Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing's Ambitious Schedule  
User currently onlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5329 posts, RR: 4
Posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10348 times:

I know we already have a bunch of Boeing threads going right now. But nearly all of them are specifically about the 737RS and Jim McNerney's comments about that one project. I want to focus on something a bit different.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...news-analysis-boeing-maps-out.html

In the linked article, Jon maps out -- citing anonymous company sources -- a highly ambitious schedule for Boeing:

2011: 787-8, 747-8
2013: 787-9
2015-16: 787-10
2017-18: 777-300ER NG "Emirates Special"
2019-20: 737RS

My question is simple: why will customers believe Boeing has a prayer of meeting this schedule, given the schedule difficulties with the 787-8 and the 747-8? It seems to me like this is setting up Boeing for customer distrust and reluctance to order.

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10300 times:

How can you say whether or not it is ambitious when we don't know how much some of those projects entail?


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineA380900 From France, joined Dec 2003, 1106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 10145 times:

Some stuff are hard core and other are backburner. It's as if you said the A330F was an entire new type in its own right and marvel at Airbus schedule...

User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3575 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10097 times:

Most interesting tidbit in that article is that Boeing did not even bother to bid the Virgin America order.

User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 9966 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
My question is simple: why will customers believe Boeing has a prayer of meeting this
schedule, given the schedule difficulties with the 787-8 and the 747-8?

If they sort out the 787-8, the question would be why *wouldn't* they make the schedule for the -9 & -10...in which case they've got 6 years before they have to cough up anything really "new".

If they don't sort out the -8...well, no customer is going believe anything they say on anything, so the point becomes kind of moot.

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
It seems to me like this is setting up Boeing for customer distrust and reluctance to order.

I would say it's far too late for that. I would assume customers will be *much* more vigorous about negotiating much more severe delay payments for many years to come, no matter what Boeing says.

Tom.


User currently offlinepiaflyer From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2007, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9931 times:

There are a few reasons why this schedule might be able to work out. The 787 is a totally new aircraft, everything down to the last light bulb was new innovation which required repetitious certification testing. Because of this the 787 went over schedule a bit. In the 748, yes it is a remodel of the original 747 but relatively speaking its not that delayed. Plus blame on the delayed 748 can be blamed on the resources that were routed to the 787 program. However, since the aircraft that are lined up for these future years are just "small modifications" to previous certified aircraft, it should be able to keep on time without too much of a problem.

Cheers,
Piaflyer


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7832 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9891 times:

It does look very busy but...

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2011: 787-8, 747-8

pretty much done, we can agree on that

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2013: 787-9

2 more years for a variant of an almost done aircraft

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2015-16: 787-10

2-3 years after that, another variant of an almost done aircraft

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2017-18: 777-300ER NG "Emirates Special"

2 years later, a variant of a 777

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2019-20: 737RS

this is a big project that will take a while. But, they have 8-9 years to complete it.

I think they'll be fine, maybe a year or 2 delay, but entirely possible (I think)



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8879 posts, RR: 75
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9832 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2015-16: 787-10

Time wil tell to see if the 787-10 will ever get launched. As it is, it is an odd ball type in terms of payload and range.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30626 posts, RR: 84
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9769 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 787-10 is likely to be a simple stretch of the 787-9 aimed at the high-density regional mission market. I don't see why it could not be brought into play within two to three years of the 787-9.

The 777-300ER(X) is going to be driven by how good the A350-1000 is and how long it takes Airbus to bring it to market. Personally, I think the prudent choice is to improve the GE90 - especially if those improvements can be retrofitted via PiPs - and try and reduce weight and make it cheaper to build so as to be cheaper to sell. Putting on a new wing - Al or CFRP - strikes me as a seriously expensive step.



Quoting zeke (Reply 7):
Time wil tell to see if the 787-10 will ever get launched. As it is, it is an odd ball type in terms of payload and range.

I would think it would be very popular on regional missions currently being flown by A330-300s and 777-300s. It offers more capacity than the A330-300, not too much less than the 777-300, better range than both and better economics than both.

[Edited 2011-01-27 21:50:56]

User currently offlinedl767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9616 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2011: 787-8, 747-8
2013: 787-9
2015-16: 787-10
2017-18: 777-300ER NG "Emirates Special"
2019-20: 737RS

I'm not sure what's so ambitious here.

The 787-9 isn't all that different from the -8 so once the problems with the -8 are worked out it should be pretty simple to move up to the -9

The -10 might take a little more work depending on if they need an additional gear, stronger wing, different engine, etc. otherwise I'm sure Boeing designed the 787 with a -10 stretch in mind which probably wouldn't be too difficult but I could see a delay with that one.

777-300ER: This is the only one where Boeing could hit a snag but it seems like a 777NG would be improved engines and shedding some weight, then maybe some interior mods but not like the 737NG where there was an entire new wing.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19417 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 9448 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):

pretty much done, we can agree on that

That's what we were saying a year ago...

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):

2 more years for a variant of an almost done aircraft

23 months for 787 flight testing what now?  
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):

this is a big project that will take a while. But, they have 8-9 years to complete it.

If they start today...   


User currently offlinembj2000 From Germany, joined Dec 2005, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 9394 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2011: 787-8, 747-8

pretty much done, we can agree on that

We "knew" that 2 years ago, let's wait and see.

According to you, it's 2-3 years development time for each new variant, but 8-9 years for the 737RS. How comes that, so you assume it's the same team of engineers working on the 787 AND 777 variants but a complete staffed engineers team working full steam on the 737RS?? Where do they come from?

I think quite the opposite, either they concentrate on the 777NG a couple of years down the road or they start NOW working on the 737RS and lose the 777 market to the A350.

To me is clear right now, Boeing can't do anything meaningful to the 737 till mid of next decade so they're throwing sand in the eyes of potential "switchers".



Like most of life's problems, this one can be solved with bending -- Bender Unit 22
User currently offlinebj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 9100 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 3):
Most interesting tidbit in that article is that Boeing did not even bother to bid the Virgin America order.

That was a lost cause. It would be the same if Airbus reacted to a Northwest bid.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):
I would say it's far too late for that. I would assume customers will be *much* more vigorous about negotiating much more severe delay payments for many years to come, no matter what Boeing says.

Yes they will. Boeing will have to be very careful in what they promise customers because if they promise them the moon and a project does go belly up then the problem would be bigger than just a PR nightmare.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 10):
That's what we were saying a year ago...

True, at this point seeing is believing.

Quoting mbj2000 (Reply 11):
I think quite the opposite, either they concentrate on the 777NG a couple of years down the road or they start NOW working on the 737RS and lose the 777 market to the A350.

I am inclined to agree with you. then again revamping the existing 777 design while beginning work on a 737RS could be an option. The development of the 737 will take longer but they won't give Airbus the keys to the 777 market.


User currently offlinerheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2213 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 8386 times:

Looking at the 777 and the 737 at the same time is the only valid way to get a feeling what awaits Boeing.

Otherwise in the Y1 threads everyone praises the big-strike character of that new NB. And in the A350 threads everybody praises the nearly unlimited capability and upgradeability of the 777NG (Y3 was hyped too but the temptation colled down a bit recently).

But in reality Boeing will only be able to adress one issue seriously:

Quote:

McNerney says fully replacing a 777 and 737 would not come simultaneously and calls the avoidance of such an overlap as "one of the independent variables in the equation."


User currently onlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5329 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7880 times:

I suppose if the schedule tells us one thing, it's that we can't expect substantial changes to the 787. The -10 will be a simple stretch of the -9 with probably about 7000 nm range. Good enough for all TATL, West Coast-East Asia TPAC, and regional missions. Not good enough for Australia or the longer TPAC routes. There won't be a ULH variant of the -8 or the -9, either.

Even while the -10 is under development, Boeing will need to be allocating most of its resources to the 737RS, and most of the remainder to the 777.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 13):
Looking at the 777 and the 737 at the same time is the only valid way to get a feeling what awaits Boeing.

   I just wonder if they can pull it off. And I expect the customers wonder too.


User currently offlineChrisinCT From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 4 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7605 times:

Maybe the 787 delays are Boeing's "Sputnik moment"    

User currently offlineytz From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 1985 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 7071 times:

What's so ambitious about this schedule?

With the 748 development wrapping up, some more resources will be freed up. I could see those resources getting to work on the 777NG right now. And maybe a small team work on concept definition for the 737RS.

Keep in mind that work ebbs and flows at different stages of development for different projects. I would think of Boeing keeping two pools of engineering talent for essentially two lines of tasking. One working steadily on the 787 line to deliver the -8,-9 and -10. And another working on the 777NG and doing some preliminary groundwork on the 737RS (so 2.5 lines of tasking). And then, once the 7810 is done, we'll see all the 787 engineering resources getting poured into the 737RS program for a sprint to the finish.

I actually think that Boeing might be better off putting any serious work on the 737RS and work towards getting out that 777NG earlier (say 2014). This allows some more maturation of Y1 technologies. And allows for a larger and more dedication team for the 737RS when they get around to it (since the 777NG will be done). I don't buy that Boeing necessarily needs 9 years to develop the 737RS. They said they're aiming for 2020. That may not necessarily have to do with their development timeline. It might have more to do with the fact that won't have the resources to really work on an 737RS, for at least another 4-5 years.

It's ambitious. But not overly ambitious. And fully within Boeing's capabilities, as long as they manage their workforce well....which I'm pretty sure they can.


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4705 posts, RR: 38
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 7018 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 6):
Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
2011: 787-8, 747-8

pretty much done, we can agree on that


Well, let us wait and see the production ramp-up go smoothly and hope that the EIS of both airliners goes smoothly as well. After that we can hopefully say "pretty much done".  .

But the ambition Boeing is showing is a good thing imho. They need it (as does Airbus) to keep delivering the best products to the market because their customers (as those from Airbus) are demanding it.  .


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2997 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6396 times:

Quoting bj87 (Reply 12):
That was a lost cause. It would be the same if Airbus reacted to a Northwest bid.

This doesn't make sense. NW purchased Airbus aircraft. You probably mean something like AA, AS or WN.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 2997 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6176 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 3):
Most interesting tidbit in that article is that Boeing did not even bother to bid the Virgin America order.

I can't speak for Boeing Sales. I'm not privvy to any inside information (nor would I post it anyway, if I did). But I wonder about the long-term viability of Virgin American. Are they going to be around long enough to justify making a large bid?


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6537 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5969 times:

About the 777NG, make it lighter might be tricky. We can see with the A320neo that a well developed airplane has nothing left to shed without major redesigning (new wing, etc.). The original 777 is from 1995, but there has been the 77L and 77W much more recently, they should already be close to as light as possible. And of course, what EK wants is a bigger plane, so if anything it will be heavier.

So, the question I don't see often asked and even less answered is : does GE have a better engine up its sleeve ? Because I feel that's what the 777NG needs.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinetistpaa727 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 326 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5896 times:

If Jon's inside sources are correct, this is mighty impressive. One can only hope that Boeing has learned some valuable lessons these past few years and have some new processes in place that will make this schedule possible. If not, well....I prefer not to think of that.


Don't sweat the little things.
User currently offlineabibus From Mexico, joined Dec 2010, 128 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5763 times:

any info about the new program that boeing was going to announce about the 787 this days?

User currently offlineDLdiamondboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5718 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Thread starter):
My question is simple: why will customers believe Boeing has a prayer of meeting this schedule, given the schedule difficulties with the 787-8 and the 747-8? It seems to me like this is setting up Boeing for customer distrust and reluctance to order.

Management that has no experience in what it takes and how long it takes to do a project always feels that it is their moral obligation to beat up on technical experts on timelines. Let’s take for example that mgmt asks the tech guys for a project schedule to design/develop a new airplane. The tech guys come back and say it is four years. The project schedule has the appropriate recycle loops after major design milestones in case redesign and the associated testing is required. Basically a middle of the road schedule with a high confidence level of technical success, Mgmt new jerk reaction will be “there is no way it can take that long, trim the timeline by 25%”. The tech guys respond “prove to us that it will not take four years” Mgmt responds “ just do it” Thus corners get cut and things go wrong due to mgmt pushing a timeline that does not reflect reality. Better to under promise and over deliver.


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5473 times:

I think we may see more - earlier on the 773erNG project. There is a lot of orders to be had here. Not only against the 351 but also the A380 too. It is one hell of an aircraft now and as people are saying with all the Gen-x/Leap-X learnings there could be 4-5% in there.The structure could be lightened abit with AlLi and carbon parts too.

25 jsquared : Forgive my relative lack of knowledge on this topic, but do we have real evidence that Boeing is serious about doing a 787-10? This is where I though
26 Stitch : A Boeing engineer who is a member of this forum has stated that there is a good bit of weight to be removed from the 777 is Boeing is willing to spen
27 Aesma : But what kind of money ? In the billions ? That, I can believe. Is it worth it ? Currently, I would say that it's not. What is the benefit of contra-
28 Goblin211 : I don't think Boeing is being ambitious b/c they've had many delays and gotten off coarse already so I'm sure it'll happen in their plan for the decad
29 tdscanuck : You can get rid of a stator stage, or increase the efficiency of the compressors & turbines a little by more efficiently removing circumferential
30 macsog6 : Most carriers understand that there is always a factor in delivery dates for which contingencies must be allowed. There are strikes, wars, God knows
31 SchorschNG : Maybe they do something new: do not accept firm orders up until the delivery date is pretty certain, then just sell it. The concept of "orders" has o
32 NAV20 : I think this tends to confirm that Boeing has a pretty comprehensive range - four models that span the range, 737, 787, 772, 773; and don't have to hu
33 Post contains images Stitch : Yes, I am sure WN and FR and other 737 operators will just decide they don't want to grow for four years while they wait for Y1. Only if the air carg
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...
Official:Boeing Re-Schedule For 787 First Flight posted Wed Jan 16 2008 06:12:22 by OyKIE
Boeing Reviewing 787 Delivery Schedule posted Tue Nov 2 2010 02:00:13 by Chiad
Boeing Pushes Back Its 747-8 Delivery Schedule posted Fri Nov 14 2008 05:52:55 by Keesje
Boeing's 787 Dreamliner First Flight On Schedule posted Mon Jun 9 2008 06:30:39 by Aviationbuff
Paine Field Boeing Flight Test Schedule posted Sat Feb 24 2007 02:17:24 by PW100
AA Boeing 757-200 N194AA Route Schedule! posted Wed Dec 21 2005 17:59:51 by Ruslan
Boeing 787: Ambitious Exterior But At The End? posted Sun Oct 23 2005 17:20:54 by Boeing777/747
Boeing Field Test Schedule Question posted Fri Sep 29 2000 19:07:23 by Rpwgw
Design New Paint Scheme For An AS Boeing 737-700! posted Thu Jan 27 2011 16:13:25 by NYC2TLV
2-3-2 Widebody Boeing Y1 Concept Still Alive posted Wed Jan 26 2011 13:19:47 by 1337Delta764