787 Delays - Sept 2009 EIS likely

In an multi-customer conference with J P Morgan, Steven Udvar-Hazy (ILFC founder and largest 787 customer) has said that they are not expecting Boeing to deliver their first 787s before September 2009, with design changes having to be made to the center wing box structure.

www.marketwatch.com...{FB20B7CB-4B96-41E7-A190-C944E66AB61A}

Your link is not working (at least for me)

www.marketwatch.com...

Urgh, forum munged it - thanks for the correction.

Hmmm no mention from ANA on this. One can only hope that they handled it better this tyme. The Delay may tip the A380 in favor over the 747-8 which ANA is looking at for dense long hual routes.

Well, its really Boeings fault. The marketed this really novel a/c with an unrealistic build / supply chain / and testing schedule and could not deliver on it

the first aircraft should be ready for in service now - i honestly think that it won`t be till 2010 till the first 7 late 7 makes and appearance - because of teh issues with the trip 7 and the lateness of teh 787 - the airbus a330 and a340 on the market are being snapped up at top price.

Sept 09 assuming no more delays.


Big big assumption.

The launch customer is All Nippon airways and was supposed to be May 2008 - a 2 year slip will cost boeing alot.

www.flightglobal.com...



In an attempt to reduce the weight they made the wing spars to thin - and have to rebuild them from scratch - which is the *probable* cause for the delivery date slip - the final production standard 787 hasn`t been built yet.

Ya know, with all that 'Airbust' rubbish we went through last year, would I be justified in referring to 'Boo-ing' from now on?

Of course I wont, but I still wanted to make the point

Now, will Airbus manage to keep the A350 on schedule to apply further pressure to the 787, so making good the time they wasted messing about with the A330-AND-A-HALF model they initially tried to promote, or are we going to see all this again in a couple of years time?

A question does occur though. Are the likes of Udvar Hazy and Tim Clark now wielding too much influence and effectively being the tail wagging the dog? Both manufacturers now seem to be struggling to meet possibly unrealistic demands from the airline bosses, has the commercial return possible from big airliners now reached a plateau?

Interesting times.

[edit on 20-3-2008 by waynos]

2 reasons:

1. Marketing idiots like John Leahy making idiotic promises that no real engineer would make.

Everyone knows how complicated things can get, until the aircraft is flying, and even after in the case of the A380 things can go horribly wrong.


2. Concurrent/cost engineering. Accountgineers are trying to apply fixed schedules and costs to immature solutions. Models are becoming far too complex for what is essentially a number cruncher based on empirical data with fudge factors applied for new techniques.

i.e. its not accurate, and never can be accurate - but idiots (like John Leahy) promise solutions based on these predictions - without considering the impossible to know error margins.

reply to post by waynos

---

Airbus is still dealing with their own issues on the A400 program and how many times its slipped in the past year of development mind you its not nearly as high profile as the 350 and 380 programs.

It is another interesting development and if all of us know anything better now from the past year is that the development of all these aviaiton projects is the certain delays.

Bombadier and Embraer seem to do being well on `lets make a plane and deliver it on time`

Erm... yeah.



I know for a fact Bombardier are a mess when it comes to getting projects out the door.


The head honchos been talking about making the CSeries now for... oh, 5 years?

and they still don't know for sure.

reply to post by kilcoo316

---

talking about did they ever treally commmit to it till last year kilcoo? thats a pretty general and not really backed up statement though I understand why you said it and that its your knowledge its just un able to be checked by me through any link. Any way you cut it though thses companies are doing better probably due to part the product they produce compared to say a 777 etc.

I'd put my money on Bombardier though since there plane are still in higher demand if we do short direct flights as appose to hug nad even if its hub flights you still need their planes. Can't really get rid of them and you cna either to Boeing but if Boeing or Airbus falls on a projects its hard fall then Bombardier.

just a quick rant and thoughts

Ah how quickly you forget I said during all the A380 turmoil that Boeimg had better deliver on the 787 or there would be hell to pay

Now can Airbus keep to the A350 schedule? They diverted alot of resources to fix the A380 wiring issue. I also think they will have some upcomming union trouble over the KC-45. If they can deliver ON time they can pull pretty close to the 787 lead in planes sold. With production slots pushed out further due to 787 delays Airbus may get the break they need.

Yup, that Leahy is a total idiot all right. Never mind that Leahy managed to sell over 200 copies of an aircraft that apparently no one wanted (the original A350).

Never mind that in just 20 months, Leahy managed to sell over 350 copies of an aircraft that apparently cannot compete with the 787 (the A350XWB).

Never mind that Leahy managed to sell as many A330F aircraft in just a single year that the 777F has managed in over 3 years.

Never mind that in the worst three years of Airbuses life, when they were paying through the nose for delays and uncertainty (A380 and A350), Leahy has managed to sell over 3,500 aircraft.

Never mind that in a year when practically every single aviation analyst was predicting a massive downturn in aircraft sales, Leahy has managed to sell over 350 aircraft in the first two months.

For an idiot, he sure seems to be someone I would want running my sales team.

Actually I think Airbus have an extremely good chance of keeping to the A350 schedule - thats why they gave themselves 7 years while Boeing only scheduled 4 years (April 2004 launch to May 2008 EIS, by the original schedule).

Also, 'engineers' is rather a broad term, the type of engineers working on the A380 wiring problems almost certainly would not be involved in defining the A350XWB structure and aerodynamics et al.



Again, I am doubtful that the unions will actually have much to say on the matter - Airbus is moving work that currently is not in existence to America, so its not as if the KC-45 and A330F assembly in Mobile is taking away from European jobs.

They still haven't committed to it.

He has sold the A350/350XWB on what promises?


They can talk the talk, without any idea of whether the product is in a position to walk the walk.


Thats how McDonnell Douglas f**ked up after all.




No denying he is good at throwing a sales pitch - its the content of some of his flashy presentations I worry about.


His promises may well land the company deep in the brown stuff.

I would expect the 350 staff to consist more of 400M engineers - composite wing etc etc.

Airbus have a few programs (380, 350, 400 & ANOther) on the go at the moment, and are short staffed (compared to ideal) in engineering, but all programs are moving forward.




I thought Airbus has already cleared this one up - did Waynos not post a beeb link somewhere.