Boeing have kept a lot of their production development close to their chest.
The A380 had a well publicized "iron bird" to test and prove its electrics.
Pity the iron bird did not identify French and German nationalism, the source of the wiring disaster.
If there is a problem with 787 wiring, IMO it will only affect the first few planes which were delivered incomplete.
Going by the temporary fasteners fiasco and lack of quality control, if the same standards applied to the wiring, it may be that Boeing are scrapping the "as delivered" wiring, and starting from scratch.
It would explain why the first flight has gone so far back.
May not affect the Boeing cash flow, but some of the suppliers may be hurting to the point where they may need bailing out.
Cheers
Achace
6-month delay seen for 787 delivery
Moderator: Latest news team
Wiring for a relatively small plane cannot cause too many issues.
And Boeing will surely keep their suppliers happy, inject them with some cash or something if their liquidity is too low.
IMO their schedule, even their production ramp up is too ambitious. In the longer term they will achieve it, but in early years of production there ought to be some mistakes..
And Boeing will surely keep their suppliers happy, inject them with some cash or something if their liquidity is too low.
IMO their schedule, even their production ramp up is too ambitious. In the longer term they will achieve it, but in early years of production there ought to be some mistakes..
-
smokejumper
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00
- Location: Northern Virginia USA
"a relatively small airplane"???CX wrote:Wiring for a relatively small plane cannot cause too many issues.
..
The 787 is essentially the size of a 767-300/400; I don't call this small.
If there are wiring issues, they could be major at this late stage in the game. The plane is designed and, jigs and fixtures are in place. Any changes will be expensive in terms of dollars and time.
I don’t like to write an in depth comment or analysis until I have had a chance to think about it.
Having thought about this, I think there is more to this than is being let out.
This should be titled, What’s Really Going ON?!!!!!
AS near as I can determine, not only are deliveries delayed, but First Test Flight is delayed 6 months as well. As we have (supposedly) a fully capable airframe, what would the reason be for not having the first aircraft as well as the 6 or 7 test aircraft in flight test?
So far I have been right that they pushed to fast and the first delivery would be late (though now even latter than I was figuring). But I have been wrong (or so it would appear) as to what would cause that. The more technical production of the sections and them passing their tests is not the listed cause, it’s the fasteners (supposedly) as well as the flight software (supposedly).
If its fasteners, are they trying to tell me they can’t get enough to finish one aircraft?
If that’s true, then there has been a breakdown of biblical proportions in procurement.
Many years ago, I worked building campgrounds. Each item (picnic tables, bumper logs, Picnic Shelters) had a material list. We know exactly how many bolts of what type and length, as well as nuts and washer it took to build each item.
They are trying to tell us that they couldn’t figure that out? Give me a break. The manage to get all the materials and tooling to build a fuselage and then can’t bolt the damned thing together?
So, somehow they did not know how many fasteners they needed to put the wing together (supposedly the biggest problem) fuselage, stringers and all the other parts? I just don’t buy it. They have this 100 million dollar software package that’s supposed to manage the project and it can’t even tell you how many fasteners it needs? If it can’t to that, then how in the blazes is it going to “.life manage” the aircraft” as its supposed to do?
What they are telling me is a 100 million dollar software package can’t count fasteners as well as I can with a pencil, paper and a materials list?
Frankly it seems like there are more than one serious fouled up in the system, be it the managing software, vendor problems, system integration (possibly software related), structural, quality issues and so on.
Does Boeing owe it to us to tell us, maybe not technically. But I do think they owe it to us as a part of the country and the community. They receive (and ask) a tremendous great deal from us, and I think they should return that in honest explanations.
Again, I have no problem with mistakes, what I have is a problem if mistakes were made and then covered up, impacting both the US and the company.
This whole thing smacks of a problem they are not disclosing. Bogus hardware, fasteners, lying vendors, misassembled, fouled up integration, vendors can’t do the wiring and equipment insert they are supposed to do or test lying by vendors?
If they can’t even keep going with a low rate production, there is more to this story than has been let out.
Having thought about this, I think there is more to this than is being let out.
This should be titled, What’s Really Going ON?!!!!!
AS near as I can determine, not only are deliveries delayed, but First Test Flight is delayed 6 months as well. As we have (supposedly) a fully capable airframe, what would the reason be for not having the first aircraft as well as the 6 or 7 test aircraft in flight test?
So far I have been right that they pushed to fast and the first delivery would be late (though now even latter than I was figuring). But I have been wrong (or so it would appear) as to what would cause that. The more technical production of the sections and them passing their tests is not the listed cause, it’s the fasteners (supposedly) as well as the flight software (supposedly).
If its fasteners, are they trying to tell me they can’t get enough to finish one aircraft?
If that’s true, then there has been a breakdown of biblical proportions in procurement.
Many years ago, I worked building campgrounds. Each item (picnic tables, bumper logs, Picnic Shelters) had a material list. We know exactly how many bolts of what type and length, as well as nuts and washer it took to build each item.
They are trying to tell us that they couldn’t figure that out? Give me a break. The manage to get all the materials and tooling to build a fuselage and then can’t bolt the damned thing together?
So, somehow they did not know how many fasteners they needed to put the wing together (supposedly the biggest problem) fuselage, stringers and all the other parts? I just don’t buy it. They have this 100 million dollar software package that’s supposed to manage the project and it can’t even tell you how many fasteners it needs? If it can’t to that, then how in the blazes is it going to “.life manage” the aircraft” as its supposed to do?
What they are telling me is a 100 million dollar software package can’t count fasteners as well as I can with a pencil, paper and a materials list?
Frankly it seems like there are more than one serious fouled up in the system, be it the managing software, vendor problems, system integration (possibly software related), structural, quality issues and so on.
Does Boeing owe it to us to tell us, maybe not technically. But I do think they owe it to us as a part of the country and the community. They receive (and ask) a tremendous great deal from us, and I think they should return that in honest explanations.
Again, I have no problem with mistakes, what I have is a problem if mistakes were made and then covered up, impacting both the US and the company.
This whole thing smacks of a problem they are not disclosing. Bogus hardware, fasteners, lying vendors, misassembled, fouled up integration, vendors can’t do the wiring and equipment insert they are supposed to do or test lying by vendors?
If they can’t even keep going with a low rate production, there is more to this story than has been let out.
RC20, you may well be correct, but it is fair to assume that there are going to be a number of very dedicated 787 fasteners.
My reading is that the delay is because tooling is involved and we are not talking about a one ship set, but a few hundred thousand fasteners of any one type to cover the initial batch of airplanes.
The dishonesty, if one is to call it that is that Boeing did not finish detail design in time to allow these fasteners to be tooled and then produced. plus there is a serious shortage of titanium world wide.
Cheers
Achace
My reading is that the delay is because tooling is involved and we are not talking about a one ship set, but a few hundred thousand fasteners of any one type to cover the initial batch of airplanes.
The dishonesty, if one is to call it that is that Boeing did not finish detail design in time to allow these fasteners to be tooled and then produced. plus there is a serious shortage of titanium world wide.
Cheers
Achace
Boeing delays delivery of 787
Richard Aboulafia :
The 787 delay is Boeing's longest in introducing a new plane, exceeding the three-month delay Boeing had delivering the first 747-400 jumbo jet, said aerospace consultant Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va.
Even with the six-month delay, Boeing said it expects to produce 109 Dreamliners in 2009, just three fewer than planned, a claim that was met with some skepticism.
"That's pretty unrealistic," Aboulafia said. "At least the aircraft itself still looks like a great performer. The only issues concern development and manufacturing. The thing that would make me panic is negative news about the aircraft's performance
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/ ... htm?csp=34
Richard Aboulafia :
The 787 delay is Boeing's longest in introducing a new plane, exceeding the three-month delay Boeing had delivering the first 747-400 jumbo jet, said aerospace consultant Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va.
Even with the six-month delay, Boeing said it expects to produce 109 Dreamliners in 2009, just three fewer than planned, a claim that was met with some skepticism.
"That's pretty unrealistic," Aboulafia said. "At least the aircraft itself still looks like a great performer. The only issues concern development and manufacturing. The thing that would make me panic is negative news about the aircraft's performance
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/ ... htm?csp=34
Pretty well said.
As time goes by, I suppose the details will come out.
I think the fasteners are only part of the story. I think a lot was not going the way they needed as far as the finished product the vendors/partners were supposed to have completed. It must have been really bad.
You would think they could run shorter special batches of fasteners (at a cost of course) if that was the only issue.
It may be they could, and still would not have the rest of the systems and wiring installed.
To put it somewhat differently, things needed to be corrected anyway, so do it all in one big lump. A lot of testing will continue in he "iron birds'" and other bread boarded systems. Not as good as flight testing for some of it, though you can hammer some items as much as you want (flap and gear cycling, turning motors on and off cycling starter generators as often as the thermal cycles permits etc). Stuff you can’t do with an airplane flying.
Shoot, with 6 months delay, they should take off, run a circuit around the airport, land and call it good!
As time goes by, I suppose the details will come out.
I think the fasteners are only part of the story. I think a lot was not going the way they needed as far as the finished product the vendors/partners were supposed to have completed. It must have been really bad.
You would think they could run shorter special batches of fasteners (at a cost of course) if that was the only issue.
It may be they could, and still would not have the rest of the systems and wiring installed.
To put it somewhat differently, things needed to be corrected anyway, so do it all in one big lump. A lot of testing will continue in he "iron birds'" and other bread boarded systems. Not as good as flight testing for some of it, though you can hammer some items as much as you want (flap and gear cycling, turning motors on and off cycling starter generators as often as the thermal cycles permits etc). Stuff you can’t do with an airplane flying.
Shoot, with 6 months delay, they should take off, run a circuit around the airport, land and call it good!
A350XWB wrote:Boeing delays delivery of 787
Richard Aboulafia :
The 787 delay is Boeing's longest in introducing a new plane, exceeding the three-month delay Boeing had delivering the first 747-400 jumbo jet, said aerospace consultant Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group in Fairfax, Va.
Even with the six-month delay, Boeing said it expects to produce 109 Dreamliners in 2009, just three fewer than planned, a claim that was met with some skepticism.
"That's pretty unrealistic," Aboulafia said. "At least the aircraft itself still looks like a great performer. The only issues concern development and manufacturing. The thing that would make me panic is negative news about the aircraft's performance
fftopic: I'm surprised this Boeing shill didn't make up excuses... Maybe I should expect more from people.
According to Flight International, who are not often wrong,
they have just announced another one month delay in assembly of number one.
There seems to be a total lack of control of who says what.
I will go on record as saying this lady wont get her certificate of airworthiness before 2009.
The cold weather testing still does not appear to have been addressed.
If those tests dont happen before December 2008, how could they possibly achieve their latest target.
Still hope I am wrong, but the way they are performing it is like watching a group of five year old footbll players, running everywhere, but am I being unkind to the kids?
Cheers
Achace
they have just announced another one month delay in assembly of number one.
There seems to be a total lack of control of who says what.
I will go on record as saying this lady wont get her certificate of airworthiness before 2009.
The cold weather testing still does not appear to have been addressed.
If those tests dont happen before December 2008, how could they possibly achieve their latest target.
Still hope I am wrong, but the way they are performing it is like watching a group of five year old footbll players, running everywhere, but am I being unkind to the kids?
Cheers
Achace
"The only issues are around development and manufacture"? That is quality.
Aye, the plane performs like a dream but we aren't getting more from it and build quality is shitty. We fully expect great performance from the aircraft as long as bits don;t start falling of it due to the fact we used gaffer tape and blu tack instead of fasteners!
I know that sounds ridiculous but thats how Dr. Buffoon's quote reads.
Airbus announced a 6 month delay initally on the 380...and it had flown. Let's see if Boeing have learned anything from their competitor.
Aye, the plane performs like a dream but we aren't getting more from it and build quality is shitty. We fully expect great performance from the aircraft as long as bits don;t start falling of it due to the fact we used gaffer tape and blu tack instead of fasteners!
I know that sounds ridiculous but thats how Dr. Buffoon's quote reads.
Airbus announced a 6 month delay initally on the 380...and it had flown. Let's see if Boeing have learned anything from their competitor.
-
FLY4HOURS.BE
- Posts: 454
- Joined: 01 May 2007, 22:13
- Location: Antwerp, Belgium
They know exactly the numbers and the fasteners are all catalogued. The problem is the manufacturing of those bolts. The suppliers can not make the exact number for just one airplane because that simply isn't economical. If MSN001 needs fastener #A1 in the number of 800 pieces, the suppliers can not put their machines to work to produce only 800 pieces, but they will need to produce at least 1 million, to make it affordable in price. Every fasteners needs to be to size, shape, strength and material expected and tested accordingly.The manage to get all the materials and tooling to build a fuselage and then can’t bolt the damned thing together?
So, somehow they did not know how many fasteners they needed to put the wing together (supposedly the biggest problem) fuselage, stringers and all the other parts? I just don’t buy it.
That's also why most manufacturers outsource the fasteners.
But fasteners are not the only issue.
Wiring a new plane is a challenge.
There are entire schedules dedicated to wiring. If one schedule goes wrong, the whole wiring can go wrong, because some wires have to be mounted before other wires,... Every single wire has to be tested, and to the difference with building wirings, the space is limited, and everything has to be compact and fit together, but also be maintenance-friendly.
Just to give you an idea:
“The production process, not the aircraft itself, has a critical error. This is the weakest link in the entire production chain and has been preventing us up to now from ramping up to the full production rate. The problem is to do with the design of the electrical cable harnesses for the fore and aft fuselage. This comprises 530 kilometres of wires which are connected to 100,000 individual cable sections with 40,300 connectors and 350 kilometres of length per aircraft. The A380's wiring is twice as complex as the A340-600's.
Fly4hours, making the path to airline pilot affordable to all
Things are coming out sooner than I thought.
I read (Bloomberg) report on it, and when I was done, it was, good lord, all four wheels came off the wagon, while the axles were breaking, the horse hitch broke and the horses all got hoof an mouth disease.
Well maybe not that bad, there were some interesting tidbits.
Everyone in the chain was failing to get their stuff done.
PR pushed the schedule not the engineers (hmmm, shade of Airbus here).
It looks like the engineers are back in charge!
I think the 6 month period may be deliberately long, and they hope to have on pace in 3-4 months (giving them the latitude to have things go array).
Frankly it looks like they decided rather than push one area (ie. special runs of fasteners) to get one part done they are going to ensure the whole supply chain is working. There are hints that other smaller pieces of equipment were late or not up to snuff. That does mean more ground testing going on in all the test rigs, which should improve the reliability with all the new stuff.
A bonus is that it ensure the major part suppliers to get their act together and have the assemblies shipped to Seattle as complete as they are supposed to be (stops the travel work).
All in all, it may not get the first bird into the air as fast (and they are saying its close for ht 1st and second one), but it gets the whole program moving sooner, and gets the deliveries back on track.
Av weeks reports that Alenia is buying more tooling, which gives them two options. One is in case they cannot make as many as they need to with current tooling. The other is if they can, they are set for the ramp up down the road.
And my personal take on the wiring is, its not an A380 wiring type issue. I suspect the harness are fine (maybe not issue free, but ok). I think there was a lack of experience with the specific type of wiring this plane requires. All the parts and pieces of that are going to be new (higher current) and learning how to do it will take time. Wires and system and equipment in places they never had them let alone installed before.
I still think the amazing part is that the fuselage construction seems to have gone so well. I always thought there would be more delay issues there. There may be in ramp up into production, but the basic production process for them is working well. .
I read (Bloomberg) report on it, and when I was done, it was, good lord, all four wheels came off the wagon, while the axles were breaking, the horse hitch broke and the horses all got hoof an mouth disease.
Well maybe not that bad, there were some interesting tidbits.
Everyone in the chain was failing to get their stuff done.
PR pushed the schedule not the engineers (hmmm, shade of Airbus here).
It looks like the engineers are back in charge!
I think the 6 month period may be deliberately long, and they hope to have on pace in 3-4 months (giving them the latitude to have things go array).
Frankly it looks like they decided rather than push one area (ie. special runs of fasteners) to get one part done they are going to ensure the whole supply chain is working. There are hints that other smaller pieces of equipment were late or not up to snuff. That does mean more ground testing going on in all the test rigs, which should improve the reliability with all the new stuff.
A bonus is that it ensure the major part suppliers to get their act together and have the assemblies shipped to Seattle as complete as they are supposed to be (stops the travel work).
All in all, it may not get the first bird into the air as fast (and they are saying its close for ht 1st and second one), but it gets the whole program moving sooner, and gets the deliveries back on track.
Av weeks reports that Alenia is buying more tooling, which gives them two options. One is in case they cannot make as many as they need to with current tooling. The other is if they can, they are set for the ramp up down the road.
And my personal take on the wiring is, its not an A380 wiring type issue. I suspect the harness are fine (maybe not issue free, but ok). I think there was a lack of experience with the specific type of wiring this plane requires. All the parts and pieces of that are going to be new (higher current) and learning how to do it will take time. Wires and system and equipment in places they never had them let alone installed before.
I still think the amazing part is that the fuselage construction seems to have gone so well. I always thought there would be more delay issues there. There may be in ramp up into production, but the basic production process for them is working well. .