User avatar
1337Delta764
Topic Author
Posts: 4891
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 7:32 am

Which is the real 787 interior? These photos are both nice interiors, but I do not know which is the official one. At Planepictures.net, this demo is shown:
http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=430109

However, at Boeing's website, the original concept interiors are still shown:
http://boeing.com/commercial/787family/gallery/k63450-02.html
http://boeing.com/commercial/787family/gallery/k63450-06.html

I'm confused about this.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
grantcv
Posts: 410
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:28 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 8:52 am

Uh, they look like the same interiors to me. There are subtle differences in the detailing, but that is to be expected as a real one has not been built yet. Other variations will have to do with the class of seating and the customer airline's choices, but I don't see any reason to be confused.
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Topic Author
Posts: 4891
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 10:14 am

Differences include the world image up front, and the upper portion of the bins are styled differently. Also, the handles on the bins on the Planepictures image are vertical.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
eraugrad02
Posts: 658
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 6:12 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 1:20 pm

well that could be the difference in bins in business vs coach. they look like same mockups. u can see coach behind businees class in theb pic. looks same.
Desmond MacRae in ILM
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 970
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 1:35 pm

Is it just me, or does it look like neither one of those mockups affords much privacy to the passenger. I am strating to think I am the only person in the world who wants the manufacturers to find a way to make the cabin feel spacious without making the passengers feel exposed. No one really likes the feeling of sleeping, when they feel like every passenger, from every cabin or class of service can see you as soon as they stand up. I realize these are just manufacturers mockups and each plane will look very similar to its operators other planes, but it seems like Boeing is making it diffficult to allow the airlines their personal style in the design. Opinions welcomed! (gently please!)
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Wed May 10, 2006 2:46 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 4):
, but it seems like Boeing is making it diffficult to allow the airlines their personal style in the design.

How is it making it difficult? How is this 787 any different from any other previous Boeing/Airbus offering in terms of interior. Please explain because I don't follow. Aircraft manufacturers really give you a "green" aircraft. They only try to suggest a way to organize interior. Buy offering certain standards you save money. You can buy a "green" aircraft and put inside whatever you want - a barn with saddles if it fits your fancy.

[Edited 2006-05-10 07:47:36]
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 970
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Thu May 11, 2006 2:41 am

it just seems as if all these "signature" elements, like the open entrance etc. are very different from the previous boeing or airbus interiors. I can appreciate the "green" nature of the aircraft, i just think the interior looks very very open.
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Thu May 11, 2006 3:22 am

Remember, a certain amount of openness is the name of the game after 9/11. If it's a regulation, they might as well build it into the design. We'll get used to it after awhile, and it won't look as if a curtain belongs there.
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Fri May 12, 2006 3:37 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 6):
i just think the interior looks very very open.

Is it bad? I think it is very good.
 
knoxibus
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:59 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Fri May 12, 2006 9:41 pm

Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 5):
How is it making it difficult? How is this 787 any different from any other previous Boeing/Airbus offering in terms of interior. Please explain because I don't follow. Aircraft manufacturers really give you a "green" aircraft. They only try to suggest a way to organize interior. Buy offering certain standards you save money. You can buy a "green" aircraft and put inside whatever you want - a barn with saddles if it fits your fancy.

Because what you don't realise is that what you can put inside an aircraft is only what the aircraft manufacturers allow you to put inside after they validated it!

And the fact is that Boeing has given very little options to its customers with regards to interiors on the 787. Everybody complained and it now seems that BCA will soon offer a larger catalogue, however this remains to be done.
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Fri May 12, 2006 11:59 pm

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 9):
Because what you don't realise is that what you can put inside an aircraft is only what the aircraft manufacturers allow you to put inside after they validated it!

Post delivery you can install anything that you can certify via an STC.

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 9):
And the fact is that Boeing has given very little options to its customers with regards to interiors on the 787. Everybody complained and it now seems that BCA will soon offer a larger catalogue, however this remains to be done.

If Boeing doesn't support the customers wishes, the retrofit industry will.

Tod
 
BigSky123
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:33 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 12:08 am

There seems to be very little room for galleys in the 787.  scratchchin 
 
hb88
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 1:09 am

Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 8):
Quoting AA777223 (Reply 6):
"i just think the interior looks very very open."

Is it bad? I think it is very good.

I guess it's open to opinion. I hate feeling 'exposed' in a plane, particularly on a long haul flight. It's probably hard to acheive, but flying around in what feels like a half-empty cinema isn't psychologically too pleasant.

of course your mileage may vary  Smile
 
knoxibus
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:59 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting Tod (Reply 10):
Post delivery you can install anything that you can certify via an STC



Quoting Tod (Reply 10):
If Boeing doesn't support the customers wishes, the retrofit industry will.

Ok, but what I see to that: added cost  dollarsign   dollarsign   dollarsign 

We are talking here of the interior catalogue from Boeing, not the one from retrofit or MROs centers.
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 1:32 am

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 13):
Quoting Tod (Reply 10):
If Boeing doesn't support the customers wishes, the retrofit industry will.

Ok, but what I see to that: added cost

Very true, but if the OEM doesn't build the plane the way you need it, it does happen. And it keeps me employed too  Wink

Tod
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 1:56 am

The 8 abreast seats look like the width of existing business class width seats. The 787 will hardly have 4 abreast in business class?
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 2:03 am

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 9):
And the fact is that Boeing has given very little options to its customers with regards to interiors on the 787. Everybody complained and it now seems that BCA will soon offer a larger catalogue, however this remains to be done.

Care to elaborate this point that Boeing only offers a few options with reliable source? It is not a fact just because you said it is a fact. I am sure Boeing will be very very flexible in the interior possibilities especially up in the first class. For cattle class, who cares. I think from looking at the previous models from A and B there is almost no difference between the cattle class interior, except for IFE and seat bottom cushion.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 2:19 am

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 4):
Is it just me, or does it look like neither one of those mockups affords much privacy to the passenger. I am strating to think I am the only person in the world who wants the manufacturers to find a way to make the cabin feel spacious without making the passengers feel exposed.

There is limited privacy to begin with....in the post 9/11 world, closed curtains (atleast on flights involving the United States) and separation between cabins is limited. Moreover, Boeing wanted to make the aircraft feel genuinely large and spacious - which I think they suceeded at. The interior shots make the 787 look more spacious and open than 777 or 747 - both of which are wider, and world more roomy than A330/340.

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 6):
it just seems as if all these "signature" elements, like the open entrance etc. are very different from the previous boeing or airbus interiors. I can appreciate the "green" nature of the aircraft, i just think the interior looks very very open.

The airlines will pick the way they finally work out. I'll agree, it's different, but I think it's a good change. I think it's kind of comforting, the open space. It feels less closed in, and on long flights, I think the large amounts of open space will be appreciated. The A380 took this to heart, as its interiors are also more open and wide than previous airliners.

Quoting Tod (Reply 10):
If Boeing doesn't support the customers wishes, the retrofit industry will.

I'm sure Boeing will offer enough options to make everyone happy, without just putting the same old seats from 767 and 777 in, and a set of 777 overhead bins. I think it is a good step forward - the new interior - and will be a positive change the average passenger will appreciate as new, and a step forward. Airbus seems to agree, because their model A350 cabin was the spitting image of 787s.

Quoting Hb88 (Reply 12):
I guess it's open to opinion. I hate feeling 'exposed' in a plane, particularly on a long haul flight. It's probably hard to acheive, but flying around in what feels like a half-empty cinema isn't psychologically too pleasant.

I'm sure the first and business cabins will be set up in such a way in the real liners to create a more cozy and isolated feelings (first especially). Cattle class - you'll feel open and exposed no matter what. I think the open design is nice though. I guess I myself have never been that sensative about sleeping on a plane. I guess I've never been afraid of the guy across the aisle or 3 seats back see me sleep.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 2:43 am

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 4):
does it look like neither one of those mockups affords much privacy to the passenger

Remember to consider that the FAA requires that the interior configuration must allow the F/A's to view 80 percent of the pax while seated in their attendant seats during TT&L.

Tod
 
knoxibus
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:59 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 3:09 am

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 16):
Care to elaborate this point that Boeing only offers a few options with reliable source?

Customer Focus Group and Workgroup comittee conclusions. These are forum or conferences that the OEM organises with ALL its customers (dedicated to specific model; here 787) to inform them of the current situation of the development of the aircraft and on potential new options.

The airlines/customers then provide feedback and comments and eventually fears or appreciations.

This just happened to be the main conclusion of the last of these meetings, and it was unanimous.

If you want a proper source, just participate to one of these forums! (Of course you would need to be part of an airline fleet management team or work for one of the suppliers!)
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 3:25 am

How does this unflexibility compare to what Boeing has already offered in their previous models?
If it is too expensive to tailor made every single aircraft interior then of course Boeing is not going to do it.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 4:13 am

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 20):
How does this unflexibility compare to what Boeing has already offered in their previous models?
If it is too expensive to tailor made every single aircraft interior then of course Boeing is not going to do it.

Just the classic balancing act between giving the customer what they want and doing it at a price that they are willing to pay.

Most of the time they get it pretty close. When they don't, either the other OEM or the retrofit market provides the solution.

Tod
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 11:23 am

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 13):
Ok, but what I see to that: added cost

We are talking here of the interior catalogue from Boeing, not the one from retrofit or MROs centers.

What extra add cost, many operators take delivery of their aircraft sans seats and carpets. They then install what they want when they get the airframe. Saves money and the manufactures have no problem with this arrangement.
 
knoxibus
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:59 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 4:19 pm

Quoting 474218 (Reply 22):
They then install what they want when they get the airframe.

"What they want when they get the airframe" generally implies that it is not part of the OEM catalogue since it was not installed at the final assembly line of the OEM, and therefore it is not certified under the type certificate of the aircraft.

I agree that with BFE suppliers the contract is signed between the airline and the supplier directly, but in 90% of the case, these suppliers are part of the OEM catalogue, however it is a different contract.

With the 787, BCA is launching a new kind of "contract", in which most of what used to be BFE (Buyer Furnished Equipment) will now be considered as SFE (Supplier Furnished Equipment), now becoming a direct responsibility of BCA, and not of the supplier.

Example: if you have an issue with a Recaro seat (and I'm not talking interface with the aircraft), before the airline would go to their Recaro Key Account Manager or field representative, etc... to solve the issue.

With the 787, Boeing agrees to deal with all those potential issues (customer support) directly and be responsible for it.

The thing is, Boeing's selection of suppliers under those terms is very thin.

If you want to install what you want, you have to be able to issue a Supplemental Type Certificate for the aircraft, as it is not an approved OEM modification.

So tell me how many airlines are able to do that? Not a lot, you have to have a lot of JAA/FAA approved licenses to do so, so many airlines send these to MROs which are approved, so added cost here.

Furthermore, it needs to be certified by your local authorities (the retrofit or the mod), and believe me, those guys take a hefty quantity of money to do so.

For example, the French DGAC takes a percentage of the total list price of every single Part Numbers you install on the aircraft.

Hope I shed a light on your concerns.
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sat May 13, 2006 10:25 pm

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 23):
If you want to install what you want, you have to be able to issue a Supplemental Type Certificate for the aircraft, as it is not an approved OEM modification.

So tell me how many airlines are able to do that?

Most of them.
What major airline has a fleet without any STC's?

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 23):
Furthermore, it needs to be certified by your local authorities (the retrofit or the mod), and believe me, those guys take a hefty quantity of money to do so.

It is more of a time issue than money when dealing with the FAA.
The Seattle ACO is overloaded with STC activity.

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 23):
For example, the French DGAC takes a percentage of the total list price of every single Part Numbers you install on the aircraft.

How long until EASA makes that practice history?

Tod
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sun May 14, 2006 3:20 am

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 19):
This just happened to be the main conclusion of the last of these meetings, and it was unanimous.

Somehow it doesn't prevent this aircraft to be the best selling (before production) aircraft in Boeing's history. I suspect deep down it is non-issue, specially that it was never repeated anywhere by the media. Yes, I have a problem with potential accuracy or misrepresentation of this issue.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sun May 14, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 23):
What they want when they get the airframe" generally implies that it is not part of the OEM catalogue since it was not installed at the final assembly line of the OEM, and therefore it is not certified under the type certificate of the aircraft.

I agree that with BFE suppliers the contract is signed between the airline and the supplier directly, but in 90% of the case, these suppliers are part of the OEM catalogue, however it is a different contract.

With the 787, BCA is launching a new kind of "contract", in which most of what used to be BFE (Buyer Furnished Equipment) will now be considered as SFE (Supplier Furnished Equipment), now becoming a direct responsibility of BCA, and not of the supplier.

Example: if you have an issue with a Recaro seat (and I'm not talking interface with the aircraft), before the airline would go to their Recaro Key Account Manager or field representative, etc... to solve the issue.

With the 787, Boeing agrees to deal with all those potential issues (customer support) directly and be responsible for it.

The thing is, Boeing's selection of suppliers under those terms is very thin.

If you want to install what you want, you have to be able to issue a Supplemental Type Certificate for the aircraft, as it is not an approved OEM modification.

So tell me how many airlines are able to do that? Not a lot, you have to have a lot of JAA/FAA approved licenses to do so, so many airlines send these to MROs which are approved, so added cost here.

Furthermore, it needs to be certified by your local authorities (the retrofit or the mod), and believe me, those guys take a hefty quantity of money to do so.

For example, the French DGAC takes a percentage of the total list price of every single Part Numbers you install on the aircraft.

Hope I shed a light on your concerns.

Not only did your reply not shed light on my concerns it actually brought up a lot more questions.

1. Please provide a site were I can see the seat manufacture called out in the Type Certificate. All I can find is the maximum number of seats.

2. Most manufactures provide the operators with several different seat plan blue prints. This allows the operator flexibility when configuring their fleet. They should get at least one, two and three class layouts and the choice in number of seats abreast.

3. So the 10% of BFE that are not in the OEM catalog, how are they certified, STC?

4. With this new contract Boeing is using for the 787, I take it the airline will order the seats, Boeing will buy and install them. If there is a problem with them the operator goes to Boeing to get the problem resolved and Boeing goes to the seat manufacture. Doesn't make a lot of sense for Boeing to take on a task that they can not resolve. Does the same procedure go for the engines, the operator has to go through Boeing to get their engine problems corrected?

5. In the states the STC approval is done by the FAA for a nominal fee, what cost money is the engineering that goes in the STC prior to it being submitted. All the FAA does is review the data and if acceptable approve it. But all the drawings, stress analysis, and procedures have to be correct before it is submitted.

6. Please explain how the French DGAC, which i assume is a government body, gets money for each part number installed, is it a tax?
 
knoxibus
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 7:59 pm

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Sun May 14, 2006 9:53 am

Quoting Tod (Reply 24):
Most of them.
What major airline has a fleet without any STC's?

How many are actually able to do the work in itself, you did not read my post entirely.

Quoting Tod (Reply 24):
It is more of a time issue than money when dealing with the FAA.

My example was the french DGAC.

Quoting Tod (Reply 24):
How long until EASA makes that practice history?

Soon hopefully, or maybe it is the case already, but it wasn't in 2003, that's for sure.

Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 25):
Somehow it doesn't prevent this aircraft to be the best selling (before production) aircraft in Boeing's history. I suspect deep down it is non-issue, specially that it was never repeated anywhere by the media. Yes, I have a problem with potential accuracy or misrepresentation of this issue.

No problem, you are entitled to your own opinion, I am just providing facts, and further more, I never said it was a bad selling point (or maybe it did not have that much influence), of course it did not prove to be so. Where do you see me saying that put a dent in its sales?

In any case, maybe it was not that evident prior to signing contracts?

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
1. Please provide a site were I can see the seat manufacture called out in the Type Certificate. All I can find is the maximum number of seats.

It is part of the Aircraft Definition & Specification document sometimes. This includes prices of the options on the aircraft, I am sure Boeing is not willing for anybody to make it available on the net just like this!!!

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
2. Most manufactures provide the operators with several different seat plan blue prints. This allows the operator flexibility when configuring their fleet. They should get at least one, two and three class layouts and the choice in number of seats abreast

I have not idea as to which comment or issue you want to pinpoint here. I am talking about suppliers, not LOPA???

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
3. So the 10% of BFE that are not in the OEM catalog, how are they certified, STC?

The percentage is very rough and therefore just to give you an idea. This is my feeling when looking at catalogue from both OEMs. And generally yes, an Engineering Order certified by the local authority would do. (Minor mod). Otherwise an STC from a third party would apply.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
Doesn't make a lot of sense for Boeing to take on a task that they can not resolve.

Well tell that to their marketing team, this helped them secure a fair amount of orders as one can see...It's got a special name and it's a whole package of support (engineering, spares, etc...) that will lift some burdens on the airline side.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
5. In the states the STC approval is done by the FAA for a nominal fee, what cost money is the engineering that goes in the STC prior to it being submitted. All the FAA does is review the data and if acceptable approve it. But all the drawings, stress analysis, and procedures have to be correct before it is submitted.

Is this a question or a comment? Thanks for the info anyway. Once again, different agencies, different policies?

Quoting 474218 (Reply 26):
6. Please explain how the French DGAC, which i assume is a government body, gets money for each part number installed, is it a tax?

They would make a full review of the list of the P/Ns installed on the A/C and which is not part of the type certificate / OEM validated. Relying on other certification documents for other A/C (FAA Form 8130-3 IIRC and for example), they would agree to allow certification of the MOD. The DGAC contains several bodies including one for aircraft safety and validation, all I clearly remember is that a small percentage (always the same) of the list price of each P/N was factured to cover the certification documents signature and dossier, and when you do a full cabin reconfig, that is expensive.

Your previous question/comment also validates mine, in the sense that when you do perform such a task (cabin reconfig), think about all the engineering and parts costs that you have to do on your own as an airline (I can thing of Air France Industries, Lufthansa Technik, Qantas and some others that have such a complete capability), or delegate to a thrid party retrofit center (see above list) that will obvisouly take a margin on this.

OF course, bear in mind that my original comment was on supplier's list. We drifted on to STCs and other retrofit, but I hope you got the general concerns that were raised and that were well accepted by Boeing, never did I say that it was a very bad thing and that nothing was done about it, please read back carefully my posts.
No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
 
Tod
Posts: 1709
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:51 am

RE: 787 Interior - Which Is It?

Mon May 15, 2006 11:18 pm

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 27):
How many are actually able to do the work in itself, you did not read my post entirely.

You are correct in noting that more airlines don't secure the STC themselves. As you know, airlines chose to sub out a lot of their workload. Because of the nature of reconfigurations, the manpower required is very cyclical and it does not make sense for most airlines to maintain the staffing level required.

Quoting Knoxibus (Reply 27):
Your previous question/comment also validates mine, in the sense that when you do perform such a task (cabin reconfig), think about all the engineering and parts costs that you have to do on your own as an airline (I can thing of Air France Industries, Lufthansa Technik, Qantas and some others that have such a complete capability), or delegate to a thrid party retrofit center (see above list) that will obvisouly take a margin on this.

Even QF and LHT chose to sub out some their workload to places like Heath Tecna and Flight Structures. You are also correct in that these services are not cheap, but if you look at what Boeing charges for non-standard work, that too can cost alot.

The basic premise still stands. If Boeing does not provide what the customer wants at a competive price, someone else always will. And that is good for the airlines. If Boeing alway got it perfect, the competition would wither and in the long run the air transportation industry would suffer.

Happy trails,
Tod