SA7700
Topic Author
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:39 am

Dear members,

Please note that this thread was started in order to discuss the technical-and or possible operational details of the 777X. If you would like to discuss Unions issues, kindly feel free to do so in the dedicated Boeing / Union thread which can be found here:

Boeing And Their Unions - The Future? (by SA7700 Nov 11 2013 in Civil Aviation)


Part 5 can be found here:

777X Updated Information And Developments Part 5 (by iowaman Nov 7 2013 in Civil Aviation)


Please stay on topic.


Thanks and regards,

SA7700
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19520
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:15 pm

Mitsubishi makes proposal to build 777X wings in Japan:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...n-mitsubishi-idUSL5N0IX3XN20131112
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
flyinggoat
Posts: 232
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:38 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:25 pm

From the article:

"According to the person with knowledge of the plan, Mitsubishi has proposed building a fleet of five 'Roll On-Roll Off' cargo ships capable of transporting sections of the 777X wing, which would be the longest Boeing has ever commissioned."

Building 5 Ro-Ro ships specifically to transport 777x wings sounds pretty impressive! Quite the investment by MHI too. I'd be curious to see what these ships look like.

Perhaps future 787 wings will be transported by ship as well.
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Tue Nov 12, 2013 7:30 pm

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 2):
Building 5 Ro-Ro ships specifically to transport 777x wings sounds pretty impressive! Quite the investment by MHI too. I'd be curious to see what these ships look like.

It would certainly be a far smaller investment than Boeing made in 747LCFs. You can buy a 100,000t container ship for $150m, which would be massively too large. While a RoRo will be different than a container ship, and have some additional costs*, for carrying a few bulky, but essentially weightless, 777 wings, you'd probably end up with a ship well under 25,000t


*Obviously needing the hatches on the end and the big unobstructed deck, OTOH you won't need any deck cranes, etc.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:21 pm

Quoting rwessel (Reply 3):
It would certainly be a far smaller investment than Boeing made in 747LCFs. You can buy a 100,000t container ship for $150m, which would be massively too large. While a RoRo will be different than a container ship, and have some additional costs*, for carrying a few bulky, but essentially weightless, 777 wings, you'd probably end up with a ship well under 25,000t

Indeed. It is quite an effective solution - reminiscent of the (much maligned) shipping method created for the A380. I would guess the 777X vessels would be broadly similar

Rgds
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:28 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 4):
reminiscent of the (much maligned) shipping method created for the A380

Is the roll-on roll-off barge that is much-maligned? or the elaborate convoy itself? I thought the Ville de Bourdeaux, etc were something like $30 Million a piece for the three. That sounds like a deal to me.

tortugamon
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:27 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 5):
Is the roll-on roll-off barge that is much-maligned? or the elaborate convoy itself? I thought the Ville de Bourdeaux, etc were something like $30 Million a piece for the three. That sounds like a deal to me.

As you say, the specialist Ro-Ro ships are relatively cheap to buy and run, compared to a specialist heavy airlifter.
Mind you, it's a bit further from Japan to Seattle than it is from Ellesmere Port to Bordeaux  

(That, and I'm expecting there to be a lot more of these wings than there are A380 wings ...)

Rgds
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:53 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 6):
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 5):

Since we are only considering the wings, they can be laid flat while at sea and can be rotated upright for the short rail trip, you really don't need to mod a RoRo that much. There are many RoRo that can handle large truck that won't require that much modification to fit a container that can handle the wing.

They do ship enough cars across the ocean from Japan to the US to know what they are talking about.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:00 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 7):
They do ship enough cars across the ocean from Japan to the US to know what they are talking about

You're not likely to find me arguing against sea transport my friend  

Airliner fan or no

Rgds
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:01 pm

All indications are that the vote is going end up lopsidedly 'No'.

I have a hard time picturing the work being done in CA. SC makes the most sense to me if they don't build it in WA. TX could also work. That state is very supportive of companies wishing to relocate and the weather is much more conducive to consistent flights.

Obviously this is WA's to lose. This is not a good sign though. Though I suspect this was Boeing's first attempt. Once they see other options, the context for the next attempt will be set.

tortugamon
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:07 pm

Reuters has tweeted the following:

#Airbus is expected to plaster #DXB13 with posters and invite delegates to sit in 17" seats to try to sour #Boeing's 10-abreast 777X launch

http://twitter.com/ReutersAero/status/400688893650935808

Not sure if this will be very popular. My guess is that they won't go with 17.2/17.4" seats. Although the more I read about the scalloping of the wall the more I think that the added room will come above arm rest height and closer to shoulder height. Personally, that is more important to me than a seat cushion but maybe 17.0" is indeed not going anywhere. We will have to stay tuned.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 6):
As you say, the specialist Ro-Ro ships are relatively cheap to buy and run, compared to a specialist heavy airlifter.

Right, and I suspect the 787 wings will be transitioned to these barges to once their is enough slack in the supply chain.

But you mentioned that these ro-ro's are 'much maligned' for the A380. Can you give me some background? Why was that approach not a popular one?


tortugamon
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:18 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 9):
All indications are that the vote is going end up lopsidedly 'No'.

The moderators have asked all union talk be done at Boeing And Their Unions - The Future? (by SA7700 Nov 11 2013 in Civil Aviation) and not this thread.



Quoting tortugamon (Reply 10):
Not sure if this will be very popular.

The people making the decision to buy a 777X or an A350 - airline management - generally don't fly Economy, especially on an intercontinental flight.  


In other news, The Seattle Times reports that “two sources close to Boeing” state that if Boeing chooses to not build the 777X in Washington, the current favorites are Long Beach, Salt Lake City or Huntsville.

Long Beach has the advantage of the C-17 FAL (so facilities already in place) and a skilled workforce. The disadvantages are Boeing believes CA is even less business friendly than WA, especially in terms of environmental and permitting regulations.

Utah is a non-union state and offered incentives to Boeing to place the 787-9 horizontal stabilizer assembly plant in SLC so they would very likely offer new incentives to land the 777X. Disadvantages is that structural assemblies and components would need to be delivered via rail from a West Coast seaport or direct via air.

Huntsville has an aerospace skilled workforce, but not necessarily an airplane skilled workforce. And like SLC, it's land-locked so it would require rail or air transport.

[Edited 2013-11-13 12:28:36]
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19520
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:54 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
In other news, The Seattle Times reports that “two sources close to Boeing” state that if Boeing chooses to not build the 777X in Washington, the current favorites are Long Beach, Salt Lake City or Huntsville.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
The disadvantages are Boeing believes CA is even less business friendly than WA, especially in terms of environmental and permitting regulations.

Any idea why CHS is missing in their list of favorite locations?

[Edited 2013-11-13 13:01:42]
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4952
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:59 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 8):
You're not likely to find me arguing against sea transport my friend

Especially if it can be accomplished below the waves  
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:06 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 12):
Any idea why CHS is missing in their list of favorite locations?

No, though these locations may be in addition to CHS.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19520
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:17 pm

Quoting flyinggoat (Reply 2):
Building 5 Ro-Ro ships specifically to transport 777x wings sounds pretty impressive! Quite the investment by MHI too. I'd be curious to see what these ships look like.

IMO Mitsubishi's proposal to Boeing is very generous, seems like they're laying all their cards on the table in the hope securing the wing work.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:20 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Huntsville has an aerospace skilled workforce, but not necessarily an airplane skilled workforce. And like SLC, it's land-locked so it would require rail or air transport.

How did they get the Saturn 5 to Canaveral? Can they get a barge to the Mississippi?

One scenario if the contract is voted down is to have final assy still be in Everett but all the major components be fabbed elsewhere. You will still draw down a lot of work force in the Everett but have lots of major work elsewhere. Unlike the 787 though, the off-loaded work will be within the company at a non-Puget Sound site.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:35 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 10):
But you mentioned that these ro-ro's are 'much maligned' for the A380. Can you give me some background? Why was that approach not a popular one?

In truth it was probably the whole logistics system, not just the ships. When the reality is that despite the complications these transportation systems (like that suggested for the 777X wings) are a very small proportion of the overall product cost.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 13):
Especially if it can be accomplished below the waves

Ro-Fo - roll-on, fire-off  

(in retrospect, that sounds like a good evening in, doesn't it?   )

Rgds
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:47 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 16):
One scenario if the contract is voted down is to have final assy still be in Everett but all the major components be fabbed elsewhere.

Well much of the current 777 is fabricated elsewhere, currently, already. So if Boeing builds the 777X wings somewhere else and ships them to PAE, the guys who build up the current 777 wings at PAE would be gone, but most everyone else would be okay.

That being said, Boeing is working on significantly automating the assembly of 777X fuselage sections (the "Anacortes Project") and while Boeing have said they're not interested in off-shoring this tooling, back in 2003 Boeing and Mitsubishi did consider having the Japanese assemble the 777 fuselages and "pre-stuff" them as is done now with the 787. If Mitsubishi is willing to build a RO-RO to ship 777X wings, they're probably willing to do so to ship 777X fuselages, as well...
 
flyingcello
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:31 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:03 pm

Mitsubishi are big in the ship-building sector, so throwing together a few specialist ro-ros will be easy as pie. However, am I alone in wondering about the timing of their offer? On the eve of the union vote? Interesting.
 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:14 am

Quite fascinating times we live in. I guess we will know whether or not Everett grasped its future or let it slip through its fingers tomorrow morning. Keeping the FAL line in Everett stays with tradition.....moving the line elsewhere though would be a bold change and something quite interesting to watch. Imagine a Boeing with a production line in Southern California! One has to wonder if the hippies would understand the mega $$$$$ and lessen their restrictions.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:45 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Huntsville has an aerospace skilled workforce, but not necessarily an airplane skilled workforce. And like SLC, it's land-locked so it would require rail or air transport.

Actually, it's not. The Tennessee River is adjacent to Huntsville.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 16):
How did they get the Saturn 5 to Canaveral? Can they get a barge to the Mississippi?

These days, the Tombigbee Waterway connects the Tennessee River to the Gulf of Mexico at Mobile.

http://tenntom.org/

You don't have to use the circuitous barge route the initial S-1C's used to get the Gulf.

(Tennessee River - Ohio River - Mississippi River)
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:29 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
In other news, The Seattle Times reports that “two sources close to Boeing” state that if Boeing chooses to not build the 777X in Washington, the current favorites are Long Beach, Salt Lake City or Huntsville.

Any idea why St. Louis isn't on the list?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:51 am

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 22):
Any idea why St. Louis isn't on the list?

Might be the same "issue" with Huntsville - they're military aerospace folks, not commercial.

[Edited 2013-11-14 00:11:11]
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19520
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:01 am

Aviationweek.com has a nice overview about the recent 777X developments. It doesn't contain any new information but it's still good to read.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-xml/awx_11_14_2013_p0-636700.xml

Perhaps they should join Airbus in Alabama   
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3784
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:47 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 21):
Actually, it's not. The Tennessee River is adjacent to Huntsville.

I like Huntsville. Some good friends are living there quite nicely. But does The Tennessee River give Huntsville an access over water to the sea?
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4918
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:49 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 20):
Imagine a Boeing with a production line in Southern California! One has to wonder if the hippies would understand the mega $$$$$ and lessen their restrictions.

Not a chance. And Boeing execs must be smoking something illegal to even think of locating any new project in California.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
c680
Posts: 425
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:03 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:57 am

Look for Boeing to quietly acquire more land in Charleston, SC - that will be the best indication of Boeing's intent.
My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 1:35 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 25):
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 21):
Actually, it's not. The Tennessee River is adjacent to Huntsville.

I like Huntsville. Some good friends are living there quite nicely. But does The Tennessee River give Huntsville an access over water to the sea?

Did you open the Tombigbee link provided in my Reply?
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3784
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:09 pm

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 28):
Did you open the Tombigbee link provided in my Reply?

No I did not. Sorry, I thought that was related to the Saturn V question. My apologies, it is all clear to me now.  
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:15 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):

Might be the same "issue" with Huntsville - they're military aerospace folks, not commercial.

Engineers and Machinists are interchangeable. Skilled machinists gets temporarily transferred between Military and Commercial projects as manpower is needed. In fact the whole 101 building (where the F-22 wings were built) is now a BCA entity.

My question is will a completed fuselage section be able to be mounted on rail cars for a short trip to/from the docks.

If Huntsville becomes a major assembly center for the barrel, they can ship it to South Carolina as the FA without having to go to the Panama Canal. Now that's a thought.

With all this talk about high wages and cost of doing business, I am curious about the cost of Japanese labor.
You would think their co
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1566
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:35 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 30):
Engineers and Machinists are interchangeable.

Uh.....No.
Anon
 
User avatar
USAF336TFS
Posts: 1355
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:36 pm

Quoting C680 (Reply 27):
Look for Boeing to quietly acquire more land in Charleston, SC - that will be the best indication of Boeing's intent.

I agree. My guess is that they will build the wings in S.C., not Japan. Too expensive, a logistical challenge as well as Intellectual Property issues that must be considered, especially in light of the excessive outsourcing problems encountered in the 787 program.
336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:37 pm

Quoting C680 (Reply 27):
Look for Boeing to quietly acquire more land in Charleston, SC - that will be the best indication of Boeing's intent.

I could be wrong, but I believe BCA has already acquired the necessary land. The engine nacelle parts facility that they just broke ground on is actually built several miles away, and didn't use the land that's at the main facility.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 30):
Engineers and Machinists are interchangeable.
Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 31):
Uh.....No.

Bikerthai obviously meant they are mobile between divisions, not between the two labor categories.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:09 pm

Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 31):
Quoting bikerthai (Reply 30):
Engineers and Machinists are interchangeable.

Uh.....No.[/quote

Well interchangeable may not be the right work. Semi-seamless may be a better word.

I've seen Engineers go from BCA to BDS and the otherway around with relatively minor paperwork. It's t he historical knowledge that is more difficult to replace/re-learned.



[quote=USAF336TFS,reply=32] especially in light of the excessive outsourcing problems encountered in the 787 program.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but with all the subcontract issue with the 787, the only major issue with Japan was the battery issue. I have not heard of any production issue with the Heavies.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:28 pm

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 21):
Actually, it's not. The Tennessee River is adjacent to Huntsville.

I had not realized that. Boeing may have to navigate the Panama Canal if they chose to make the wings in Japan. Definitely not the shortest of lead times either.

I imagine Japanese wings make sense with a West Coast FAL but not for AL or SC.

Quoting C680 (Reply 27):
Look for Boeing to quietly acquire more land in Charleston, SC

Its not so quiet. They just bought 267 acres a couple months ago. Their footprint is pushing 600 acres in SC which I think gets them to around 75% of Everett. Plenty of room to grow if they want to.

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/n...on-airport-authority-approves.html

There are a couple negative aspects with Charleston though. It is likely that the 787-10 cannot be produced in Everett so it will be ramping up in Charleston around 2017 which is going to be a busy time for the 777x. Also, the 787 team is not exactly blowing people's socks off in terms of speed nor quality. There is clearly a cost savings however.

Also, the Charleston facility may not have access to a true rail spur nor clear access to the Cooper River/Port of Charleston. Of course these can be added but would represent a significant infrastructure investment.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 19520
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:39 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 36):
which is going to be a busy time for the 777x.

I don't think the 777X work would interfere the 787 ramp-up in CHS (and vice versa).
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:41 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 35):
Correct me if I'm wrong, but with all the subcontract issue with the 787, the only major issue with Japan was the battery issue. I have not heard of any production issue with the Heavies.

There were some strength issues with the keel beams for the main landing gear well, but that was handled with titanium supports on existing frames and more CFRP on later shipsets.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:48 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 38):
There were some strength issues with the keel beams for the main landing gear well,

This would have been an Engineering Design issue. It could have been either an initial sizing miscalculation or a detailed design error. Did the Japanese do the detailed design or was the detailed design done in the US? I'm pretty sure the initial sizing was done in the US.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 34):
Bikerthai obviously meant they are mobile between divisions, not between the two labor categories.

That's what I meant.    And my reply 35 was all messed up.  

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
tistpaa727
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 5:23 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:14 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 33):
I could be wrong, but I believe BCA has already acquired the necessary land.

Yes, you are correct. Back in September they acquired additional land right next to the airport. I think this is different than what you were describing though.

Boeing, Charleston airport board reach new deal on land purchase
Don't sweat the little things.
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4918
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:34 pm

My suspicion is that the Seattle area has seen the last new project that it will ever see from Boeing. Anything they can move will be moved. And anything they have to start will be started elsewhere. That means that the 777X fuselage will NOT be assembled in Everett, so worrying how to transport it is futile. It will be built where the FAL is going to be. Whatever infrastructure improvements Boeing has to make will be relatively cheap compared to the costs incurred by another major strike, and that is why, I believe, that Boeing is doing this.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 1865
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:21 pm

Can they keep on track with production and roll out if they don't do the FAL in the Seattle area? Airlines were already critical of the fact Boeing waited so long to launch this a/c in the first place. How thrilled will they be if the production is delayed because Boeing has to set up shop elsewhere?

Keep in mind of course that we're talking events that won't take place for years lol.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:32 pm

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 42):
Can they keep on track with production and roll out if they don't do the FAL in the Seattle area?

They won't need to start configuring the FAL for years yet. Keep in mind that Boeing broke ground in Charleston, SC in November 2009 and its first 787 was delivered in October 2012. That is three years from shovel in the ground to an aircraft in service and the 777x EIS is still seven years away. There is a lot to be done but there should be enough time.

tortugamon
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:45 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 36):
Also, the 787 team is not exactly blowing people's socks off in terms of speed nor quality. There is clearly a cost savings however.

As a former resident of SC and a great fan of the state..... Them's fighting words!!!   

Seriously, however, how is the dispatch reliability of SC birds vs Everett? Is there a correlation? I know several AI birds came out of SC and AI is pushing 98+ dispatch reliability so far.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 8:17 pm

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 44):
As a former resident of SC and a great fan of the state..... Them's fighting words!

I am a fan too. Kiawah is a great place and Charleston is a solid town. No disrespect intended  .

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 44):
Seriously, however, how is the dispatch reliability of SC birds vs Everett? Is there a correlation?

Much of what we know is speculative and rumors but there is some evidence. In terms of quality we have the following: the average aircraft out of Everett takes more test flights before a customer accepts it than those in Everett. The data is found here:
http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/p...gle=true&gid=2&output=html

Second, in terms of efficiency/speed, the ramp up has been slower than expected. They had planned on three by the end of 2013 but won't reach that mark until some point next year:
http://www.boeing.co.in/Featured-Con...First-South-Carolina-built-787-Dre

We have seen other things that don't fit in as well, with customers delaying receipt in Charleston and Everett pushing through an out of the order aircraft for a customer and delivering it despite an identical aircraft being nearly ready in Charleston. I think there is other evidence out there as well.

For example, all SC employees were called to a meeting with their chief specifically to talk about quality:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/flyingless...n-a-message-about-quality-control/

Anyway, its all semi-circumstantial but I think it points in one direction. But let us not forget that they broke ground on this facility in November 2009 and delivered its first aircraft in October 2012. That is a quick turnaround with a workforce that is not the most sophisticated aerospace professionals. They can't expect to Charleston to match Everett so quickly. Everett has been doing a very good job for decades.

tortugamon
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4918
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:29 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 45):
But let us not forget that they broke ground on this facility in November 2009 and delivered its first aircraft in October 2012. That is a quick turnaround with a workforce that is not the most sophisticated aerospace professionals. They can't expect to Charleston to match Everett so quickly. Everett has been doing a very good job for decades.

I think this is crucial for critics of Charleston to remember. i have every confidence that the Charleston workforce, or any other workforce, can learn to build airliners just as well as the Everett workforce, but it will take time.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:22 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 45):
For example, all SC employees were called to a meeting with their chief specifically to talk about quality:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/flyingless...trol/

Interesting articles. However to muddy the waters further....

from the article above

"Air India has eight 787s. Most or all of which were put together in South Carolina while the Dreamliners delivered to Norwegian, LOT Polish and United, were assembled in Everett, Washington."

So a sort of inconsistency. CHS is slow, but statistically, they (AI Birds) are above average whereas two of the worst cases for dispatch, United and Norweigian, are from Everett.

United and Norweigian could have other factors, such as build number (Though AI did have some earlier builds than United) and operations mentality (Maybe AI is ignoring all the software nuisance alarms and UA isn't).
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 10:39 pm

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 47):
So a sort of inconsistency. CHS is slow, but statistically, they (AI Birds) are above average whereas two of the worst cases for dispatch, United and Norweigian, are from Everett.

And ANA has a 99% rate and all of those aircraft come from Everett...we really can go back and forth and the reality of the situation is that we do not know based on dispatch reliability. As almost 9 out 10 787s delivered come from Everett, Charleston's sample size is too small.

However, when the same airline picks up an aircraft at each location, it takes longer for them to take delivery in Charleston than it does in Everett. That tells me they are still working through issues.

Charleston just delivered an aircraft to UA that entered final assembly more than 6 months ago and that was the quickest they have ever accomplished that. Everett does it in less than half the time.

Again, Everett has been at this a lot longer. Differences are expected.

tortugamon
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777X Updated Information And Developments Part 6

Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:50 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 12):
Any idea why CHS is missing in their list of favorite locations?

WSJ is reporting that CHS is indeed being considered and was being considered before the union vote.

Quote:
"Mr. Alder declined to identify the number or locations of other sites being considered, but the company's nonunion South Carolina facility—which already builds 787 Dreamliners—was being evaluated before the machinists' vote Wednesday, according to industry officials."
Top