Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[eltib 54]

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is expected to make its first flight in August of 2007 with delivery starting in 2008. As of now, Boeing has orders for 458 planes from 37 customers.

 

"It's a challenge, no doubt about it. This is the team, all of us together -- our customers, our partners and each of us -- who will bring this airplane to life. It's an amazing journey from where we started just four years ago. But the best part is yet to come," said Bair.

 

That's 6 months away. I give it another year before it will be flying.

[TheFiend 1,181]

The European Union/European Economic Community perhaps should start calling itself "The United States of Europe"

[MrMango 667]

That would be Monetarist Economics 101 though.

The Keynesian school believes that fiscal policy (government spending) can play a productive part in economic management, FDR's New Deal being the text book case.

The "Keynesian School theory" is a questionable one, and in practice is a dismal failure.I'm not sure that all of FDR's crazy policy's were from this school, but the U.S. is still paying for his mistakes.

 

 

Actually, I think the process of Airbus disentangling itself from the gordian knot of EU venture capital and hence political meddling may well prove to be a more important challenge in establishing itself as a world class company than the hiccup of the A380 delays, which after all they can learn from.

Agree totally, if they can survive the 380 financial hits that they are bound to take. I believe that the disaster of the 350 will have a far bigger impact on them than the 380.

[BigDUSA 71]

Mad dash to finish 787 gets trickier

But company vows to roll out first plane by July 8 deadline Issues with fasteners, systems will test Boeing

 

Systems not installed.

 

Workmanship issues with the horizontal stabilizer.

 

Temporary fasteners that will have to be replaced.

 

Those are only some of what 787 workers at The Boeing Co.'s Everett plant face as the mad dash begins to get the first Dreamliner assembled and out the factory door by July 8.

 

Judging by what one source described -- and has personally seen -- it's a good thing Boeing is prepared for the extra work that it will take to get that first plane finished on time.

 

Boeing executives have stressed that the company has contingency plans to deal with any number of issues related to 787 production, manufacturing and final assembly in order to keep the program on schedule.

 

"The joke around here is that they will beat us if they have to, but that first plane is going to be finished on time," one Boeing mechanic at the plant said Wednesday after the last of the large 787 structures was delivered by the large cargo freighter called the Dreamlifter.

 

That last piece was the midbody fuselage, 84 feet long and 19 feet in diameter and consisting of sections manufactured in Italy and Japan. They were attached together in Charleston, S.C., before being flown to Everett on the modified 747 Dreamlifter

 

With that delivery, the start of final assembly of the first Dreamliner is only days away. Boeing plans to celebrate the occasion Monday with what it bills as the "grand opening" of the 787 bay where all Dreamliners will be assembled. Even Gov. Chris Gregoire is supposed to be there.

 

What won't be apparent to her and other outsiders is just how much more must be done to complete the first plane on time. It is not as simple as merely hooking the various structures together, even though that's the long-term plan.

 

A source with direct knowledge of the matter provided this glimpse of some of the issues.

 

 

Systems. Many critical systems -- the guts of a jetliner -- were not installed by Boeing's partners before the large fuselage sections and wings were delivered to Everett over the past few weeks.

 

This is the kind of "travel work" that Boeing has said it is prepared for. The company has hired additional mechanics to help with 787 final assembly, though it will not say how many. It is also shifting mechanics from other airplane programs. The source said dozens of 777 workers -- the biggest jetliner program in Everett -- are being moved over to support 787 final assembly now that all the large structures have arrived. New workers will be hired to replace those veteran 777 mechanics, the source said.

 

 

Stabilizer defects. What may not have been expected or planned for was the arrival condition of the 787's horizontal stabilizer. This is the winglike structure on the tail. The 62-foot composite stabilizer is made by Alenia in Italy. It was the first of the large 787 structures to arrive at the Everett plant, on April 24.

 

The source personally inspected the stabilizer recently and said it was covered with pieces of blue tape, each piece indicating some kind of defect or area that needed attention.

 

These "workmanship" issues, as another Boeing person described them, can be fixed but it means more work. Boeing reportedly has talked with Alenia about its quality-control procedures to make sure the second stabilizer that arrives in Everett is in better shape.

 

 

Fasteners. The large 787 structures arrived with many temporary fasteners -- painted red to indicate that they can't go on the finished airplane. It is not clear why temporary fasteners may have been used, but they must be replaced with permanent fasteners.

 

In a conference call with reporters earlier this year, Mike Bair, Boeing's vice president of the 787 program, said there is a worldwide shortage of fasteners because of the increase in jet production by Boeing and rival Airbus.

 

"The fastener industry is stretched tighter than a rubber band," Bair said at the time.

 

Asked for comment Wednesday about the kinds of 787 issues described by the source, a Boeing spokeswoman said they were "typical" for a new airplane program and they were anticipated and planned for.

 

Jim McNerney, Boeing's chairman and chief executive, has said Boeing is spending about $1 billion more to help with 787 issues, as well as on the new 747-8 development program.

 

Boeing had to send dozens of its engineers to help its partners in Italy and Japan after they fell behind in manufacturing the large composite structures for the Dreamliner.

 

The production and manufacturing system for the 787 represents a sea change not only for Boeing but the industry.

 

Instead of doing most of the manufacturing work, Boeing has given that responsibility to its global partners. The Japanese are making the composite wings of the 787. Alenia of Italy is making sections of the composite fuselage, as are Texas-based Vought and Spirit AeroSystems in Wichita, Kan.

 

The only large 787 structure manufactured by Boeing is the composite tail fin.

 

Eventually, as with all jetliner programs, the production and assembly kinks that are now so apparent will be worked out. Once they have been, Boeing believes that a 787 will spend only three days in final assembly at the Everett plant.

 

But for now, 787 mechanics in Everett have just over 50 days to install all the systems, connect the structures and get that first plane assembled for the plane's July 8 debut.

 

That will be followed by first flight in late August or early September, with the seventh production plane (the first six will be test planes) going to All Nippon Airways of Japan next May.

 

In an exclusive interview with the Seattle P-I this week, at a meeting of the Star Alliance in Copenhagen, Denmark, Mineo Yamamoto, chief executive of All Nippon Airways, said Boeing has assured him the airline will get its first Dreamliner on time.

 

 

Looks like Boeing has a good handle on 'theething propblems" with the 787. Still on with the July 8 roll out.

[joekicker 53]

That's 6 months away. I give it another year before it will be flying.

 

What do you give it now?

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

Flying August anyone ?

 

Mad dash to finish 787 gets trickier

Systems not installed.

 

Workmanship issues with the horizontal stabilizer.

 

Temporary fasteners that will have to be replaced.

Judging by what one source described -- and has personally seen -- it's a good thing Boeing is prepared for the extra work that it will take to get that first plane finished on time.

 

Boeing executives have stressed that the company has contingency plans to deal with any number of issues related to 787 production, manufacturing and final assembly in order to keep the program on schedule.

A source with direct knowledge of the matter provided this glimpse of some of the issues.

Systems. Many critical systems -- the guts of a jetliner -- were not installed by Boeing's partners before the large fuselage sections and wings were delivered to Everett over the past few weeks.

 

The source personally inspected the stabilizer recently and said it was covered with pieces of blue tape, each piece indicating some kind of defect or area that needed attention.

 

These "workmanship" issues, as another Boeing person described them, can be fixed but it means more work. Boeing reportedly has talked with Alenia about its quality-control procedures to make sure the second stabilizer that arrives in Everett is in better shape.

Fasteners. The large 787 structures arrived with many temporary fasteners -- painted red to indicate that they can't go on the finished airplane. It is not clear why temporary fasteners may have been used, but they must be replaced with permanent fasteners.

 

Asked for comment Wednesday about the kinds of 787 issues described by the source, a Boeing spokeswoman said they were "typical" for a new airplane program and they were anticipated and planned for.

 

Jim McNerney, Boeing's chairman and chief executive, has said Boeing is spending about $1 billion more to help with 787 issues, as well as on the new 747-8 development program.

 

Boeing had to send dozens of its engineers to help its partners in Italy and Japan after they fell behind in manufacturing the large composite structures for the Dreamliner.

Eventually, as with all jetliner programs, the production and assembly kinks that are now so apparent will be worked out. Once they have been, Boeing believes that a 787 will spend only three days in final assembly at the Everett plant.

[Samsonite 181]

Early September, if not before.

[eltib 54]

What do you give it now?

 

Well if Boeing says September 2007, I still say Feb 2008.

 

 

Hi,

 

Flying August anyone ?

 

Thanx for redlining those Wacmedia. Allot of those issues were present in the old MD95-717 model that only sold 125, and was eventually cancelled. Goes to show too many cooks spoil the broth.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

All they're doing is a roll out on 8 July. They could stick it together with glue if that's what's needed or just sub-contract the job to Airfix. The critical date is when the thing will start flying.

 

ANA isn't going to start complaining about timings since their order is part and parcel of the deal that took the bulk of the manufacturing process to Japan.

Edited May 20, 2007 by CheshireTom

[wacmedia 277]

The critical date is when the thing will start flying.

 

Hi,

 

Dont we know it.

 

Allot of those issues were present in the old MD95-717 model that only sold 125, and was eventually cancelled. Goes to show too many cooks spoil the broth.

 

Hi,

 

I think that reminder will give them nightmares.

[BigDUSA 71]

When machinists start the final stages of assembling the first 787 Dreamliner, the din of pounding rivet guns won't echo through the factory as it does on production lines for Boeing Co.'s other jets.

 

Instead of hundreds of panels of aluminum, the 787's major components are being built mostly or entirely of carbon-fiber composite materials that are essentially baked in giant pressure cookers, flown in from faraway factories, then fastened together.

 

In the past, workers at Boeing plants have stuffed the electrical wiring, hydraulic systems and other innards into planes as they got assembled here, but with the 787, suppliers scattered all over the globe are doing that work.

 

"Basically ... we're snapping it together," said Tom Wroblewski, president of the union representing Boeing production workers in the Seattle area. "This is a whole new way of assembling an aircraft."

 

Boeing's Dreamlifter, the 747 superfreighter it modified to transport large parts of the Dreamliner, made the last of four deliveries for the first 787 this past week. The company will show them off Monday when it hosts a grand opening for the 787 factory line, right next to the 777 line in a plant north of Seattle.

 

At first, the Dreamliner assembly line will look much like those of other planes, because Boeing has pulled in extra workers to install wiring in the first few planes, said Mike Bair, head of the 787 program. The company decided to start flying in unfinished parts rather than risk falling behind schedule. Eventually, there will be fewer workers on the factory floor, because it won't take as many people to join the huge prefabricated parts.

 

So far, Boeing says everything has been running smoothly, even as some production issues have cropped up. The horizontal stabilizer that will be part of the first plane's tail arrived with dings on its surface, indicating it wasn't handled properly during the shipping process. And temporary fasteners on some parts will have to be replaced because of an industrywide shortage of permanent ones.

 

The company expected some bumps in the road and has contingency plans to deal with them, spokeswoman Mary Hanson said.

 

If glitches become a big enough problem, Wroblewski said machinists are eager for the chance to do more of the work themselves.

 

"We need to be ready and available to pick up that slack and show them we can do it better than the supplier, and our hope is then that we can draw that work back," to the Seattle area, Wroblewski said.

 

Boeing executives insist the company has ample experience managing outside suppliers that build parts for its other planes, and that it's confident the 787's manufacturing network will be a success.

 

"All it takes is one part and you can't build an airplane," Bair said. "One bolt and you can be in trouble. So managing that is nothing new."

 

Bair said it's unlikely that substantial amounts of work will be shifted back to the Seattle area.

 

"Clearly the plan is to make sure that all these partners will do what they have committed that they're going to do," he said.

 

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with aerospace and defense consulting firm Teal Group, predicts Boeing's suppliers will make the grade, even if there are occasional snags.

 

"I certainly expect hiccups ... but I don't think they're going to be material enough to affect the program," Aboulafia said.

 

Boeing hasn't said how much money it has saved by having suppliers take on various development costs, but industry analyst Scott Hamilton said it's bound to be substantial.

 

"That kind of risk-sharing, which in the aggregate runs in the billions of dollars, is money that Boeing doesn't have to front," he said.

 

Once production hits full speed, it will take roughly 700 to 800 machinists to run the 787's final assembly line, Bair said. That's substantially less than the work force needed for Boeing's other jets, though Connie Kelliher, spokeswoman for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District 751, said she couldn't offer a hard number as a comparison because the company doesn't break out employee totals by production line.

 

The 787 is a double-edged sword for machinists.

 

On the one hand, it has given Boeing a huge boost as it's hustled to win back the edge it once had over its European rival Airbus SAS. The company has won more than 500 orders for the midsize, long-haul jet, which Boeing says will be 20 percent more fuel-efficient than comparable jets and cheaper to maintain because composites are more durable than aluminum.

 

Machinists handled much of the research and development Boeing used to make its business case for the 787, then winced as the work got handed off to outside suppliers.

 

"The rub is always that if we're good enough to do the R&D, and we can prove that it's a good process, it should just stay in the skilled hands of the people that develop it," Kelliher said.

 

Boeing has said the outsourcing was crucial to keeping development and production costs low enough to make the 787 a good enough bargain that airlines would buy it.

 

Boeing remains on track to roll out the first plane on July 8 (i.e., 7-8-07), begin initial test flights around late August and deliver the first 787 to Japan's All Nippon Airways Co. next May.

 

For the first two years, Bair said the company will deliver 112 planes, with final assembly of each one taking three days on average. Beyond those numbers, Boeing won't say much about the production rate it's shooting for, but Bair said the company is already working on plans to pick up the pace.

 

"It's pretty clear that our initial thoughts about the market demand were too conservative," Bair said.

 

Boeing has fielded so many orders for the 787, airlines that order them today won't be able to get them until 2013, the same year Airbus' competing A350 XWB is scheduled to enter commercial service.

[eltib 54]

When machinists start the final stages of assembling the first 787 Dreamliner, the din of pounding rivet guns won't echo through the factory as it does on production lines for Boeing Co.'s other jets.

 

Instead of hundreds of panels of aluminum, the 787's major components are being built mostly or entirely of carbon-fiber composite materials that are essentially baked in giant pressure cookers, flown in from faraway factories, then fastened together.

 

In the past, workers at Boeing plants have stuffed the electrical wiring, hydraulic systems and other innards into planes as they got assembled here, but with the 787, suppliers scattered all over the globe are doing that work.

 

"Basically ... we're snapping it together," said Tom Wroblewski, president of the union representing Boeing production workers in the Seattle area. "This is a whole new way of assembling an aircraft."

 

 

Sounds scary to me. I think they might need some of this to hold it together.

 

Edited May 20, 2007 by eltib

[wacmedia 277]

Sounds scary to me.

 

Hi,

 

Not the only one.

 

Flaws in 787 turn dream into Boeing's nightmare

 

According to Business Week magazine, last month, engineers at Boeing’s Developmental Centre in south Seattle discovered worrisome bubbles developing in the skin of the fuselage.

 

The Dreamliner’s body is fabricated from a wide tape made from loosely woven, super-strong carbon fibres soaked in a mixture of polymers. The gooey tapes are cooked in a mould where the heat transforms them into a super-hard structure.

 

But the size of the fuselage sections means multiple layers of carbon-fibre tape are required and each added layer increases the likelihood of flaws such as bubbles.

 

These are bad enough in wallpaper but, at altitude, they could freeze and expand, raising the possibility of cracks.

[MrMango 667]

Well, IMHO, the best way to see if Boeing is in trouble is to look at their share price over the last year or so,

http://ir.shareholder.com/ba/stock.cfm

Looks pretty good to me.

[Samsonite 181]

Flaws in 787 turn dream into Boeing's nightmare

Just like you, wacky, to quote a two year old article describing the first barrel they ever made 2 1/2 years ago.

 

Are you totally without conscience or shame?

 

Here is the article, dated June 2005,

 

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...38037_mz011.htm

 

 

An acquaintance, an engineer by trade, recently toured the Boeing visitor center in Everett, Washington.

There was a 787 fuselage section in the Exhibit Hall, which was freely available for examination and touching. He grabbed the exposed end of the exterior shell, which is about 5mm thick, and tried bending it, without success. He then pounded on it with his fist to see how it would react and said there was no movement as it was very rigid, more so than the traditional aluminum shell.

Edited May 20, 2007 by Scalawag

[wacmedia 277]

[Are you totally without conscience or shame?

 

Hi,

 

Calm down. I'm trying to be the honest broker here. I'm trying to balance the hype and propaganda of the American company with the realities on the ground.

[Samsonite 181]

Calm down. I'm trying to be the honest broker here. I'm trying to balance the hype and propaganda of the American company with the realities on the ground.

You have repeatedly demonstrated you wouldn't know reality if it walked up and slapped you across the face.

Sheeezzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Purposely quoting out of date articles is hardly honest!

Edited May 20, 2007 by Scalawag

[MrMango 667]

Hi,

 

Calm down. I'm trying to be the honest broker here. I'm trying to balance the hype and propaganda of the American company with the realities on the ground.

By quoting a 2 year old story? Get real.

[wacmedia 277]

Purposely quoting out of date articles is hardly honest!

 

 

Hi,

 

I have rechecked the article and on this occasion I admit I forgot to check the articles date. However that does not mean that there isin't serious problems with the 787 and I will be very surprised if it stays on schedule. Time will prove which of us is right.

[MrMango 667]

Hi,

 

I have rechecked the article and on this occasion I admit I forgot to check the articles date. However that does not mean that there isin't serious problems with the 787 and I will be very surprised if it stays on schedule. Time will prove which of us is right.

Well, I don't know what the status of Boeing or their airplane. I have simply pointed out some of the biased posts here.

 

All indications that I can see is that the plane is reasonably on schedule without any MAJOR problems.

[eltib 54]

Well, IMHO, the best way to see if Boeing is in trouble is to look at their share price over the last year or so,

http://ir.shareholder.com/ba/stock.cfm

Looks pretty good to me.

 

Once again, stock price is based on investor confidence. If investors lose confidence in a company, the stock heads south.

 

 

Just like you, wacky, to quote a two year old article describing the first barrel they ever made 2 1/2 years ago.

 

Are you totally without conscience or shame?

 

Here is the article, dated June 2005,

 

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...38037_mz011.htm

An acquaintance, an engineer by trade, recently toured the Boeing visitor center in Everett, Washington.

There was a 787 fuselage section in the Exhibit Hall, which was freely available for examination and touching. He grabbed the exposed end of the exterior shell, which is about 5mm thick, and tried bending it, without success. He then pounded on it with his fist to see how it would react and said there was no movement as it was very rigid, more so than the traditional aluminum shell.

 

I'll tell you what aluminum flexes, and while this composite stuff cannot bend by human force, air pressure will dominate human force. Has Boeing pressure tested the material in a altitude chamber to see how much force is exerted on the material, through air pressure?

 

Wacmedia is supposedly quoting an article from last week. Your link is from almost 2 years ago. If there is truth to Wacmedia's post, let him post the link, and this argument will be over.

Edited May 21, 2007 by eltib

[Samsonite 181]

I'll tell you what aluminum flexes, and while this composite stuff cannot bend by human force, air pressure will dominate human force. Has Boeing pressure tested the material in a altitude chamber to see how much force is exerted on the material, through air pressure?

Wacmedia is supposedly quoting an article from last week. Your link is from almost 2 years ago. If there is truth to Wacmedia's post, let him post the link, and this argument will be over.

What wacky posted is word for word from that 2 year old article. Go back 3 messages to post 144 and you will see wacky stated, "I have rechecked the article and on this occasion I admit I forgot to check the articles date." Hence, no argument.

 

Do you think Boeing would be this far into the B787 program if they they hadn't tested the material?

Your negative bias has apparently effected your ability to think clearly or logically when it come to anything to do with Boeing.

Edited May 21, 2007 by Scalawag

[MrMango 667]

Once again, stock price is based on investor confidence. If investors lose confidence in a company, the stock heads south.

Is there an echo here? This was EXACTLY my point, but from a positive point of view. The stock has been rising over the last year, so investors must be pretty confident about Boeing.

[eltib 54]

Do you think Boeing would be this far into the B787 program if they they hadn't tested the material?

Your negative bias has apparently effected your ability to think clearly or logically when it come to anything to do with Boeing.

 

TBH, after all the ethical lapses I've seen in the company... The answer is no. They will happen again, like a dog eats it own shit. My negative bias towards Boeing is not through unclear thinking, but a few incidents I've had to endure besides these.

 

1, They only enforce their policies and procedures when it benefits Boeing.

 

a, Harry Stonecipher created a code of conduct, and then had an affair, and sent raunchy emails to a female VP. Had it been any other employee, they would have been fired. Instead they let Harry resign. Here's a writing I found one day that Mr. Stonecipher left.

 

An allegedly true incident that was heard from a couple of different people:

Harry Stonecipher was speaking to our Contracts people about the need to trim their budget by eliminating a lot of fringe benefits (free dinners with clients, etc.) that are currently commonplace. one of th e

employees asked, "harry, you took some 200 people on a golf outing recently and Boeing picked up the tab. How is that helping our budget?"

Harry's response was, "I did that this year. I did that last year. I

did it every year I was at McDonnell Douglas and I'll do it every year

I'm at Boeing. If you have a problem with that, I can replace every single person in this audience in 24 hours."

Yep, that's the way to foster loyalty with the troops...

 

2, They take credit for doing projects, and fail to recognize the people that really contributed to milestones, here are 2 examples.

 

a, My coworker and I contributed allot of time and effort to help with the VoIP project. When the awards were given, our names were not mentioned anywhere in the newsletter. Also a guy that was hired was tasked to build a "how to use" sheet consisting of a word document and a powerpoint presentation. He was unable to merge the powerpoint presentation into the word document. The project manager gave it to me and I converted the PPS into a jpg, and embedded it into the word document, then resized it so it fit. Quite a simple task if you know how to use a PC. Had I not done this persons job, over 3500 people that received VoIP phones, would have had no idea how to use them. BTW the person is still employed for now, but there are more cuts coming. The nice thing I was hired last week by an employer, and I no longer have to commute on a freeway to work.

 

b, The CIO of IT takes credit for a drawing system that he says "NASA currently uses" as web based. What he failed to mention, is the application he developed was a memory hog that used a TCP batch file. And it gave techs like me a headache trying to build a work around,( that I eventually fixed with a band aid file till they put it on a web base application) so the end user didn't have to deal with the black screen of death every time all the resources were used up.

 

Now you know why I show negative bias towards Boeing, besides the sexual harassment complaint I filed they never acted on, So

 

STFU

 

BTW, here's why I filed the complaint, and tell me that Bergman's comments in bold is appropriate for the workplace. I sent this to his then supervisor who took action, unfortunately the dumbfuck that became Bergman's new boss didn't follow through, along with the HR person.

 

This evening I wanted to watch Dateline NBC in the cafeteria on the Predator series. Mr. Bergman was in there, and I was about to change the channel. He then started telling me how bad I was for going to Thailand to do what I do there. I told him "I don't want to hear it! It's my business and as long as I'm not breaking any laws there, it's none of his business." He then called me a sick individual that probably goes to Thailand to have sex with boys." I told him "Oh yes you are really good taking soda from the fountain, you have allot of room to talk." Walt I don't go to Thailand to have sex with boys. I go to get cultured and pampered by the ladies there. And they aren't underage either. It's something that doesn't exist in the USA anymore, and I enjoy it.

Edited May 21, 2007 by eltib

[eltib 54]

Is there an echo here? This was EXACTLY my point, but from a positive point of view. The stock has been rising over the last year, so investors must be pretty confident about Boeing.

 

For now...