Here’s something I never expected to see. Boeing just announced they are adding a fourth 737 production line in the Everett factory. The internal news release stated the other lines will remain in Renton.

I don’t want to post the internal news release but this will be public shortly.

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

Continental767 wrote:

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

I guess a space previously occupied by 747 production can support a couple of 'smaller' types.

Continental767 wrote:

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

The release said they’ll move the 787 rework to other available space in the factory.

Continental767 wrote:

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

That won't last that long.

Plus they have the 787 space.

I think they got up to 57 before in Renton. I wonder what they are aiming for with both? It must be north of 70 per month.

"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" - Boeing 737 MAX

Nice to see some positive news come out of Boeing for a change! Guess we'll have to wait for more official details such as when, expected rate, how the supply chain will support, etc.

Could this also be an area for the time being for 737 fixes to clear out the backlog (as long as they have the skilled labor? Between the 787 and 737, there is quite the backlog to get through and they did announce last week hiring 10,000 people in 2023.

https://twitter.com/dominicgates/status ... 4gqDCqfXAw

Confirmed by Dominic Gates

Wow, this is not how I expected the extra space at Everett to end up being used. My only question is how does this solve the constant Supply Chain issues? Are the issues expected to be gone in a year? (Doubt)

Expected to be ready by the second half of 2024:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-everett/

I guess I'll ask it. Beginning of the end for Renton?

TWA772LR wrote:

I guess I'll ask it. Beginning of the end for Renton?

Seems possible to me. Renton is very space constrained and sitting on valuable land.

Rhal97 wrote:

https://twitter.com/dominicgates/status/1620116271424765952?s=46&t=wE4dsYE71qbR4gqDCqfXAw

Confirmed by Dominic Gates

Yeah, I halfway expected someone to ask, “Source?”

No, I made it up.

The internal Boeing news release came out about an hour ago. I figured it would be public soon.

TWA772LR wrote:

I guess I'll ask it. Beginning of the end for Renton?

Not as long as the 737 is built. I agree the future of Renton is unclear after the 737 phases out.

787 leadership announced a few months back that they were doing studies.. Another option was defense work... looks like the 737 won

There is a parallel thread.. I imagine the moderators will merge them.... Anyway a poster there provided a link:

TheZ wrote:

Expected to be ready by the second half of 2024:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-everett/

That's big news for Everett, which is just doing 787 fuselage repairs and 767 Tanker / Freighters. I would imagine it will be a nice site for building the MAX.

I know the P-8 production will wind down (based on the NG), so that lower capacity line may be available as well for MAX production increases.

Yeah, we all wanted Y1 / NSA, but might as well maximize production to bring in cash with the MAX to fund the future narrow body replacement in the future.

I wonder if any of the tools/skills that Calhoun talks about (not building a new plane, but developing the tools and skills for building a new plane) are ready to implement on this new MAX line in Everette? Will we see any fruitage from that years long effort for this line? This might be interesting to watch!

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

787 leadership announced a few months back that they were doing studies.. Another option was defense work... looks like the 737 won

Seems the unions won too.

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

There is a parallel thread.. I imagine the moderators will merge them.... Anyway a poster there provided a link:

TheZ wrote:

Expected to be ready by the second half of 2024:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-everett/

That's big news for Everett, which is just doing 787 fuselage repairs and 767 Tanker / Freighters. I would imagine it will be a nice site for building the MAX.

I know the P-8 production will wind down (based on the NG), so that lower capacity line may be available as well for MAX production increases.

Yeah, we all wanted Y1 / NSA, but might as well maximize production to bring in cash with the MAX to fund the future narrow body replacement in the future.

I wonder if any of the tools/skills that Calhoun talks about (not building a new plane, but developing the tools and skills for building a new plane) are ready to implement on this new MAX line in Everette? Will we see any fruitage from that years long effort for this line? This might be interesting to watch!

What about the 777?

Likely helps with some of the supply chain slowdowns that have plagued Boeing for the past year - you can have a fourth line so that aircraft can still move forward where suppliers are able to keep up.

morrisond wrote:

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

There is a parallel thread.. I imagine the moderators will merge them.... Anyway a poster there provided a link:

TheZ wrote:

Expected to be ready by the second half of 2024:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... n-everett/

That's big news for Everett, which is just doing 787 fuselage repairs and 767 Tanker / Freighters. I would imagine it will be a nice site for building the MAX.

I know the P-8 production will wind down (based on the NG), so that lower capacity line may be available as well for MAX production increases.

Yeah, we all wanted Y1 / NSA, but might as well maximize production to bring in cash with the MAX to fund the future narrow body replacement in the future.

I wonder if any of the tools/skills that Calhoun talks about (not building a new plane, but developing the tools and skills for building a new plane) are ready to implement on this new MAX line in Everette? Will we see any fruitage from that years long effort for this line? This might be interesting to watch!

What about the 777?

777-300ER and 777F are still being produced at the Everett factory.

BoeingGuy wrote:

morrisond wrote:

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

There is a parallel thread.. I imagine the moderators will merge them.... Anyway a poster there provided a link:



That's big news for Everett, which is just doing 787 fuselage repairs and 767 Tanker / Freighters. I would imagine it will be a nice site for building the MAX.

I know the P-8 production will wind down (based on the NG), so that lower capacity line may be available as well for MAX production increases.

Yeah, we all wanted Y1 / NSA, but might as well maximize production to bring in cash with the MAX to fund the future narrow body replacement in the future.

I wonder if any of the tools/skills that Calhoun talks about (not building a new plane, but developing the tools and skills for building a new plane) are ready to implement on this new MAX line in Everette? Will we see any fruitage from that years long effort for this line? This might be interesting to watch!

What about the 777?

777-300ER and 777F are still being produced at the Everett factory.

Yes, I'm quite aware - I was just trying to help the previous poster.

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

There is a parallel thread.. I imagine the moderators will merge them.... Anyway a poster there provided a link:

TheZ wrote:

I wonder if any of the tools/skills that Calhoun talks about (not building a new plane, but developing the tools and skills for building a new plane) are ready to implement on this new MAX line in Everette? Will we see any fruitage from that years long effort for this line? This might be interesting to watch!

Probably not as they'd have to certify these new production processes for use on the MAX. It's probably easier to stick with the existing ones.

I know that the 787 is now being built in Charleston and now I know from this thread that 787 reworks are being done on the former 747 line.

But what is Boeing doing with the former 787 line? Is the MAX taking it over now?

KPTKRampy wrote:

I know that the 787 is now being built in Charleston and now I know from this thread that 787 reworks are being done on the former 747 line.

But what is Boeing doing with the former 787 line? Is the MAX taking it over now?

787 reworks were in the 787 bay, IIRC. Or maybe what they were calling the surge line?
The tweet from Dominic Gates above says MAX will take over 787 bay and 787 rework moves to 747 bay and the Modification Center.
It's implied that 767 and 777 will stay where they are.

This is maybe foreshadowing some pretty big orders in the not-so-distant future.

Southwest still needs to order 250 plus growth, Ryanair could be good for a few hundred, and with MAX resuming in China one would have to guess they maybe order a few hundred if they can get past the political issues. They are flying well over 1,000 NG's with very few MAX on order.

KPTKRampy wrote:

I know that the 787 is now being built in Charleston and now I know from this thread that 787 reworks are being done on the former 747 line.

But what is Boeing doing with the former 787 line? Is the MAX taking it over now?

Seems like it yes

morrisond wrote:

This is maybe foreshadowing some pretty big orders in the not-so-distant future.

Southwest still needs to order 250 plus growth, Ryanair could be good for a few hundred, and with MAX resuming in China one would have to guess they maybe order a few hundred if they can get past the political issues. They are flying well over 1,000 NG's with very few MAX on order.

I would have thought their biggest issue was reworking (and in some cases, remarketing) 737s already built.

Maybe they see the light at the end of that tunnel?

Kind of interesting that during the MCAS debacle so many people said it'd be the end of the 737, and now we'll have more production dedicated to the 737 than there ever has been.

I agree they must project more orders coming in, otherwise it seems there would be no need to invest more dollars into more 737 production capacity and employing more high cost union labor.

In a way it might end up being a life line for the Everett plant, a way to keep it in the game till they eventually know what the 737 replacement will be, a place to concentrate the expertise to be used for that replacement.

It could be just like 787 in that the experienced yet high-cost workforce will be used to build the early replacement models, then later a lower cost greenfield site will take over.

As above, it also may be a sign that Renton will eventually fade away.

morrisond wrote:

I think they got up to 57 before in Renton. I wonder what they are aiming for with both? It must be north of 70 per month.

The peak rate was 52/month, and they flirted with that shortly before the groundings. At that time, they were trying to attain stability at 52 per month, while targeting 57 per month in the coming year. For 2018, the full-year average was 48 per month, and the last six months hit 52, but each month the number of deliveries bounced up and down as they dealt with traveled work and late engine deliveries.

I suspect the trouble they had stably producing 52 per month, combined with the greater scrutiny on everything, are major contributors to the decision to open a 4th line before even ramping back up to 50 per month, which is currently targeted for 2025 or 2026. They are not currently publicly discussing rate targets beyond that time frame, to the best of my knowledge.

Boeing's 20 year market forecast is 30,880 single-aisle deliveries, which is an average of 129 per month. I expect Airbus will continue to take the larger share of that market at least until a Boeing New Single Aisle appears, but to consider some scenarios:

35% market share = 45/month
40% market share = 51/month
45% market share = 58/month
50% market share = 64/month

In a growing market, these rates would start below the average and end above the average. Boeing only averaged 32/month in 2022, while Airbus averaged 43/month for the A320 and 4.4/month for the CSeries, for a narrowbody total of 80/month.

Airbus last year proposed going as high as 75/month as early as 2025, although I'm extremely skeptical of them achieving a 75% increase over their current rate and 40% increase over their highest ever rate in only 3 years. Historically, Airbus has managed to increase the A320 rate by 4.7% per year.

Overall, 50-something per month seems like a reasonable estimate for the 737 for the foreseeable future.

Revelation wrote:

morrisond wrote:

This is maybe foreshadowing some pretty big orders in the not-so-distant future.

Southwest still needs to order 250 plus growth, Ryanair could be good for a few hundred, and with MAX resuming in China one would have to guess they maybe order a few hundred if they can get past the political issues. They are flying well over 1,000 NG's with very few MAX on order.

I would have thought their biggest issue was reworking (and in some cases, remarketing) 737s already built.

Maybe they see the light at the end of that tunnel?

Kind of interesting that during the MCAS debacle so many people said it'd be the end of the 737, and now we'll have more production dedicated to the 737 than there ever has been.

I agree they must project more orders coming in, otherwise it seems there would be no need to invest more dollars into more 737 production capacity and employing more high cost union labor.

In a way it might end up being a life line for the Everett plant, a way to keep it in the game till they eventually know what the 737 replacement will be, a place to concentrate the expertise to be used for that replacement.

It could be just like 787 in that the experienced yet high-cost workforce will be used to build the early replacement models, then later a lower cost greenfield site will take over.

As above, it also may be a sign that Renton will eventually fade away.

The competition is sold out for almost 7 years if they deliver at 75 per month. You would hope that they project more sales if they are ramping up capacity. You have to wonder though if they will run into trouble getting engines at a rate approaching Airbus though, only one engine supplier and also supplying half or so of the Airbus backlog will put pressure on CFM to deliver at such high rates.

iamlucky13 wrote:

Overall, 50-something per month seems like a reasonable estimate for the 737 for the foreseeable future.

Seems odd to me that they'd invest the money for a 4th line when they've already shown they can do 50+ on the current lines. I thought Boeing was (allegedly) all about demonstrating shareholder value? It seems to be an expensive way to de-risk future ramp-ups, unless you knew you also projected you had business that would take you to rate 70 or so.

Some may see it odd that Boeing would decide to invest the money for the new line in a union shop in a high labor cost state too, without staging some sort of state versus state bake-off, since these things too run against Boeing's (alleged) values. I'm more willing to see this as not odd in the current context. Skilled labor is hard to find. They have a lot more data on what things cost in Puget Sound vs elsewhere these days. It'll be a challenge to bring up a 4th line, adding a new site to the picture may just be a step too far.

Wow, was not expecting this headline today!

I'm not super well versed in the details of rail transit, but I imagine there is some time and cost efficiency in switching the fuselages off the main track at Mukilteo instead of slogging through Seattle en route to Renton. The Seattle Times article linked above notes that there is a caveat - the Japanese Gulch rail spur may pose some technical challenges.

BoeingGuy wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

I guess I'll ask it. Beginning of the end for Renton?

Not as long as the 737 is built. I agree the future of Renton is unclear after the 737 phases out.

I recall from years back when Boeing discussed their real estate portfolio (around the time they put the Auburn racetrack office on the block) that Renton will remain open thru the end of the 737 production, then sold off. It is too confined of a site for production and the property values are huge. Something approaching half of Renton was already sold off back when the Fry's, Lowes, and all the retail and apartments went up.

Renton will be building 737s for at least 10 years after the new NB has it's EIS. But that is 20+ years away.

This Everett line dove tails with the phasing out of the 737, it could be one remaining line open some time in the future, letting Renton be sold off some 5 years earlier. At a rate of 60/month of NB production it would take the new NB line over a decade to ramp up to that level. It would be 5 years minimum below rate 10/month.

enzo011 wrote:

The competition is sold out for almost 7 years if they deliver at 75 per month. You would hope that they project more sales if they are ramping up capacity. You have to wonder though if they will run into trouble getting engines at a rate approaching Airbus though, only one engine supplier and also supplying half or so of the Airbus backlog will put pressure on CFM to deliver at such high rates.

I agree engines are probably on the critical path. IIRC Boeing was taking CFMs off of stored MAXes to keep production rates up. None of us have much visibility into CFM's production deficits nor allocation strategies AFAIK.

Looking at Everett from left to right:

South side:
40-21 (original building): 747 wing / fuselage assembly -> empty?
40-22 (original building): 747 final assembly bay 1 -> 787 rework
40-23 (original building): 747 final assembly bay 2 -> 777 surge line -> 787 rework? / empty?
40-24 (expansion 1): 767 -> 787 surge line -> 777X
40-25 (expansion 2): 777
40-26 (expansion 2): 787 -> 787 rework -> 737MAX (1 line? they can fit 2 side by side if they want)

North side:
40-32: 767

Revelation wrote:

enzo011 wrote:

The competition is sold out for almost 7 years if they deliver at 75 per month. You would hope that they project more sales if they are ramping up capacity. You have to wonder though if they will run into trouble getting engines at a rate approaching Airbus though, only one engine supplier and also supplying half or so of the Airbus backlog will put pressure on CFM to deliver at such high rates.

I agree engines are probably on the critical path. IIRC Boeing was taking CFMs off of stored MAXes to keep production rates up. None of us have much visibility into CFM's production deficits nor allocation strategies AFAIK.

That is a very good thing... better than brand new engines sitting un-used for years. The engines are not custom / operator specific. Having them tied to the stored frames would mean having to replace seals / hoses after years in storage.

Has anybody seen a source that cites the CapEx to do this? It might be not-exactly-cheap market-share insurance. 'We can deliver xxx frames in three years, and they can't,' kind of thing.

Leeham has a piece up for subscribers, and a teaser for non-subscribers.

The one tasty bit I found in the teaser was:

Boeing needs to keep up with the Joneses (aka Airbus). Boeing is studying very high 737 production rates.

Ref: https://leehamnews.com/2023/01/30/boein ... ett-plant/

I recall when Renton was at the high production there was a huge amount of overtime, something around 60 hour weeks for everyone. Running a 4th line that is set up to handle as many as the current largest line (one line is just P-8As & the second MAX line is lower capacity than the main line) would give the added space in a line which should improve productivity. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the 747 assembly bays gets added to this as well, to support more pre-FAL work. Possibly this will be just a -10 line, leaving Renton building the -7, -8, and -9's

Although not much longer, stringing 5 stations in a line is 2m x 5 = 10 extra meters taken up if all where -10's.

It is possible the AI order adds several hundred to the backlog.

Revelation wrote:

Leeham has a piece up for subscribers, and a teaser for non-subscribers.

The one tasty bit I found in the teaser was:

Boeing needs to keep up with the Joneses (aka Airbus). Boeing is studying very high 737 production rates.

Ref: https://leehamnews.com/2023/01/30/boein ... ett-plant/

70+ here we come. Boeing could generate well in excess of its target of $10B of cashflow with this. Plus they are contemplating 787 at 10 per month.

JayinKitsap wrote:

I recall when Renton was at the high production there was a huge amount of overtime, something around 60 hour weeks for everyone. Running a 4th line that is set up to handle as many as the current largest line (one line is just P-8As & the second MAX line is lower capacity than the main line) would give the added space in a line which should improve productivity. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the 747 assembly bays gets added to this as well, to support more pre-FAL work. Possibly this will be just a -10 line, leaving Renton building the -7, -8, and -9's

Although not much longer, stringing 5 stations in a line is 2m x 5 = 10 extra meters taken up if all where -10's.

It is possible the AI order adds several hundred to the backlog.

All interesting stuff in your post.

kaitak744's post ( viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1481075&p=23651019#p23650983 ) gives the current layout at Everett.

I do think they'll take a bit of time making use of all the extra space in the 787 bay, but I think they won't want to to be too different from the current lines. All this stuff needs a FAA manufacturing certificate, which we can imagine would take a lot of time to obtain if they try to change too much.

It seems they will have lots of space in the 747 area ( three bays, only one said to be needed for 787 rework, which IIRC is supposed to finish some time in 2024 ) yet it's at the opposite end of the ( massive ) building.

morrisond wrote:

Continental767 wrote:

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

That won't last that long.

Leeham is reporting that Boeing says 787 rework will last until end of 2024. Based on Boeing’s recent history on timelines, nobody would bet against it taking longer.

Should have never closed Long Beach

N1120A wrote:

Should have never closed Long Beach

Why? Seems like they have plenty of existing space if they are opening a 737 line in Everett.

scbriml wrote:

morrisond wrote:

Continental767 wrote:

Woah! Where will this space come from? I thought the 747 area was being used for 787 rework.

That won't last that long.

Leeham is reporting that Boeing says 787 rework will last until end of 2024. Based on Boeing’s recent history on timelines, nobody would bet against it taking longer.

That’s 2-3 years. In the grand scheme of facility management that is not long at all especially since it’s not like the new 737 line is (and can be) opened tomorrow. We are talking what, 6-12 months max overlap between new 737 line and 787 rework? And as 787 rework winds down less space for it will be needed then current.

Polot wrote:

scbriml wrote:

morrisond wrote:

That won't last that long.

Leeham is reporting that Boeing says 787 rework will last until end of 2024. Based on Boeing’s recent history on timelines, nobody would bet against it taking longer.

That’s 2-3 years. In the grand scheme of facility management that is not long at all especially since it’s not like the new 737 line is (and can be) opened tomorrow. We are talking what, 6-12 months max overlap between new 737 line and 787 rework? And as 787 rework winds down less space for it will be needed then current.

Leeham’s summary specifically notes a big reason for the line at Everett is the skilled workers there now on the 787 rework. So yea some overlap is possible/likely, but the rework will be winding down then. He states: “Boeing has a lot of skilled workers in Everett who are losing their assignments when the 787 rework is completed (target: year-end 2024) and with the cessation of 747 production. These skilled workers need replacement work.”

Can someone help me make sense of this..? This doubling down on 737 infrastructure seems strange to me given that there's no way they can keep the 737 after this iteration without a clean sheet. Did Boeing essentially run the numbers and determine that even in the short term this is their best solution to use the real estate? Just seems really bizarre to me. I'm happy for them and personally love the MAX but I'm struggling to wrap my head around this.

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:

Can someone help me make sense of this..? This doubling down on 737 infrastructure seems strange to me given that there's no way they can keep the 737 after this iteration without a clean sheet. Did Boeing essentially run the numbers and determine that even in the short term this is their best solution to use the real estate? Just seems really bizarre to me. I'm happy for them and personally love the MAX but I'm struggling to wrap my head around this.

Well, it is evident one purpose is to re-use the real estate. As above, Leeham also says they want to retain skilled workers, something that's hard to do these days. And, I will suggest that they expect to make a profit on the 737s produced there, otherwise I personally doubt it would be happening. Leeham said nothing about linkage to a future clean sheet, but I personally think keeping skilled workers around helps that happen too.

jbs2886 wrote:

Polot wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Leeham is reporting that Boeing says 787 rework will last until end of 2024. Based on Boeing’s recent history on timelines, nobody would bet against it taking longer.

That’s 2-3 years. In the grand scheme of facility management that is not long at all especially since it’s not like the new 737 line is (and can be) opened tomorrow. We are talking what, 6-12 months max overlap between new 737 line and 787 rework? And as 787 rework winds down less space for it will be needed then current.

Leeham’s summary specifically notes a big reason for the line at Everett is the skilled workers there now on the 787 rework. So yea some overlap is possible/likely, but the rework will be winding down then. He states: “Boeing has a lot of skilled workers in Everett who are losing their assignments when the 787 rework is completed (target: year-end 2024) and with the cessation of 747 production. These skilled workers need replacement work.”

Retaining skilled workers seems to be a strong, positive motivation for another 737 line in Everett. It makes a whole lot more sense than trying to hire in Renton and ramp up in a relatively compressed space when you have a surplus of workers and empty factory bays in Everett. Most trains from Wichita cross Stevens Pass and go through Everett making for a shorter (presumably) detour.

This move is very uncharacteristic of the old Boeing, which seems to be a good sign.

BigPlaneGuy13 wrote:

Did Boeing essentially run the numbers and determine that even in the short term this is their best solution to use the real estate?

For the incremental plane sales, Boeing isn't so much looking at margin, but contribution margin. There's no added SG&A costs, nor Engineering costs, and not a lot of Manufacturing Overhead (because they're already paying for the space and utilities). So the incremental profit is really avg sales price - variable manufacturing cost. That's going to be a lot of profit on the units after 50 or so per month.

Hence my question on the fixed investment to put in this 4th line, upthread.

As others mention, they must have confidence they will have demand for that added capacity for some sustained period of time.

morrisond wrote:

What about the 777?

BoeingGuy wrote:

777-300ER and 777F are still being produced at the Everett factory.

Dang! I typed 77F, 773, 778F, and 779 work and development. But I must have deleted it while moving some text around in my posts (I'm always revising/rewording as I type)... Didn't even catch that I accidently cut it. Getting older stinks.
So yes, certainly 777 remains an important piece for Everett.

Smart move on Boeing’s side. Ryanair, Air India, the new Saudi carrier are all expected orders. If Southwest, as mentioned above, and Chinese carriers, and some top-up’s from other American carriers appear, it sure is justified to invest in a new production line.