aminobwana
Posts: 923
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:32 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:52 am

.

The URL below by FLIGHTBLOGGER itself was already posted , but as far I can see the content not commented.

[url] http://flightblogger.blogspot.com/[/url]

where it is stated between other:

Quote:
First Flight
August 27, 2007
From the assembly floor:
Reports of extended delay for the first flight in late August are largely unfounded. ZA001/LN1 is still on track to be sent to the paint shop on June 25. No changes have been made to the originally planned schedule. Staff changes at Vought have been happening for sometime including the dismissal of the VP in charge of the 787 program last week. The sentiment from the Boeing floor is that things are back on track at Vought and the next shipset is expected from Charleston in Everett between the 19th to the 21st of June.

aminobwana
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:00 pm

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 150):
It's really simple. We are having a discussion. No one knows who is wrong or right. Is there even a wrong or right in this type of discussion? I am simply passing on what I have heard. From several sources now. We will know in a few months time if the info is correct.

Indeed, which is why I asked for the clarification - I *think* some of the posts have been deleted.

And perhaps I did not clearly convey my message when I pointed out that where others would have backed down and introduced maybes, mights, and whatever when challenged - the folks who come in banging away at either Airbus or Boeing like drunks coming home from the pub - in stark contrast you have remained steadfast in your claim that first flight will be delayed by an unspecified time for unspecified reasons.

But then you muddy the waters again with the comment, "For the record I hope Boeing gets the plane in the air and in to service on time" when you've already stated, "But I do know the first flight won't happen in "late August-early September."

Which begs the question - what is there for you to hope for in Boeing getting the plane in the air on time if you know for a fact that it being delayed negates the possibility of Boeing getting into the air on time?

I think that deserves explanation.
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9149
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:18 pm

Wow, you are really analyzing my words!

Here was my original sentence:

For the record I hope Boeing gets the plane in the air and in to service on time, and I hope it beats all it's goals.

Perhaps I worded it poorly Big grin

How about: For the record, I hope Boeing gets the 787 in the air with as minimal as a delay as possible, and I hope it beats all it's goals.

Better?

I don't know where all this talk of a 6 months delay has come from. Certainly not from me. My original comment (can't find the thread, was it deleted?) was that it was a possibility that the first flight won't happen until sometime in 2008.

Subsequent digging shows a delay, but no one seems to know how long. Seems like the average is three months. Again, this is in delay to the first flight. I have no idea how this would affect EIS. Perhaps Boeing is late with the first frame but early with the next 3. Or 5. Or 15. And this puts them ahead in testing. That part I can't answer.

There seems to be two issues at hand. Vendors and systems. Seems that there are some troubles with the vendors, I have heard talk, both here and through sources not online, that there is concern about the fitting between sections of the fuse. Systems is behind schedule. The plane we see on 7/8/7 will be a shell, with engines hanging off of it.

Perhaps a miracle will happen and it will fly on time. I hope it does. I hope I am wrong and I can upload first flight pictures on Aug 27, 2007. If I am wrong I will be the first to admit it.
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:26 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 155):
If you need to see the trees from the forest, then get new glasses. SOX has basically made it impossible for Boeing to hide anything like a six month delay. Sorry if that pops your little bubble, but then you have the legacy of Airbus and the way they do business to deal with. Boeing has to play to a much higher standard. Maybe you should get your own version of SOX in the EU. It would fill the jails with a lot of "high ranking" people, but that's life.

You have not replied to my questions. There is no need to drag the EU or Airbus into this discussion. This is all OT and clearly not an answer to my question. So let me ask this again in condensed form:

Which exact reporting requirement in the SOX would Boeing violate if they notice some problem and decide to analyze its causes and its impact, discuss possible workarounds and only after they know that they cannot avoid an impact on their original business plan deliver a message to stockholders about the changes in their planning?

Both links you provided highlighted certain reporting requirements, but none applies in this case IMHO.
 
bhmbaglock
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 7:51 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:55 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 127):
but it isn't a panacea to remove corporate fraud because would-be fraudsters can plan accordingly

It's not perfect but I don't know of any better solution elsewhere. Any law will be broken on occasion by those who let their ego get out of control but this law has real teeth and it's almost always popular for the DA to nail an exec.

Quoting Joni (Reply 127):
SOX just adds a lot of paperwork. It is great for accounting companies, though

I see you are as well informed on this as on freedom of speech in Venezuela.
Where are all of my respected members going?
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:56 pm

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 159):
Wow, you are really analyzing my words!

Yes, for several reasons. One, you've made a bold claim, to put it lightly, that you've repeated and maintained. Two, you've used your reputation and profession to support your claim. Three, you have until now (and now just a little) not wavered in your claim.

Please don't get the wrong impression - I am not analyzing your comments/sentences/words just to find a finger-hold to catch you out on something. I'm actually interested in why you are so sure first flight won't happen until 2008. There's a world of difference between reading tea leaves and knowing facts, and thus far you've given the definite impression of speaking in terms of facts, not tea leaves.

If what you say is true, Boeing execs are looking at jail.

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 159):
How about: For the record, I hope Boeing gets the 787 in the air with as minimal as a delay as possible, and I hope it beats all it's goals.

If it's delayed, it won't matter a whole lot if it walks on water.
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:09 pm

I think we would know by Paris here is boeing's press schedule -

""The Boeing schedule begins on Monday, June 18 with a press conference at 0945 hosted by Boeing Commercial Airplanes President and CEO Scott Carson. On the same day at 1100, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems President and CEO Jim Albaugh and the leaders of the IDS businesses will discuss current business trends and opportunities. On Tuesday, June 19, the vice president and general manager of the 787 Dreamliner program, Mike Bair, will hold a press conference at 1245.
""
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:19 pm

Quoting Philly Phlyer (Reply 129):
As a CPA in the US, I don't believe you understand the hammer that Sarbanes-Oxley has provided the regulators. If Boeing knows it has a probable 6 month delay, it must disclose that risk. If it doesn't and the risk materializes, there will be an impact on the stock price and the upper management responsible is in a boat-load of trouble

Absolutely. And then there are the independent auditors, who answer to no one.

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 135):
What is known is that Boeing has a great team that will get it all sorted, even if it does take a bit mroe time.

Absolutely, the best in the business.
One Nation Under God
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:29 pm

The Seattle Times this morning noted that there was a gap of a few mm between Sections 41 and 43, which has now been corrected. However, such gaps may become more prevalent when the sections are delivered with all their internal components.

Boeing finds 787 pieces aren't quite a perfect fit

Quote:
Photos of the final-assembly process provided anonymously to The Seattle Times show the jet's first two forward sections did not fit properly when initially joined. On one side, there was a gap wide enough to stick a finger in.

The photos -- taken during the ongoing assembly of the first airplane, which is due to roll out in a month -- show a gap of 0.3 inch where the nose-and-cockpit section made by Spirit AeroSystems bulged out farther on the left side than the fuselage section behind it, made by Kawasaki of Japan.

Boeing said that within the past week the problem has been safely fixed and the gap eliminated. Company spokeswomen said the gap was a typical issue in putting an airplane together.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...chnology/2003744076_787gaps12.html
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5535
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:42 pm

I certainly do not see this as unexpected. I'm sure they will resolve it for future frames; my solution would be to make master templates of the joining flanges to provide to each supplier; the sections would have to match the template before shipment. But there are other ways to do it; I'm sure Boeing will find one that works.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
ual747-600
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 1999 12:57 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:59 pm

Here you go nay sayers. Right from the horses mouth. 787 schedule not impacted by issues at Vought.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...llenges-are-not-impacting-787.html

This will obviously disappoint some.

UAL747-600
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:15 pm

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 131):
I am sorry to call you out on it, but it simply is not true. Go to any tavern in Everett or Mukiteo at 4pm on a weekday afternoon and you can talk to all the Boeing wrenches you want to. Ask any of them if the 787 is on-time, they will laugh you out of the bar.

In fact I talked to say 10-12 of them in the past few days, and heard the same story, at different times.

How many have you spoken with? Face to face?

Dude I respect your contrbution on the forum plenty but I've talked to people in the 787 program and they are insisting that they will be on time for first flight. And this is not some high level manager but people on the floor. I think the rumor of a 6 month delay is hogwash.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:19 pm

Quoting Wsp (Reply 158):
You have not replied to my questions. There is no need to drag the EU or Airbus into this discussion. This is all OT and clearly not an answer to my question. So let me ask this again in condensed form:

Since you are too lazy to read the Act, try

Section 302 of the Act mandates a set of internal procedures designed to ensure accurate financial disclosure. The signing officers must certify that they are “responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls” and “have designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to the company and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to such officers by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the periodic reports are being prepared.”

Under SEC rules, any publicaly traded company must disclose any situation which may materially effect its share market price.. SOX requires that the CEO and CFO assure that they know what is going on.

Quoting Wsp (Reply 158):
Which exact reporting requirement in the SOX would Boeing violate if they notice some problem and decide to analyze its causes and its impact, discuss possible workarounds and only after they know that they cannot avoid an impact on their original business plan deliver a message to stockholders about the changes in their planning?

What you are saying is Boeing has a 6 months delay and they are hiding it with a futile search "for possible work arounds." While it is obvious that management has the right to try to control problems, once it is clear that it will impact their share price, they must report it. They can not play the game of "We were trying to fix the problem for 6 months, but finally decided that we couldn't." That will no longer fly.

There is a real reason why Perdue got fired and Vought made their "Mea Culpa" to the world. That is to fore warn that their may be a problem. Boeing, on the other hand, is not worried. The following statement will come back to haunt them if not true, and the buggie man will be the SEC

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...llenges-are-not-impacting-787.html
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:48 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 143):
My experience is that by and large the workers on the floor see management as totally incompetent, they see every problem as insurmountable and are convinced that everything is going to hell in a handbasket, even while taking pride in building the best machines in the world. That was my experience in the machine tool business, and there wasn't once when we had a tight schedule that a large number of the floor people wouldn't say that it was impossible. Then they went ahead and did it anyway.

That's because in the places where they teach management in this country they still think Frederick Taylor is alive and well. That's how the newly minted 'supervisors' with their BAs in Drama and their mail order MBAs operate. A lot of people who come in on management tracks have never spun a wrench or bashed rivets.

"Management" itself seen as a skill set that does not have to owe anything to knowledge of the rest of the processes that make manufacturing run. My spouse worked for an insurance company (in a production typing pool) and most of the people there spend their time 'managing' and going to idiotic meetings and other time wasters, getting revved up and then going and giving the worker bees hell.

Of course it varies from place to place and like all generalizations this one is not always true. My supervisors at Douglas were competent people who'd made their bones in the industry or the military. But they were by no means typical.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5535
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:03 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 168):
That's because in the places where they teach management in this country they still think Frederick Taylor is alive and well. That's how the newly minted 'supervisors' with their BAs in Drama and their mail order MBAs operate. A lot of people who come in on management tracks have never spun a wrench or bashed rivets.

I have to agree with you here. By and large the best managers are the ones that come up through the ranks and thus know what they are managing, but not always. I have encountered some of those that were totally incompetent, and likewise have met some that never had gotten their hands dirty but still did a good job and were respected. But they are the exceptions. But I think there is still something in the American worker's psyche that requires the behavior that I have cited. The fact that it is usually coupled with dedication to the job makes it all the more baffling.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6725
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:03 pm

Just to air Boeing's side.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...llenges-are-not-impacting-787.html

Quote:
"Challenges faced by key Boeing 787 supplier, Vought Aircraft Industries, are not impacting the airframer’s overall programme schedule for the twinjet, Boeing says."
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:49 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 164):
I certainly do not see this as unexpected. I'm sure they will resolve it for future frames; my solution would be to make master templates of the joining flanges to provide to each supplier; the sections would have to match the template before shipment. But there are other ways to do it; I'm sure Boeing will find one that works.

More likely a jig than a template. Fix the barrel ends into the proper shape before stuffing. With the internal structure added it should tend to support the barrel in the proper shape rather than distorting it, as appears to be the problem at present.
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:39 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
Section 302 of the Act mandates a set of internal procedures designed to ensure accurate financial disclosure. The signing officers must certify that they are “responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls” and “have designed such internal controls to ensure that material information relating to the company and its consolidated subsidiaries is made known to such officers by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the periodic reports are being prepared.”

This refers to "periodic reports" not ad hoc press releases.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
Under SEC rules, any publicaly traded company must disclose any situation which may materially effect its share market price..

Can you point to the specific text of that rule. The text you wrote sounds vague and legally unenforceable.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
SOX requires that the CEO and CFO assure that they know what is going on.

No one doubted that this is the case here.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
What you are saying is Boeing has a 6 months delay and they are hiding it with a futile search "for possible work arounds." While it is obvious that management has the right to try to control problems, once it is clear that it will impact their share price, they must report it.

I would like to believe you here but you have not provided any source for that legal requirement. There is certainly no reference to the "impact [on] their share price" in the form you linked to.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
There is a real reason why Perdue got fired and Vought made their "Mea Culpa" to the world. That is to fore warn that their may be a problem.

Firing executives as a substitute for disclosure of facts? You can't be serious.

From the article:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...llenges-are-not-impacting-787.html

Quote:
Vought continues to face some supply challenges. “We are not alone. There is a worldwide shortage for different components,” says the Vought spokeswoman. But, she stresses, Vought is “identifying them [challenges]…attacking them, and doing everything we can to overcome them.”

Well that sounds exactly like what I described earlier. They are working on a solution but have not yet resolved the problem. Hopefully they will succeed with that. But this is not guaranteed. According to what several people including you have (without providing sources) claimed was that this disclosure would have been mandatory and would fall under this rule:

Quote:
Unless otherwise specified, a report is to be filed or furnished within four business days after occurrence of the event.

Yet we know that they fired that Manager back at the end of May thats certainly more than 4 business days and even if they had fired him only today it would have taken more than 4 days to assess the situation and as a result fire the guy.
 
dank
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:03 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 167):
There is a real reason why Perdue got fired and Vought made their "Mea Culpa" to the world. That is to fore warn that their may be a problem. Boeing, on the other hand, is not worried. The following statement will come back to haunt them if not true, and the buggie man will be the SEC

.

I sure hope that they are worried. To not be worried would imply that they are being arrogant about the program. Does that mean that there is a delay, no. But to not be worried that there could be a delay, particularly with supplier issues is...
 
IAD787
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 1:54 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:04 am

Well, we've beaten this one to a pulp over the last several hours speculating what this issue actually means. Frankly, this was a non-story for the most part, but rather what makes this issue so fascinating is that it gives us a glimpse into what it actually takes to build a new aircraft. Problems arise and solutions quickly follow. It's this kind of engineering problem solving that makes our interest in this process so rich.

No one reading this thread wouldn't kill to be right along side those in 40-26 in Everett. This was red meat for a.netters. I loved this story and the fact that it was solved even before it went to press was that much more satisfying. We're all armchair engineers, airline managers and pilots. (okay some of us actually are engineers, airline managers and pilots too) But this story has traction because you felt like you were a part of the process. Believe it or not, I know how an aviation nut thinks, I just happen to be one.

Onward,
IAD787
Former FlightBlogger turned Wall Street Journal Aerospace Beat Reporter
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9149
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:24 am

I find it amusing that James Wallace is being attacked on his blog...accused of "stirring the dust." Whatever that means.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:29 am

With all the crap that was laid on Airbus in this forum for the A388's delays, it is to be expected that Boeing will be similarly savaged for any perceived or reported delay.

But just as the A388 eventually took to the skies, so will the 787. I watched the A388 do it live on TV. I'll be fortunate to see the 787 live in person (though not on Boeing property). I expect it will be as cool with the 787 as it was with the A388.  yes 
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:22 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 78):
Quoting HB88 (Reply 76):
"No. Read what I wrote again. Slowly this time. I was referring to the equipping (stuffing) issues, not the wiring harness issues. You do understand the difference don't you? This was due to supplystream supply chain in an analogous way (if you want to refer to Natco supply of fuselage sections as supply chain and why not...)."

"Vindication? Who gives a rats about vindication? I'm drawing a parallel. This certainly is a sensitive topic. Boeing may have expected this. Airbus also expected certain delays.

Oh sorry, I was looking at it honestly, not through someone else's veil."

You said "not the wiring issues per se". So I guess the "per se" means you weren't referring to the A380 wiring issues? Not looking for vindication? Be honest with yourself man! You and I both know what you were attempting.

"Honestly" my a*s. You're attempting to put words in my mouth. Don't try and do that, it's rude and poor forum etiquette, no matter how much you genuinely believe what you are saying. I meant the wiring issue on its own. Excuse my inaccurate use of English if that's what floats your boat, but vindication has nothing to do with it. I was pointing out that the stuffing issue is an issue which Boeing seems to be having problems with. I'm not sure that "planning for it" is any panacea. I believe that if parallels are drawn with the Airbus experience, this was referred to by the Boeing cheerleaders as "planning for failure/delay".

In any case, I would think this issue has compounded the inaccuracies in the mate up in the fuse sections 41/43 fit (covered in another thread) which required removal of some of the internal structure to allow an attempt to get these barrel sections to fit. On its own, possibly not too serious, but some of these problems do seem to be compounding.

However, Airbus fans must tread lightly here as the 787 is the most sacred of sacred cows and the Chicago inquisition will be brought to bear if any heresy is uttered....  Wink
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:25 am

Love it when the Airbus cheerleaders squad get all the skirts bunched up in their arse over the 787 non-issues and unsubstantiated rumors.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:31 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 177):
In any case, I would think this issue has compounded the inaccuracies in the mate up in the fuse sections 41/43 fit (covered in another thread) which required removal of some of the internal structure to allow an attempt to get these barrel sections to fit. On its own, possibly not too serious, but some of these problems do seem to be compounding.

The Seattle Times article I linked to on this subject did note that as future barrels ship with all internal fittings installed, this problem may crop up more frequently and could be an issue since it might require more work to remove things and get them to line-up.

However, the same article also noted that this issue is not unique to the 787 and that the rest of Boeing's (and, presumably, Airbus') often need to be finagled into place. Also, that article notes that Boeing and the barrel suppliers are improving their quality control to try and nip it in the bud at the production factory, but if it does indeed show up again at Building 40-26, they have processes in place to correct it and those processes should not/will not materially impact the assembly time - especially a year or two from now when they're approaching maximum capacity. (thumbsup)
 
kl911
Topic Author
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:33 am

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 178):
Love it when the Airbus cheerleaders squad get all the skirts bunched up in their arse over the 787 non-issues and unsubstantiated rumors.

As if the Boeing cheerleaders haven't done the same bringing down the A380 while it's far superior and way more 'Queen of the skies' than an average 747... And don't forget the bashing the A340 back then....

KL911
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:37 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 179):
However, the same article also noted that this issue is not unique to the 787 and that the rest of Boeing's (and, presumably, Airbus') often need to be finagled into place. Also, that article notes that Boeing and the barrel suppliers are improving their quality control to try and nip it in the bud at the production factory, but if it does indeed show up again at Building 40-26, they have processes in place to correct it and those processes should not/will not materially impact the assembly time - especially a year or two from now when they're approaching maximum capacity. (thumbsup)

You're quite right. Mating fuse sections does sometimes require finagling into place. However, these are usually to deal with gaps/misalignments which are perhaps a factor of 2 to 4 smaller than these section mismatches reported today. I wonder whether cfrp barrels would require different techniques to deal with any required finagling. If they were out of shape, I wouldn't see that as a problem. But actual full circumference mismatches must be much harder to fix.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 178):
Love it when the Airbus cheerleaders squad get all the skirts bunched up in their arse over the 787 non-issues and unsubstantiated rumors.

Non of these issues are rumours at this stage (delays/barrel mismatch). Whether they are non-issues or not, it doesn't sound like you're really qualified to make that call. So I wouldn't lay into Airbus fans. You're making a fool of yourself.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:40 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):
You're quite right. Mating fuse sections does sometimes require finagling into place. However, these are usually to deal with gaps/misalignments which are perhaps a factor of 2 to 4 smaller than these section mismatches reported today.

At least one Boeing machinist believes otherwise according to the Seattle Times article -

Quote:
"If it was metal, and it was only three-tenths of an inch, we'd have a party," said one former assembly mechanic who still works for Boeing and asked not to be named because he's not allowed to speak to the media."
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:42 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):
You're quite right. Mating fuse sections does sometimes require finagling into place. However, these are usually to deal with gaps/misalignments which are perhaps a factor of 2 to 4 smaller than these section mismatches reported today. I wonder whether cfrp barrels would require different techniques to deal with any required finagling. If they were out of shape, I wouldn't see that as a problem. But actual full circumference mismatches must be much harder to fix.

For a true believer that still thinks the A380 issues are IFE. I think you should place your mountain between Rainier and St. Helens, as I saw a mole hill there the other day. LOL

Cheers
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:47 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 183):
For a true believer that still thinks the A380 issues are IFE. I think you should place your mountain between Rainier and St. Helens, as I saw a mole hill there the other day. LOL

Crikey, I mustn't be a true believer then. I have utterly no illusions as to the reasons behind the A380 delay.

Do you Boeing fanboys really believe that all Airbus fans don't understand the reasons for the A380 delays - ie the fixation on IFE etc? I'm genuinely curious.

Very odd.
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:56 am

Quoting KL911 (Reply 180):
As if the Boeing cheerleaders haven't done the same bringing down the A380 while it's far superior and way more 'Queen of the skies' than an average 747... And don't forget the bashing the A340 back then....

And thus your true motivation is revealed.

Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):
You're quite right. Mating fuse sections does sometimes require finagling into place. However, these are usually to deal with gaps/misalignments which are perhaps a factor of 2 to 4 smaller than these section mismatches reported today. I wonder whether cfrp barrels would require different techniques to deal with any required finagling. If they were out of shape, I wouldn't see that as a problem. But actual full circumference mismatches must be much harder to fix.

This is not a full-circumference mismatch. One would think the various partners would all have the necessary templates/jigs of all other relevant sections in order to guarantee this sort of thing not happening. Oh well, "Package is sold by weight, not volume. Some settling may have occurred in shipping."

"The problem was on the left side of section 41 -- the nose and cockpit -- manufactured by Spirit AeroSystems in Wichita. A bulge of about a half inch was discovered when that section was initially lined up in tooling to be connected with the forward fuselage section 43, manufactured by Kawasaki in Japan, the source said."

Also: "Contrary to growing rumors that the 787 will be delayed, she said nothing has been encountered so far during final assembly of the first plane -- or with Boeing's partners (the firing of the 787 Vought executive) -- that would delay the official rollout on July 8, first flight or first 787 delivery next May to All Nippon Airways of Japan."

And: "The 787 spokeswoman did say any serious issues that might delay the 787 would be quickly disclosed."

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/archives/116545.asp
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:07 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 185):
And: "The 787 spokeswoman did say any serious issues that might delay the 787 would be quickly disclosed."

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/a...5.asp

And with that definitive statement statement made by an official Boeing spokesperson showing the rumor to be totally false, I would suggest locking this thread.
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:17 am

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 186):
Quoting Khobar (Reply 185):
"And: "The 787 spokeswoman did say any serious issues that might delay the 787 would be quickly disclosed."

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/a...5.asp"

And with that definitive statement statement made by an official Boeing spokesperson showing the rumor to be totally false, I would suggest locking this thread.

My friend, if that criteria had ever been applied to the hysterical whipping that Airbus has received in the forums over the last year in relation to the 380 or 350, this forum would have been a much more boring and quiet place.

I can see it now -

"mods, Charles Champion has issued an official statement in relation to blah blah, the discussion is finished please lock the thread".

"oh, ok, fair enough CLUNK".

Sorry, but IMO a definitive statement from a manufacturer is not the point at which a discussion is forcibly stopped. That's where it gets interesting...
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:22 am

The other thread has been deleted, but I was answering a few questions which I think are pertinent since they relate to the current discussion on this thread. Hopefully the moderators will agree.

Quoting Clickhappy:
Boeing is having plenty of trouble with CATIA - "Cuss And Try It Again".

Ain't it the truth.  Smile

I used to support CATIA (and WIRS and a bunch of other Unix and Mainframe apps) when I worked for Boeing and it could be a pain at times. Still, it was cool watching them model planes on it.  cloudnine 

Quoting Philzh:
...does the fact that carbon fibre materials are being used here change anything in how easily things can be "finagled into place"? Is it just as easy to work with carbon fibres as it is with metals?

I would think not, to be honest, but I do not have hands-on experience with either CFRP or Al airliner sections.

Quoting HB88:
If this was a normal mating issue requiring a bit of finagling (as is common in assembly of metal fuselage sections), then I wouldn't have thought it would have even warranted a slow-down in assembly, let alone removing internal structure to allow the sections to be pulled into section in order to mate properly.

Perhaps it was because this was the first time and they had to both analyze the issue and create a workaround?

I am not picking on the A388 when I say this, but am only using it as another point of reference: When they first tried to mate the aft underside section of MSN001, the panel did not fit and they had to determine why and then create a workaround (grind away some of the metal). This took a bit of time (a day or so), but they made it fit and went back and made sure the future parts were produced to the proper dimensions going forward and this no longer became a regular issue.

If Boeing is still trying to fit these sections together on LN011, I'll start to be worried, because they should have had it squared away by then.
 
legoguy
Posts: 2981
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:59 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:29 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 185):
"The problem was on the left side of section 41 -- the nose and cockpit -- manufactured by Spirit AeroSystems in Wichita. A bulge of about a half inch was discovered when that section was initially lined up in tooling to be connected with the forward fuselage section 43, manufactured by Kawasaki in Japan, the source said."

Will these problems appear when Boeing fit together the forward and rear sections?

How exactly is the problem solved on any aircraft that has mis-fitting sections? If such sections are forced together, will this not add some sort of stress at the connecting sections?

Thanks in advance.
Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:29 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 188):
Quoting HB88:
"If this was a normal mating issue requiring a bit of finagling (as is common in assembly of metal fuselage sections), then I wouldn't have thought it would have even warranted a slow-down in assembly, let alone removing internal structure to allow the sections to be pulled into section in order to mate properly."

Perhaps it was because this was the first time and they had to both analyze the issue and create a workaround?

I don't know. Most Boeing fans assume a level of prescience on Boeings part which would completely disallow anything remotely unexpected.

In any case, one of the major advantages of determinant assembly is that the parts should fit to within the design/manefacture tolerances as they are "jigged off each other". This is different from extrinsic (for the want of a better word) jigging where the components are located in relation to a spatially fixed external reference frame. Determinant assembly is thought to be vastly superior, which is why I was very very surprised to see such an error in such a major assembly procedure.

But then again, as another poster pointed out, if it was an out of round issue, then it's not so serious notwithstanding the unstuffing to fix it. But if it was an absolute mismatch, then that would be, IMO, a complete cockup.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:30 am

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 178):
Love it when the Airbus cheerleaders squad get all the skirts bunched up in their arse over the 787 non-issues and unsubstantiated rumors.

yeah me too.
One Nation Under God
 
MCIGuy
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:52 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 187):
I can see it now -

"mods, Charles Champion has issued an official statement in relation to blah blah, the discussion is finished please lock the thread".

"oh, ok, fair enough CLUNK".

That's becase this particular spokesperson just put her future freedom on the line by making that statement. If it were revealed that it's not true and she knew it, she'd be going to jail. I think the reason some want this locked is because her statement pretty much makes the point of this thread moot.  Smile
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:55 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 190):

But then again, as another poster pointed out, if it was an out of round issue, then it's not so serious notwithstanding the unstuffing to fix it. But if it was an absolute mismatch, then that would be, IMO, a complete cockup.

Agreed.
 
MCIGuy
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:59 am

This just in:
787 fuslelage sections not a perfect fit! Spirit Aerosystems to announce resignations, potential additional 6 month delay to 787!

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:04 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 190):
In any case, one of the major advantages of determinant assembly is that the parts should fit to within the design/manefacture tolerances as they are "jigged off each other". This is different from extrinsic (for the want of a better word) jigging where the components are located in relation to a spatially fixed external reference frame. Determinant assembly is thought to be vastly superior, which is why I was very very surprised to see such an error in such a major assembly procedure.

 checkmark 
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:18 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 194):
787 fuslelage sections not a perfect fit! Spirit Aerosystems to announce resignations, potential additional 6 month delay to 787!

MCIGuy, no need to cover up, My super secret double undercover guy said he also told you about the real changes to the program...

Boeing has completely failed with barrels and is has contracted with EADS to supply them with panels as the 787 works forward for its 2010 first flight and 2014 EIS. Boeing is understandably sorry that its customers completely screwed it all up and has to take these drastic steps to cover for their customers incompetence. Also They noted that now that the 787 is going to be an 11Y with 16" seat plane they are very upset that GE and RR have thus far failed to supply the engines and only shipped inadequate 70K lbs thrust units. Clearly GE and RR have failed their customers, and Boeing hopes that possibly they can work out some deal to ensure that eventually these companies can regain their customers trust.

Oh another source known only to me, and that I can't reveal indicates that Boeing will be unable to meet several key promises to customers due to an IFE wiring issue. Its caused wake turbulence, OEW, and other contractual issues to not be met. The customers were informed of this and are completely to blame.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:23 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 182):
Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):You're quite right. Mating fuse sections does sometimes require finagling into place. However, these are usually to deal with gaps/misalignments which are perhaps a factor of 2 to 4 smaller than these section mismatches reported today. At least one Boeing machinist believes otherwise according to the Seattle Times article -Quote:"If it was metal, and it was only three-tenths of an inch, we'd have a party," said one former assembly mechanic who still works for Boeing and asked not to be named because he's not allowed to speak to the media."

IIRC, wasn't there an article sometime in the last year that suggested that some of the 737's arriving in Seattle were so out of tolerance that there was a fair amount of hammering and drilling needed to get them assembled?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:31 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):
Non of these issues are rumours at this stage (delays

The rumour of a delay is just that - a rumour. Boeing has come out and said the rumour was false. Why do you insist otherwise?

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 189):
Will these problems appear when Boeing fit together the forward and rear sections?

They might.

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 189):
How exactly is the problem solved on any aircraft that has mis-fitting sections? If such sections are forced together, will this not add some sort of stress at the connecting sections?

The problem was, apparently, an "out-of-round" condition, so to speak, caused by the internal structure. The fix was quick and simple.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7086
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:37 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 190):
In any case, one of the major advantages of determinant assembly is that the parts should fit to within the design/manefacture tolerances as they are "jigged off each other".

Surprise echoed here.......
It should be possible to eradicate this at source, before the sections ever get to the FAL.
It's possible there has been a bit of "hurry-up" going on to prepare for the roll-out.
I wouldn't expect this to be an ongoing problem.......

Quoting Khobar (Reply 185):
A bulge of about a half inch was discovered when that section was initially lined up in tooling to be connected with the forward fuselage section 43, manufactured by Kawasaki in Japan, the source said."

Ah, the feelgood factor  Smile
We get upset when our 11m diameter, inches thick, unjigged, fabricated sections mis-align, or are out of circ. by 3mm.....
You wanna try forcing this stuff back into alignment..  spin 

Regards
 
hb88
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:40 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 198):
Quoting HB88 (Reply 181):
Non of these issues are rumours at this stage (delays

The rumour of a delay is just that - a rumour. Boeing has come out and said the rumour was false. Why do you insist otherwise?

Sorry, I meant to only refer to the section mismatch issue which is not a rumour. The mods kept deleting a separate discussion on this topic and insisted on combining all manufacturing threads into one uber-thread. Hence the confusion.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26774
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:43 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 199):
You wanna try forcing this stuff back into alignment...

Don't worry. Just take her a few hundred meters deeper on her first dive and the pressure should pop it right back into place.  duck 
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:52 am

If a section is buldging 1/2 inch, I would assume they could build up the area with some sort of bonding agent/filler. They would probably not want to remove material, at least I would not think so.

Any car body man will tell you that metal is easy you can reform it, fill it, whatever. Fiberglass and carbon fiber better be close to perfect going on, because you just dont have near as many options to alter its shape while maintaining its integrity.

Quoting KL911 (Reply 180):
As if the Boeing cheerleaders haven't done the same bringing down the A380 while it's far superior and way more 'Queen of the skies' than an average 747... And don't forget the bashing the A340 back then....

Why is it so important to steal the name from the 747? It has been and will remain the Queen of the Skies for a long time. Find your own damn name!

Also, 'far superior'? The 380 will never even come close to selling as many copies as the 747, will never see the profit margins and total ROI that the 747 has, it will never star in as many movies, and it will never become part of the worldwide lexicon. To paraphrase a certain former President, I guess it depends on what the definition of 'far superior' is....

"Average"? Wanna talk average profit per frame over the life of the program? Last I read it is still between 13 and 15 percent and peaking at 20%. Hows that for average? The 380 will be working on getting up to zero for a long time.

Dont get me wrong, I like the 380, from behind the wings are increadibly impressive, but come on! This thing is about making money.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: 787 May Face 6 Mo. Delay, Vought Involved

Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:53 am

Since so much of this thread has gone off topic (This thread is not about US Corporate laws), it is being locked.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos