment. GE has stated several
102 Stitch : The GEnx2B used on the 747-8 incorporates changes that do not exist on the current GEnx1B for the 787. So in some ways, the GEnx2B is a more advanced
103 328JET : What differences are these? I heard only about a new designed turbine for both engines to lower the fuel consumption.
104 dynamicsguy : If you were sapping less power then the SFC would change. But with generators mounted on the engines you're still sucking the power, just in a differ
105 tdscanuck : Except that name didn't come from marketing, or anyone at Boeing. It was a public contest on newairplane.com That's normal. That defies reality. It's
106 328JET : - I never said that! I said that the SFC of both GEnx variants is equal according GE. - I think the B787-8-variant has a disadvantage against the B74
107 BMI727 : Any source for that? Well, I suppose by that logic Airbus is going down a dead end with the sidestick since Boeing and others haven't followed suit.
108 328JET : I think it is not essential if you use sidesticks or not. But using bleed or no bleed is a very different thing and the reason the B787 is the only a
109 BMI727 : But certainly the reason Airbus chose sidesticks is because they think they can do a better job than a traditional yoke. And Boeing chose the standar
110 tdscanuck : Obviously I can't read the minds of the OEM's, but the first thing to observe is that, of all the aircraft started after the 787, only one is of comp
111 ADent : The 787 engine is certified for 72,300 lb thrust and has a fan 111 in, while the 747-8 engine is certified for 67,400 lb thrust and has a fan size of
112 Post contains links Lumberton : http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2...g-denies-reports-dreamliner-delay/
113 Baroque : Indeed, but care for an "investment" that when QF has its first IFSD with a 787 the engine is reported as RR? Some on a.net are telling us that becau
114 Post contains links Rheinbote : Your figures are wrong. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...4acf7/$FILE/E00078NE%20Rev%201.pdf GEnx-1B54 12,822 lbs = 5,816 kg (dry) GEnx-2B67 12,
115 Post contains links and images MadameConcorde : I am not sure if this is the right place to post, I just saw this on a newspaper site (Le Parisien) First landing of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Paris
116 PW100 : I'm pretty positive that all SFC numbers are derived numbers that do not include any external loading to the engine: SFC is established with no bleed
117 Post contains links trex8 : Maybe this has been mentioned but I can't find it on this thread http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...eliveries-slip-10-more-months.html
118 Post contains links flood : It was brought up in the 787 production thread but Boeing basically dismissed these reports via twitter yesterday saying "Today's press reports about
119 Post contains links Gordomatic : The article appears to be dated May 11, 2010 - right? (edit - date on linked Article above is today's date: DD/MM/YY format is used) There is another
120 Lumberton : But the one I posted earlier today is not dated 11 May. BTW, that's the European date convention. The correct date is 5 Nov 10.
121 328JET : You are right - i mixed a 2 and 5 on the engine of the B748... I meant 5440Kgs weight and not 2440Kgs...
122 Post contains links kanban : the latest from Seattle http://www.king5.com/news/business/B...of-more-days-on-787-106794798.html we may have some overzealous reporters starting rumo
123 flood : This doesn't change the fact that Boeing advised KAL in August their frames were facing an additional 10 month delay. Correct me if I'm wrong, but th
124 328JET : The article says: "Customers who are slated for those 787s could, in fact, be given newer planes that have already been modified. The older planes wou
125 tdscanuck : That's not necessarily true...part of the 787 was to severely reduce the number of options and configuration choices. As a result, there's a lot less
126 328JET : Right. Less than any other Boeing model, but still different aircrafts. Every airplane producer tries to reduce the possible options more and more, b
127 kanban : this can also mean that if you have planes in the second block (30 and on) you may be getting those before those in the first block...
128 cerecl : Alas, this proves little and would not be the first time Boeing initially denied such a report only to confirm it after a certain period. Sorry, afte
129 LAXtoATL : I have to agree with you here, that sounds like complete rubbish to me. Not only would it be a counter productive exercise as it would add to their o
130 kanban : Here we go again... there are several posters that actually work for Boeing and are connected with the program, others like myself have retired howev
131 328JET : Both points are exactly right and are the main "problem" why the producers cannot simply exchange aircrafts before delivery.
132 LAXtoATL : So are you saying that your inside contacts are telling you that Boeing is going to swap out later production 787s from other customers to meet their
133 tdscanuck : Having customers present to witness final assembly is true for some customers, not all. It's almost certainly true for early 787 customers. But the f
134 Post contains images BMI727 : That is what I thought. As far as I know, the contracts have a date, not a "we must get our planes before airline x." So, it is then obviously a good
135 Post contains images lightsaber : Its sad to see any further delays! Rumors are that current sales prices of the A330 were dropping due to the 'imminent' 788 deliveries... But judging
136 Rheinbote : That's the most plausible assertion I've read here. Exactly I guess you are talking "factory flow" and C-days? Just curious because the "interim" goa
137 LAXtoATL : Thank you for your response. But I am still a little a little confused... To be clear you are saying that I am correct and that new build 787s that h
138 PITingres : I am confused about how building and/or modifying an airframe to incorporate engineering revisions "assigns" it to a customer? Tom is saying that the
139 LAXtoATL : I said I was confused by his response, but I read it as saying that a certain point in the production process that the airframe is assigned to a cust
140 tdscanuck : Yes. That would depend on the details of the customer contracts but, assuming no odd clauses, that is *not* what I said. There are two questions here
141 LAXtoATL : tdscancuk, Thanks for your entire response. It was very informative to the overall process. Which goes back to my original statement that I do not bel
142 Stitch : I believe most of the completed frames - even the painted ones - do not have their interiors installed nor do they have engines. And it is possible t
143 Rheinbote : Thank you. Are you going to use all four positions then to get to 10/month or just 3 positions plus one contingency for 7,5/month?
144 MadameConcorde : I am coming with a basic question to all the specialists here. Considering the new delays, when do you estimate the delivery of the first aircrafts to
145 Stitch : I believe NH has now said they plan to have ZA007 in revenue service within 30 days of delivery.
146 MadameConcorde : Any estimate as to the delivery date of the first aircraft?
147 Post contains images QFA787380 : Is that an admission(or excuse) that a KL 787 order is a mere formality
148 Post contains links mdword1959 : There was this statement reported by Flightglobal on Thurday attributed to a JAL executive which seems to conflict factually with Boeing's denial as
149 art : Unless there was some genuine confusion here, at best one of the 2 parties is not being entirely open. Now who is that more likely to be?
150 Stitch : Still around February 2011 per Boeing.
151 tdscanuck : I didn't say it wouldn't make sense, I said it was easier (from a production standpoint). Swapping airframes around takes time and work. But so does
152 Post contains images MadameConcorde : Thank you. I need to make sure I don't spend the money on any other flights and be ready to book the minute they publish the flight bookings. . The N
153 Post contains links Rheinbote : Here we go... http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ology/2013385417_dreamliner10.html "Boeing management is telling Wall Street that the 787 Dreamli
154 Post contains images scbriml : This is the real shocker - Ouch!
155 kanban : analysts have their heads up their APU's... 2 dozen seems low, however it might be higher if the RR problem resolves itself quickly. and how many are
156 Post contains images mdword1959 : You gotta love McNerney, the bad news never seems to knock on his door until a couple of weeks after the earnings call.
157 cosmofly : Hope this is not a repeat of the 2007 premiere fiasco. Boeing is doing everything to try to put up a EIS show but will delay ramp up. Is this new man
158 Stitch : Well Boeing has begun receiving product again, so that's somewhat of a hopeful sign, though it looks like travel and re-work on said deliveries may s
159 BMI727 : Those are probably BFE so I can't imagine that would cost Boeing any compensation. Other interior fittings might not be, especially with the attempts
160 tdscanuck : I'm not sure how it could be...it's not like ANA would just not notice that Boeing delivered an incomplete airplane. They wouldn't accept it, so the
161 mdword1959 : Boeing delivered more than 90 747s in 1970, there wasn't ostensibly much necessity of "rework" to the airframes once they rolled off the assembled li
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 Delivery Schedule? posted Sat May 23 2009 05:08:52 by SafetyDude
Boeing Pushes Back Its 747-8 Delivery Schedule posted Fri Nov 14 2008 05:52:55 by Keesje
The New 787 Anticipated Delivery Schedule posted Tue Oct 28 2008 18:01:17 by BP1
787 Backlog, Delivery Schedule And Ramp Up posted Mon Apr 14 2008 11:28:53 by Moo
Boeing 787 Delivery Times posted Fri Jun 29 2007 16:08:27 by JFK787NYC
Boeing Reviewing Second 787 Production Line posted Mon Nov 6 2006 18:50:56 by Aeropiggot
Delta Re-negotiates With Boeing For 787 posted Mon Oct 25 2010 11:53:01 by flyibaby
Boeing Adds 787 Supply Plant In S.C. posted Mon May 3 2010 12:07:39 by Stitch
Hawaiian Orders Another A-330 + Delivery Schedule posted Tue Mar 9 2010 05:36:27 by yazoo
Boeing's Charleston 787 Line. posted Sun Mar 7 2010 14:08:00 by CX747