• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Boeing delays 787 dreamliner

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
linky

I remember all the cheerleading threads when Airbus had difficulties. It looks like the Boeing plastic plane will not fly anytime soon
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: freegeeks
linky

I remember all the cheerleading threads when Airbus had difficulties. It looks like the Boeing plastic plane will not fly anytime soon
Haha, which is STILL probably ahead of any normal schedules.


From YOUR link...

Boeing has delayed delivery of its 787 Dreamliner by six months, shortly after rather recklessly claiming it could dispatch the first example to All-Nippon Airways by May 2008 following a compressed flight test schedule.


The Boeing Dreamliner in All-Nippon Airways livery.
Some of the aircraft's suppliers describe this intended feat as "the aerospace equivalent of hitting a hole in one on a golf course", given that the Dreamliner's planned August 2007 maiden flight had already been put back to between mid-November and mid-December due to a "critical shortage of aerospace fasteners to hold the airplane together", as the Wall Street Journal explained.
 

Mxylplyx

Diamond Member
Mar 21, 2007
4,197
100
106
Delays always suck, but they've got a ways to go to catch up with Airbus's failures. Their delivery schedule has been rather ambitious, which could just be a marketing ploy to secure preorders.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
36,549
10,485
136
Not a much of a surprise. There had been quite a few stories about their tight development timetable and them hitting a few snags. The affected airlines will surely get some discounts on their orders.

If Airbus makes their mid 2013 delivery date for the XWB I'll eat my hat.
 

Finality

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,665
0
0
Originally posted by: alchemize
6 months < 2 years (and counting).
Dreamliner is now officially 1 year behind when you factor in the 6 month schedule delay.

I don't see a way how any company would start manufacturing the composites on mass in such large pieces in a timely manner. Making composites on a small scale for a car is hard enough as it is.

I think the WXB should be on schedule basically most of the heavy lifting would have been done by the 787 issues. Besides the A380 issue is more to do with coordination of design teams for the wiring schematics. Not a production issue as such.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,973
4,968
126
What I want is a composite monocoque car that is made like that jet :)
Maybe then we can have more midsize cars under 3000lbs, and not the porkers we have today.
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
33
91
It's not much of a surprise considering the massively complex supply chain that Boeing needs to help manage to get the parts to their Washington assembly facility. This is the first time they've let their suppliers make huge parts of the plane by themselves. Some place in Japan is making the wings, someplace else is making part of the fuselage, etc. All these individual companies have to source their own materials while staying within Boeing's specifications, which is tough to do. Boeing's had to send their own people to help oversee operations in their part's suppliers, and to help out these suppliers with their own supply chains. After all this is somehow coordinated with what Boeing wants, comes the whole logistics process of shipping these huge airplane parts from all over the world to Washington.

Basically the manufacturing and development of the 787 is incredibly decentralized around the globe this time around, and it requires a ton of coordination and a lot of things can go wrong in terms of timetables. However, the end product should be a lot better due to this decentralization and working closely with suppliers and whatnot, as can be seen by Toyota's own system in practice. A full 60% of Toyota's product innovations come from their suppliers, which just happen to be located all over the globe. Quality and innovation both increase when a company works closely with their suppliers in developing and manufacturing a product. If these suppliers are global, well, the need to effectively manage the supply chain is doubly important.
 

fornax

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
6,867
0
76
Originally posted by: alchemize
6 months < 2 years (and counting).
Welcome to Earth. Airbus just delivered their first plane to Singapore, 18 months behind schedule. With the new 6 months, it is now 12 months for Boeing. Apparently those damned socialist drugged commies have taken over Boeing too.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,214
2
0
I wonder if anybody who went from airbus to boeing will now cancel the 787 order afterall and get back in line for an AB :)
 

fornax

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
6,867
0
76
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I wonder if anybody who went from airbus to boeing will now cancel the 787 order afterall and get back in line for an AB :)
But those are different planes, with different target markets. It's unlikely that if a company wanted a 787, they'd go for a 380, unless they reevaluated their routes and requirements.

I was just making fun of all the gloaters when Airbus was delayed. I have a close relative working in Boeing and in no way have ill wishes towards them. It's just that both companies have to deal with very new, advanced technologies (and bad management in the case of Airbus), and gloating over the delays just shows how shallow-minded you were.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I wonder if anybody who went from airbus to boeing will now cancel the 787 order afterall and get back in line for an AB :)
the A350 is a candidate. It's going to depend if there are even more Boeing delays. The A350 is coming into service in 2013. The 787 is such a success that some customers have to wait for years to get their 787's. Maybe Airbus can step in and lure some of these customers away.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,404
5,419
126
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I wonder if anybody who went from airbus to boeing will now cancel the 787 order afterall and get back in line for an AB :)
the A350 is a candidate. It's going to depend if there are even more Boeing delays. The A350 is coming into service in 2013. The 787 is such a success that some customers have to wait for years to get their 787's. Maybe Airbus can step in and lure some of these customers away.
that's assuming the A350 isn't delayed some more.


and good luck with the euro at $1.50.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I wonder if anybody who went from airbus to boeing will now cancel the 787 order afterall and get back in line for an AB :)
the A350 is a candidate. It's going to depend if there are even more Boeing delays. The A350 is coming into service in 2013. The 787 is such a success that some customers have to wait for years to get their 787's. Maybe Airbus can step in and lure some of these customers away.
that's assuming the A350 isn't delayed some more.


and good luck with the euro at $1.50.
euro / dollar has not a big effect in this sector. Most of the financial deals between airline co and Boeing / Airbus span easily a period of a decade. There is no way you can predict what the euro / dollar is going to be. Boeing was selling plenty of planes when the dollar was skyhigh, Airbus is still selling a buttload of planes, even with the strong euro.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,628
4
81
Once they are ready for production about how long does it take to make each one of these planes?
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Once they are ready for production about how long does it take to make each one of these planes?
A380 - full production is 4 / month
Boeing 787 - full production is 10 /15 month
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,294
740
126
The 787 has some potential design flaws that need to be checked by flight tests/crash tests.

It is yet to be seen if the thing is going to shatter into pieces if it crashes. It is also yet to be seen if the copper in the wings to conduct lightning strikes will hold up with the constant pressure/abuse put on it.

They had to put copper in the wings to conduct lightinging because it would otherwise shatter the wing.,

Dan Rather had an interesting report on the 787 a month or so back.

 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,179
1
81
I don't know why Boeing isn't hedging its bets as Airbus is doing. The A350 could have come earlier, sure, but when it goes into production Airbus will have a full lineup of products, from the cheapo A320s to the 380, whereas Boeing won't have anything in the top end other than the by-then 45 year old 747.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,520
0
0
Originally posted by: Martin
I don't know why Boeing isn't hedging its bets as Airbus is doing. The A350 could have come earlier, sure, but when it goes into production Airbus will have a full lineup of products, from the cheapo A320s to the 380, whereas Boeing won't have anything in the top end other than the by-then 45 year old 747.
Hedging your bets is expensive, and I think Boeing is betting on the fact that the market will go in one particular direction instead of needing a broad range of products. Huge planes are great, but I think the market is somewhat limited. As midsize airports grow, the idea of hub and spoke systems will shrink in importance. Making good midsize planes like the 787 way more desirable than a plane even larger than a 747 for all but the absolute major routes. And Boeing has the 777 near the top end, which will probably fill many large aircraft needs. Conceding the absolute top of the market to Airbus might not be a major issue if the top of the market isn't all that big.
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,179
1
81
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Martin
I don't know why Boeing isn't hedging its bets as Airbus is doing. The A350 could have come earlier, sure, but when it goes into production Airbus will have a full lineup of products, from the cheapo A320s to the 380, whereas Boeing won't have anything in the top end other than the by-then 45 year old 747.
Hedging your bets is expensive, and I think Boeing is betting on the fact that the market will go in one particular direction instead of needing a broad range of products. Huge planes are great, but I think the market is somewhat limited. As midsize airports grow, the idea of hub and spoke systems will shrink in importance. Making good midsize planes like the 787 way more desirable than a plane even larger than a 747 for all but the absolute major routes. And Boeing has the 777 near the top end, which will probably fill many large aircraft needs. Conceding the absolute top of the market to Airbus might not be a major issue if the top of the market isn't all that big.
True, but space at major airports usually can't expand and with a populous developing world its hard to imagine no need for large planes. Not only that, but the A380 carries a relatively small price premium over the larger 777s (17%), while offering a whole lot more (52% more seats, more passenger room, lower running costs etc).

We'll know who made the right bets in a decade, but Airbus looks in a better position right now.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,643
27
91
Boeing is going to get bit in the ass hard and their military contracts will dry up at the same time when the democrats take over.
 

imported_Shivetya

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2005
2,978
1
0
Originally posted by: Wreckem
The 787 has some potential design flaws that need to be checked by flight tests/crash tests.

It is yet to be seen if the thing is going to shatter into pieces if it crashes. It is also yet to be seen if the copper in the wings to conduct lightning strikes will hold up with the constant pressure/abuse put on it.

They had to put copper in the wings to conduct lightinging because it would otherwise shatter the wing.,

Dan Rather had an interesting report on the 787 a month or so back.
yet another report where he was basically ridiculed by experts. The basis seemed to be one disgruntled engineer.

Frankly, shattering on impact is the least of your worries.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY