caribbean484
Posts: 873
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:57 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:07 pm



Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 36):
Great news - I'm glad they're confident in the new schedule. Having the design of the 788 100% complete must be a nice milestone.

I am also happy to see that the 787-8 is coming along very fine. I hope they will keep the schedule test and delivery. Nice to also see that 3 787s are being produced.
All ah we is one family
 
User avatar
teme82
Posts: 1335
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:38 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:14 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 38):
In case you are not joking,

Yeah I was joking there. But the time will tell us is there more delays coming or not... I think it's 60/40 situation so delays are more likely to be seen in the future. Just my 2 euro cent's.
Flying high and low
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:17 pm

This webcast gives a confidence boost to the program IMO. No new or significant delays anticipated is good news indeed.
One Nation Under God
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:21 pm



Quoting Teme82 (Reply 29):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
FAA and Boeing have agreed on what is needed to receive Type Certification.

What about EASA???

If Boeing have reached agreement with the FAA on the 787 certification, EASA agreement is probably not far away and may have been reached already.

It is common today to receive FAA and EASA certification on the same day, meaning an airplane's certification basis is usually agreed with the FAA and EASA at about the same time.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15029
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:12 pm



Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 52):
This webcast gives a confidence boost to the program IMO. No new or significant delays anticipated is good news indeed.

Another good indicator that this isn't just fluff is they reaffirmed the 748 program was on schedule. They have completed 100% of the 788 design and those engineers they pulled off sound like they are already back on the 748. If they were still having real 788 issues, I doubt they would have made all those moves and statements.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
pnwtraveler
Posts: 1074
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:12 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:19 pm

Stitch can't go into Journalism. He has been far to accurate for that. And there was a lack of spin too. :P Thanks Stitch for the reporting.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:47 am

In the end there are metrics tht the casual aviation observer/enthusiast can use to measure how well Boeing is doing:

1) movements of the LCFs to move parts around and to deliver parts into Everett (next milestone is delivering LN 2 into Everett over the next 2 weeks)
2) Power on of LN 1
3) movement of the static and fatigue frame out of 40-26.
4) deliveries and movements of fuselage sections of LN 3, LN 4, LN 5 and LN 6. LN 5 and LN 6 main fuselage sections have still to be delivered into Charleston.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
747Dreamlifter
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:07 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:53 am



Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
Since nobody has started one, and the webcast is now starting, I figured I'd kick off a "formal" thread

Hi Stitch,

THANKS a bunch for printing out the webcast......

I listened intensely this morning to what was presented by Pat and Scott....As far as I'm concerned, I pre-read most of it on Aviation Week and Flight International online. These journalist are right-on top of the industry and have a good feel of what's to be expected from these guys.....Boeing is finally admitting they need more time.....hense the name "Dreamliner" seems to be very appropriate

I was disappointed that nothing specific was mentioned regarding the -300, -900 or even -1000 models
I was also hoping to have them do some "Finger Pointing" and mention "Names" of deficient suppliers (even if this may seem unprofessional and a bit "canny").

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):
Q (James Wallace from Seattle PI) - Were you displeased with Mike B. dissing the suppliers, Scott?
A - Neither pleased nor displeased.

"Balony"!....Mr. Carson

If Mike Bair was there in the conference room and was allowed to speak candidly, this webcast would have taken a whole new direction.....He, in my opinion was the "scape-goat" for Carson.....Boeing Everett doesn't decide who the co-risk players will be, that's decided in Chicago where Scott lives.

Thanks again Stitch!...."Merry Christmas"!

Cheers.
 
kochamLOT
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:32 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:38 am

when is the first flight for the 787 gonna happen?
 
BE77
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:15 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:44 am

Added Stitch to respected members list  praise 
Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
 
lorgem1
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 4:20 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 4:15 am

Thanks Stitch! Excellent job!
It will be interesting to see the KRI's of the audit portion of the metrics. I still believe that the Suppliers cannot cope/keep up with the demand, hence the unexpected 'travel work'. The critical result area is now PRODUCTION. I wonder how closely Boeing is monitoring their suppliers - it appears to be the weak link in the whole program. Stitch, do you have any info on the supplier relationships?
Once again thanks Stitch and IAD787
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:18 am



Quoting 747Dreamlifter (Reply 57):
I was disappointed that nothing specific was mentioned regarding the -300, -900 or even -1000 models

Why? There's no such airplane. Assuming you mean the -3, -9, and -10...the -3 and -9 have relatively little bearing on the production ramp up. Once the -8 is in flight test and the production line starts to hum, inserting the -3 and -9 in there isn't nearly as big a job as what they're doing now. They are, rightly, focussed on the near-term deliverables around the -8.

Quoting KochamLOT (Reply 58):
when is the first flight for the 787 gonna happen?

Before the end of March.

Quoting Lorgem1 (Reply 60):
I still believe that the Suppliers cannot cope/keep up with the demand, hence the unexpected 'travel work'.

Travel work, so far, is one airplane. I don't think that really says they can't cope with demand, it just says they didn't spool up fast enough. If they have the same problems on LN 2-6, then I'll believe they have a problem coping with demand. However, all indications are that they're already way farther ahead on LN2 than they were on LN1.

Tom.
 
workhorse
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:38 am

...little question to English language native speakers: what does the term 'travel work' exactly mean in this context?
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2192
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:56 am



Quoting Workhorse (Reply 62):
...little question to English language native speakers: what does the term 'travel work' exactly mean in this context?

It probably should more correctly be called "travelled work", it's the term adopted for things that should be taking place on the plane sections at the sub-contractors before they reach the final assembly line (eg wiring) which haven't been done on the first plane(s) and has to be done when they arrive at Boeing.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15029
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:59 am



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 61):
If they have the same problems on LN 2-6, then I'll believe they have a problem coping with demand.

They won't have all the same problems, but they will have some. They would not commit to the frame that will not have any "travel work" that wasn't originally planned. It was thought it would be frame 5 or 7. One can assume it will be number 7, as the first true production frame, as they want to certify production ASAP. That frame is scheduled to roll out in April (at least that's what I think it says above).
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
workhorse
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:57 am



Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 63):
It probably should more correctly be called "travelled work", it's the term adopted for things that should be taking place on the plane sections at the sub-contractors before they reach the final assembly line (eg wiring) which haven't been done on the first plane(s) and has to be done when they arrive at Boeing.

I see, thank you!

 Smile
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9598
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 11:26 am

Remember the A380 "customer specific" issue with wires, I hope and trust that this "travel work" issue does not become the same for the B-787. I must admit to being disappointed in the whole issue, this type production is not new but based on the scope somewhat revolutionary at least in the major airline industry, I really cannot understand how the issues of dificient suppliers was allowed to get so far along before Boeing even noticied and started cracking whips.
When attempting something this new for the first time you need to pay more attention to whats taking place, where I think they fell down is in their supplier inspections, that is Boeing reps paying visits and noting for themselves whether things were on track rather than reading reports, it certainely would increase the cost of initial production, but when you now compare what is being lost in the delay, it probably bears no comparison.

Best wishes for the B-787, we are all waiting to see her take to the air.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:54 pm



Quoting Par13del (Reply 66):
I must admit to being disappointed in the whole issue, this type production is not new but based on the scope somewhat revolutionary at least in the major airline industry, I really cannot understand how the issues of dificient suppliers was allowed to get so far along before Boeing even noticied and started cracking whips.

It is important to remember that Boeing was not truly blind-sided by their suppliers. They knew almost from the beginning of the production program that many of the suppliers were behind and that this was going to affect the major partners in delivering both assemblies, period, and the completeness of those assemblies. Bair called these "the known unknowns".

Boeing spent close to a billion USD to try and fix that ahead of time. They also implemented some "brute force" staffing programs at Everett (the extra 1000 machinists) to address this. However, the true scope of the problems were beyond what Boeing had planned for, and then the fastener issue did pretty much bite them in the butt as it was one of those "unknown unknowns". And yes, hauling ZA001 out on July 8th, 2007 as a "kit-plane" wasn't the most brilliant of ideas in retrospect, but even if they'd left it in pieces in 40-28, it really would not have helped since Boeing still didn't have parts or fasteners to attach them. At worst, I think we'd be talking two to three weeks earlier power-on, first flight, and delivery which isn't really going to matter when you're still 22+ weeks behind schedule, anyway.

Shanahan's speciality is managing the supply chain. And based on what he and Scott said yesterday, it looks like that is exactly what he is doing and things are improving rather markedly.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22389
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:07 pm



Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 52):
This webcast gives a confidence boost to the program IMO. No new or significant delays anticipated is good news indeed.

I know I have a cynical side, but I won't be drawing any conclusions based on what was said here.

After all, nothing new was said, only affirmations that dates already announced are still the planned dates. Oh, we did hear how the second level of executive chairs are being filled, which wasn't all that significant to me.

We heard similar upbeat stuff before Boeing dropped the six month delay on us.

I remember how Clickhappy got pummelled here when he suggested a similar delay months before it happened, even though he has been one of the most valued contributers to a.net.

I also remember seeing the delay first being openly discussed in the press because of statements made by John Leahy, of all people!

So, put me in the "seeing is believing" camp.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 56):
In the end there are metrics tht the casual aviation observer/enthusiast can use to measure how well Boeing is doing:

1) movements of the LCFs to move parts around and to deliver parts into Everett (next milestone is delivering LN 2 into Everett over the next 2 weeks)
2) Power on of LN 1
3) movement of the static and fatigue frame out of 40-26.
4) deliveries and movements of fuselage sections of LN 3, LN 4, LN 5 and LN 6. LN 5 and LN 6 main fuselage sections have still to be delivered into Charleston.

 checkmark 

Seeing is believing...

Quoting Par13del (Reply 66):
Remember the A380 "customer specific" issue with wires, I hope and trust that this "travel work" issue does not become the same for the B-787. I must admit to being disappointed in the whole issue, this type production is not new but based on the scope somewhat revolutionary at least in the major airline industry, I really cannot understand how the issues of dificient suppliers was allowed to get so far along before Boeing even noticied and started cracking whips.

IIRC the last delay was blamed on:

  • Travelled work
  • Fastener shortages
  • Software issues
Reading the transcript above, it seems they are only claiming success on the software front, and are saying that the fastener shortage and travelled work issues still exist, but are being managed.

As others mentioned, it seems a big issue has been the chaos at Vought, but Boeing hasn't been all that forthright about it. We have seen articles in the Seattle papers about it, but Boeing hasn't directly been willing to call them out. That makes sense from a business perspective: like it or not, Vought has a big piece of the 787's future in their hands.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 66):
When attempting something this new for the first time you need to pay more attention to whats taking place, where I think they fell down is in their supplier inspections, that is Boeing reps paying visits and noting for themselves whether things were on track rather than reading reports, it certainely would increase the cost of initial production, but when you now compare what is being lost in the delay, it probably bears no comparison.

Before the six month delay, Boeing was talking openly about sending its employees around to deal with issues in the supplier network. So the issue was being worked at some level, but I agree in retrospect it seems like it wasn't dealt with effectively, and I think Boeing is admitting to this in general terms in this webcast.

Of all the issues listed above, we can all speculate on what the "long pole in the tent" was. I think the software and fastener issues would have been good for a few month slip, but the chaos in the supplier network is probably the long pole in the tent.

And it's clear that the "show and tell" on 7/8/2007 must have put an unnatural kink in the schedule.

Without the "show and tell", I imagine sections would have stayed at suppliers longer, till the right fasteners were available and more wiring work was completed. On the other hand, maybe the premature pressure to deliver made the problems in the supplier network become visible earlier. I guess we'll never know for sure. because we don't know what Boeing knew and when they knew it, but it seems from the webcast and from the replacement of Bair that Boeing is admitting the issues in the supplier network were not handled as well as they could have been.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:55 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 68):
I know I have a cynical side, but I won't be drawing any conclusions based on what was said here.

After all, nothing new was said, only affirmations that dates already announced are still the planned dates. Oh, we did hear how the second level of executive chairs are being filled, which wasn't all that significant to me.

We heard similar upbeat stuff before Boeing dropped the six month delay on us.

I go along with that. The Call was riddled with hollow phrases like "we achieved 100 minus x percent of whatnot", "there is good progress", "we have a better picture now", "we still believe...", yadda, yadda.

Basically, between all those words, Shanahan pointed out that until power-on they won't know whether the schedule is executable. It is quite logic that as long as they don't know precisely what a new guidance on first flight, certification, first delivery, and production ramp-up would look like, they better stick to the current one.
Likewise, they'll have to wait for initial flight test results to see how much of the performance shortfall from weight and engines not being up to spec might be recoverable due to (hopefully) better than expected aero performance - and what the implications for (re)designing the -9 and -10 are - or how much they would have to swallow for noncompliance with guarantees.

What amazes me is that for the third update in a row Boeing announced that thay have begun to install systems on LN1...Nevertheless, I hear right now that in fact LN1 is still 'bare'.  scratchchin 

Moreover, given the quantum leap in systems integration and innovation displayed by the 787, it is hard to believe we'll see power-on in January and first flight only two months later. Lab testing might do the trick...  crossfingers 
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15029
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:01 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 68):
Reading the transcript above, it seems they are only claiming success on the software front, and are saying that the fastener shortage and travelled work issues still exist, but are being managed.

Well, that's why they announced a 6 month delay and not a 3 month delay, isn't it? If all the problems could be immediately eliminated in the first 2 months...

In other words, they were quite candid with the progress, and being candid is seen as a weakness by some people. The alternative is the very secretive way Airbus has dealt with the A380 problems.

I don't know which is better. The investors haven't responded positively to either methodology, though Airbus took a much larger hit. Then again, I'd expect Boeing to also take a bigger hit if they miss more deadlines.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:21 pm

Sometimes I wish the A380 had never been launched because all the vitriol spilled over it here in airliners.net has ensured that every future project will be equally poisoned. In five years we'll be lambasting Airbus for every single mis-step they make with the A350XWB and pouring over every PR and conference call to call out where they are obfuscating, covering, and outright lying just as was done with the original A350.

The darn things flies when it flies. Boeing is fortunate they set the benchmark so high with the 787 nothing could touch it for a decade, and a decade is a very long time to get it right. Again, just as in ten years nobody will care about the A380's troubled birth when there are hundreds of them flying, neither will folks care about the 787 and the A350 when there are thousands of each of them flying.

Nobody but us here, of course.  Sad
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:47 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):
Sometimes I wish the A380 had never been launched because all the vitriol spilled over it here in airliners.net has ensured that every future project will be equally poisoned. In five years we'll be lambasting Airbus for every single mis-step they make with the A350XWB and pouring over every PR and conference call to call out where they are obfuscating, covering, and outright lying just as was done with the original A350

Errr...excuse me?  eyebrow  Obfuscating, covering, and outright lying is just that. Doesn't make any difference to me whether Airbus might have done it before or not.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:49 pm

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 72):
Errr...excuse me? Obfuscating, covering, and outright lying is just that. Doesn't make any difference to me whether Airbus might have done it before or not.

I'm just saying the "mission" of these forums seems to have moved from the promotion and enjoyment of aviation to the discrediting and ridiculing of it.

But then, maybe I am reading too much into it. I just seem to spend more time defending the 787, 747-8, A380 and A350 from what I feel are...unfair...attacks then celebrating their milestones.  Sad

[Edited 2007-12-12 11:52:47]
 
LY4XELD
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 5:14 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:52 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):

The darn things flies when it flies. Boeing is fortunate they set the benchmark so high with the 787 nothing could touch it for a decade, and a decade is a very long time to get it right. Again, just as in ten years nobody will care about the A380's troubled birth when there are hundreds of them flying, neither will folks care about the 787 and the A350 when there are thousands of each of them flying.

Amen.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7027
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:16 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):
Sometimes I wish the A380 had never been launched because all the vitriol spilled over it here in airliners.net has ensured that every future project will be equally poisoned

There was a better solution to that problem than "not launching the A380" - sadly.
Don't blame the A380. The blame belongs squarely in a specific place, n'est pas?

Regards
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:26 pm

Boeing, when they launched the 787, said that the production rate was going to be about 7/month. That's before sales really took off. Now they're saying that they can still deliver 109 by 12/31/09 which mean they have to bang out 108 airplanes over the next 24 months so let's look at a hypothetical.

Boeing can put out from Jan. 2008 to March 2008 2 787s/month (a total of 6 for 1st quarter 2008) and still get those airplanes into the test program and meet the revised EIS date. Now let's say they ramp up to 3/month for 2nd quarter 2008 (that's 9 for that time or 1 airplane every 10 days) and then for the last 6 months of 2008 they can ramp up to 4 per month (or about 1/week) and that will be 24 airplanes.

Looking at those numbers then we arrive at 39 for 2008. Boeing said (at the Oct. 10th conference call) that they feel they can get about 40-45 787s done by the end of 2008.

That leaves about 68-69 to build in 2009.

This is what I envisioned for 2009 production:
1st quarter 2009: 5/month = 15
2nd quarter 2009: 5/month = 15
3rd quarter 2009: 6/month = 18
4th quarter 2009: 6/month = 18

Total for 2009: 66 787 and total for 2008 and 2009 is 105. They can make up thye extra 3 frames by sightly tweaking up the production rate but as you can see it does get them awfully close to 109 airfrmaes (actually they would have 106 as LN 1 is already built but you get the idea).

Now what are the pit falls. So far Vought and the small part suppliers continue to be the achilies heel is all of this. Strode is going over to Charleston to basically pistol whip Vought and GA. How they respond is still up in the air.

What about the small part suppliers (for brackets, clips, fasteners)? They need to step up and increase production in order to meet these production goals.

An interesting conundrum exists though:

All the major suppliers (Japanese Heavy's, Alenia, Vought, Spirit) can easily continue to produce their workshare parts easily and continue to use temporary fasteners until there are more and more parts (the delays should help mitigate all this) and still be able to keep up the production schedule as planned (for 109) but for the small parts suppliers they need to ramp up quicklly and catch up to the large suppliers who are producing faster that they are. After the small part suppliers have caught up by increasing production then they would have to slow down production so that they supply the right amount of parts for the number of aircraft that are being produced each month. This slow down could entail some cost to them and I'm unsure if those cost would be passed on or if they would have to eat it. Of course if Boeing decides to ultimately increase production of the 787 beyond 10/month then there would be no problem.

Again Boeing has no problems putting the 787 together and with a steep learning curve they can get the join done in a short amount of time(they need to achieve 1.5 787 per week ultimatley to make the 109 787) and it is evident that the engineering of the airplane is very sound. The 6 month delay allowed ZA9998 and LN 2 to be in a more complete state and thus allow for less traveled work which will ease the Everett bottleneck. The big part of the success of the ramp up is out of Boeing's hands in the hands of Vought and the small suppliers.

The next three months are going to be very critical and LCF movements will be the the indication as to how production is going.

[Edited 2007-12-12 12:49:28]
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:48 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):
Sometimes I wish the A380 had never been launched because all the vitriol spilled over it here in airliners.net has ensured that every future project will be equally poisoned.

I actually think the atmosphere has improved on a.net... the poison was the haughty self-righteousness of the ardent fans on each side, as A's fortunes were down and B's fortunes were up. Now that the 787 is (a little) behind, those people have either shut up or left, to my great relief. Misery loves company. Building airplanes is hard; there will always be hiccups... that's what makes it interesting, and it's also why we don't see Airbus and Boeing ripping into each other.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):
Nobody but us here, of course. Sad

Awww, don't be sad... yes, we're nerds, but we can be proud nerds!  Big grin

Quoting Revelation (Reply 68):
So, put me in the "seeing is believing" camp.

 highfive  I remember you as a Boeing fan, so I admire you for saying that.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 76):
The next three months are going to be very critical and LCF movements will be the the indication as to how production is going.

 checkmark  Exciting times ahead!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:43 pm



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 75):
There was a better solution to that problem than "not launching the A380" - sadly.
Don't blame the A380. The blame belongs squarely in a specific place, n'est pas?

I spend too much time defending the A380 to dislike her.  Smile Even though it is all pro bono, maybe SQ will overbook J and kick me up to R when I try her for the first time as a thank you.  cloudnine 

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 77):
Building airplanes is hard; there will always be hiccups... that's what makes it interesting, and it's also why we don't see Airbus and Boeing ripping into each other.

It's just strikes me that so many people seem to not understand just how complicated these things are. Even the programs that appear on the surface to go fine likely had a whole slew of "white-knuckle" moments we've never heard of. The A380, A350XWB and 787 all had (or will have) similar gestation periods of 5-7 years. Maybe that is just "too far too fast", but Boeing and Airbus can't dawdle forever lest the airlines just keep ordering more of what they have to meet their needs and forgo the new model, no matter how nice it ends up being. That they can still get within six to eighteen months of that date I find more impressive then dismissive.  thumbsup 
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:27 am



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 69):
Nevertheless, I hear right now that in fact LN1 is still 'bare'.

Then someone is lying to you. LN1 hasn't been bare for several weeks.

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 69):
Moreover, given the quantum leap in systems integration and innovation displayed by the 787, it is hard to believe we'll see power-on in January and first flight only two months later.

Actually, the systems integration should greatly speed up the time. On something like the 747-400, you had dozens and dozens of boxes that had to talk to each other. The 787 has far fewer boxes and they've had the software playing together in the "sandbox" for a long time.

Tom.
 
ckfred
Posts: 5167
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:34 am

It would be interesting to know if Boeing is anticipating any large orders from U.S. carriers during 2008. DL, AA, and UA have older widebody fleets, as well as the need for additional aircraft to continue with international expansion.
 
speedbird128
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:30 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:58 am



Quoting Stitch (Reply 71):
The darn things flies when it flies

It's a pity that sentiment is/was not universal for all manufacturers...
A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22389
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:27 pm



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 70):
In other words, they were quite candid with the progress, and being candid is seen as a weakness by some people.

I can't say that they are being candid, regardless of what Airbus or any other entity does.

Can you say you heard candid statements from Boing before the annoucement of the six month delay that there could be a significant delay? All I heard from Boeing was that there were challenges, but the schedule would hold. The first candid statement I heard in the press about the delay was from John Leahy!

And so, when you read the transcript of the above, how can you judge that the statements are candid?

Some things make me think they are not being candid.

Here's a few quick things I picked out:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Full confidence in the technology and the suppliers and supply chain.

Full confidence? Really? After the suppliers have been a big part of the six month slip? Somehow this just doesn't ring true to me.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):
Q (James Wallace from Seattle PI) - Were you displeased with Mike B. dissing the suppliers, Scott?
A - Neither pleased nor displeased.

Really, Scott, you have no opinion?

Bottom line: you see candid statements, I see corporate spin. Neither of us know what's going on in their heads. Seeing will be believing.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 73):
I'm just saying the "mission" of these forums seems to have moved from the promotion and enjoyment of aviation to the discrediting and ridiculing of it.

How is being critical not supportive of aviation? Is it in the interest of aviation to have poorly managed projects with unrealistic goals go unnoticed? If so, why do we need a.net: we can all just read press releases at corporate web sites and revel in their truth and beauty.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15029
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:14 pm



Quoting NYC777 (Reply 76):
1st quarter 2009: 5/month = 15
2nd quarter 2009: 5/month = 15
3rd quarter 2009: 6/month = 18
4th quarter 2009: 6/month = 18

My guess is they are looking to get ramped up to 5 a month by Q1 of 2008 and full pace by the end of 2009, which would basically be close to the original schedule for ramp up. As long as they have the fastener situation sorted out and there are no time consuming changes to design discovered during testing, should be achievable. Here are some estimates that show a slow and steady rampup, rather than jumps.

Output from 2007 (3 total frames, 1 to fly)
1st quarter 2008: ~2/month = 5
2nd quarter 2008: ~3/month = 8
3rd quarter 2008: ~4/month = 11
4th quarter 2008: ~4/month = 13
1st quarter 2009: ~5/month = 15
2nd quarter 2009: ~6/month = 17
3rd quarter 2009: ~6/month = 19
4th quarter 2009: ~7/month = 21

Total completed by YE2009= 109 flying frames, 2 static/fatigue test frames.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
I can't say that they are being candid

I know you can't. But I think they were. That's why I disagreed with you.  Wink
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
Ncfc99
Posts: 778
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:49 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 73):
But then, maybe I am reading too much into it. I just seem to spend more time defending the 787, 747-8, A380 and A350 from what I feel are...unfair...attacks then celebrating their milestones.

No youre not. You are not alone in your veiws. Although there were several Americans with doolally interpretations of all things airbus, there only seems to be one doolally european(that I have noticed) about all things boeing, so the bashing has slowed from a torrent to a trickle of late.
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:58 pm



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 79):
Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 69):
Nevertheless, I hear right now that in fact LN1 is still 'bare'.

Then someone is lying to you. LN1 hasn't been bare for several weeks.

Do you start installing insulation blankets after installing systems or before? Is the structure of LN1 fully complete by now? Listen carefully to what Shanahan said during the call.

That apart, systems are more than just avionics. You have 5000psi hydraulics, novel 270VDC electrics, two large E/E bays, air ducting, liquid cooling circuits and whatnot. A DMU is great in reducing change rework by maybe 95%, but you still have to cope with the other 5%. Normal business, nothing to bicker about. But assuming that systems installation and power-on will work without a hitch is just unrealistic. Again, listen carefully to what Shanahan said: He is aware of the risk and I am pretty sure there already are some "known (un)knowns" that are going to spoil the current schedule which has no margin at all (I'd say even less than that). All the answers given during the conference call were very, very carefully worded, leaving all doors open.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
How is being critical not supportive of aviation? Is it in the interest of aviation to have poorly managed projects with unrealistic goals go unnoticed? If so, why do we need a.net: we can all just read press releases at corporate web sites and revel in their truth and beauty.

Very well said.

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 81):
It's a pity that sentiment is/was not universal for all manufacturers...

Exactly, but I prefer facts over sentimentalism anyway.

Heidi Wood of Morgan Stanley has just downgraded Boeing as she doesn't believe anymore that 109 aircraft until end of 2009 is achievable. She's forecasting something closer to 65 aircraft instead.

As Shanahan said, the next 30-60 days will show...if they make it, I'll be the first to take a bow.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:51 am



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 85):
Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 79):
Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 69):
Nevertheless, I hear right now that in fact LN1 is still 'bare'.

Then someone is lying to you. LN1 hasn't been bare for several weeks.

Do you start installing insulation blankets after installing systems or before? Is the structure of LN1 fully complete by now? Listen carefully to what Shanahan said during the call.

You only have insulation blankets inside the fuselage; you have systems all over the place. You do them in parallel; you can't judge systems installation progress by insulation blanket coverage. The structure on LN1 has been complete for quite some time. They've been fitting systems for several weeks now.

Tom.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1013
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:05 pm



Quoting 747Dreamlifter (Reply 57):
If Mike Bair was there in the conference room and was allowed to speak candidly, this webcast would have taken a whole new direction.....He, in my opinion was the "scape-goat" for Carson.....Boeing Everett doesn't decide who the co-risk players will be, that's decided in Chicago where Scott lives.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 67):
Shanahan's speciality is managing the supply chain. And based on what he and Scott said yesterday, it looks like that is exactly what he is doing and things are improving rather markedly.



Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
Full confidence? Really? After the suppliers have been a big part of the six month slip? Somehow this just doesn't ring true to me.



Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
Full confidence? Really? After the suppliers have been a big part of the six month slip? Somehow this just doesn't ring true to me.

This may be the most ambitous supply chain effort ever. The only thing I can think of that compares is the Apollo moon project, and that was all domestic. But Boeing and their suppliers have been at this a while now and sooner or later they are going to get it right. What some see as a weakness in the production system may seem so in the beginning because the production effort in this project is so much more front loaded than airplanes to date. However, once the line is rolling you have many benefits for expanding production

1) Once expertise is established, complexity is distributed. Partners only need to focus on one part of an airplane. I for one believe suppliers can learn to stuff a fuselage barrel. Boeing is having trouble with one of the major ones, I think they will fix this.

2) The ebb and surge of labor demand of airplane cycles is spread out among a much larger base than just Boeing. It will have a smaller impact on everybody (good for cost employee retention versus fire and rehire is a big difference) and for Boeing they keeps their key skill sets in house an busy. It's also good for quality as greater retention helps there too. Been discussed ad infinitum also.

3) The big question is the barrels themselves and more than that, the whole concept of the plane. One thing of MAJOR importance on the call (attention to those who say nothing new was said), is that all the barrels are snapping together, no problem. This is the production key, the rest is just established tolerances of know materials and subsystems.

At this point I don't know if Boeing will meet its schedule or not, but since the Barrels are snapping together, the worst is over from a production point of view in terms of new technology. In light of this it is logical for Shanahan to say that the big problems are solved, there is just a lot of detail.

This is a wholly modular airplane, not just the barrels. Electrical subsystems, bleedless engines, etc were chosen mainly for their system value, not just fuel burn. I.E., when a better, lighter motor, inverter, battery, etc. comes along, it pops it right in. If you are a computer programmer think of how much up front work you need to do to get a program properly written with modules, subroutines and subprograms. However, once your sub library is done, (and that can take a while to get these separate pices debugged and understood), you can really rock!

Modularity will have a tremendous advantage for scaling to other aircraft. Scalability is inherent to modular systems. The system modules or subsytems can be modified easier and reused easier just like in computer programs. This will lessen design times and have the supply chain benefits too (just like on major software projects where subroutines are specified for development by independent teams).

Its not clear to me how the supply chain got out of control or who is to blame, but I think the scale of the upfront details simply overwhelmed the team and things were left unchecked. It's a big learning curve, but things should really cruise when its all worked out. I think Boeing has no reason not to be confident in the production process, and Shanahan has demonstrated in a very short time he is the guy. His moves in reorganizing were bold and quick and logical. They will fix this thing.

The big unknowns now are how this airplane will perform and how easy it will be to maintain. One disadvantage to modularity is complexity and that can translate into weight. The 787 should have a slight weight advantage over the A350 in barrels, but may give it up it in complexity of subsystems. It's real advantage is a generation newer in concept for upgrading, maintenance, assembly costs, design time and probably structural strength.
 
CP744
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2000 3:08 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:13 pm



Quoting Tugger (Reply 41):
Tug

Thanks Tug, I suspected availability of raw materials for all the stated reasons, however I hadn't realized that Boeing was still tweaking the design.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
I was surprised about how far they've progressed and how that progression reinforces their belief they can meet their targets.

It certainly sounds as if Boeing has made some significant progress, compared to reports coming out just 3 months ago.

Quoting Pnwtraveler (Reply 55):
Stitch can't go into Journalism. He has been far to accurate for that. And there was a lack of spin too

 checkmark 

Cheers
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:28 pm



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 86):
You only have insulation blankets inside the fuselage; you have systems all over the place. You do them in parallel; you can't judge systems installation progress by insulation blanket coverage. The structure on LN1 has been complete for quite some time. They've been fitting systems for several weeks now.

I stand corrected. At the time of writing I was a little fixated on the fuselage interior.  wink 
 
astuteman
Posts: 7027
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:43 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 78):
It's just strikes me that so many people seem to not understand just how complicated these things are.

How very right you are, Stitch  thumbsup 

Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
How is being critical not supportive of aviation?

Agree with this, but there is a difference between a genuine critic, and the sort of ignorant myopia which haunts this forum to the point of ridicule on occasion.
I side with Stitch on this. There have so many ludicrous opinions expressed about the A380 in particular (and are still being so), it beggars belief. Stitch is right to fear a backlash. We need a better signal/noise ratio going forward than we've had of late.

Regards
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3597
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sat Dec 15, 2007 9:09 pm



Quoting Revelation (Reply 82):
Can you say you heard candid statements from Boing before the annoucement of the six month delay that there could be a significant delay? All I heard from Boeing was that there were challenges, but the schedule would hold. The first candid statement I heard in the press about the delay was from John Leahy!

That's what I was thinking - you don't go from "all is well" to "we have a six month delay" in a matter of a couple weeks. It was not too long before the October update that folks like Bair were still claiming the 787 was on schedule. Could be part of the reason he's off the project.....
Anyway, I sure hope Shanahan is up to the task and truly does have the project on track to meet the revised timetable.
I for one do not want to see any further push-back of 1st flight, certification, EIS and delivery schedule. The 787 looks to be a magnificent aircraft and I can't wait to see her in the air!
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sun Dec 16, 2007 4:38 pm

There's an article in Seattle Times today that, as I think, provides some interesting insight into the 787 program.

"Pay in Aerospace is low for non-Boeing Workers"
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...erospace/2004076057_787jobs16.html

The report is on C&D Aerospace. In addition to 787 fuselage frames, C&D, previously known as Northwest Composites, makes the interiors for Boeing's 767.

Reading this article I think I am beginning to loose faith in the Boeing business model. Not so much because I see safety at risk - these trained-on-the-job people are probably doing a great job and deserve respect for doing so at a measly $10-15 an hour.

I am more concerned about the long-term implications. I am concerned that investors' unbridled greed for short-term profits may be going to destroy the skill- and knowledge-base of the aerospace industry in the long run. If companies decide that an investment into a skilled and knowledgeable workforce is no longer justified, bright young people might no longer be willing to invest their time and resources into proper educating themselves for a job in such an industry.  scratchchin 

Is it a mere coincidence that the 787 is suffering not only from a shortage in fastneres, but from a shortage in fuselage frames as well, C&D reportedly being the culprit? Is it a mere coincidence that Vought has run into trouble with its trained-on-the-job low-wage newbie workforce?

You can't have sophisticated, high-tech, quality products for free.  no 
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 26638
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787 December 11, 2007 Webcast Thread

Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:55 pm



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 92):
There's an article in Seattle Times today that, as I think, provides some interesting insight into the 787 program.

I started a separate thread on it this morning: Seattle Times - WA Aerospace Jobs Up, Pay Down (by Stitch Dec 16 2007 in Civil Aviation)

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