It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Boeing suggests 767-300ERs to help solve the 787 capacity gap

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
www.flightglobal.com...


Boeing suggests 767-300ERs to help solve the 787 capacity gap

Boeing has yet to tell 787 customers exactly how their delivery schedules will be impacted by the latest delay, but it has floated the idea of producing brand new 767-300ERs to help fill the capacity gap.


erm , ya think that maybe the airlines would have ordered 767-300ER if they actually wanted them? well no , they want 787`s.... BUT if you read between the lines AND read

www.flightglobal.com...

boeing are in deep deep s**t , production of the 787 is revised downwards to 10 a month till 2012 - thats 240 aircraft delivered between now and then (from the 2010 EIO) - `airbust` must be laughing - as long as there corruption scandal doesn`t hit too hard.




posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
boeing are in deep deep s**t , production of the 787 is revised downwards to 10 a month till 2012 - thats 240 aircraft delivered between now and then (from the 2010 EIO)


Actually, the ramp up assumes 10 a month *by* 2012 - thats the date at which Boeing hopes to achieve its goal of 10 aircraft a month, there will be a ramp up to that number between 2010 and 2012 (25 aircraft produced in 2009).

The number of aircraft delivered by 2012 will be significantly lower than 240, and *significantly* lower than Boeing planned originally.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Morale of the story?


Don't assume the learning curve can be eradicated through modern design methods.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
erm , ya think that maybe the airlines would have ordered 767-300ER if they actually wanted them? well no , they want 787`s.... BUT if you read between the lines AND read


Hmmmm, it really no different that Airbus fire selling A330's when the A380 delivery schedule went south.

I have heard rumors that Airbus was basically selling the A330's at cost to any takers who's A380 were delayed. I would suspect Boeing to do the same.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Yes Fred, it is basically the same thing. Still not good though, either way. The XWB team are probably getting some mighty pep talks around now


I wonder if heads will roll at Boeing over this, and the KC-X decision? It is incidentally due to the KC-X loss that Boeing is now interested in pushing more 767's on the airlines again, lord knows what they would have proposed if they had won that order?

QANTAS even wants Boeing to pick up the tab for their A330 lease, with Chief exec Geoff Dixon saying they may even look to get more A330's beyond the current planned six!

According to the feature (over three pages) in the paper version of Flight that arrived this morning the output of 787's will be *less than* 10 per month until 2012. They were hoping to hit 10/month by 2010 and 16 by 2012 originally.

One point that may be obvious to everyone else but kind of shocked me to see it spelled out is that we are only 1 month away from the planned first delivery of an in service 787 and *still* the prototype has not yet even flown once. Obviously that delivery was long since delayed, but its an interesting juxtaposition all the same. The first flight will not now be until October at the earliest with the first delivery in the third quarter of 2009, a year 'and a quarter' late.

Boeings biggest concern over further delays is in the supply chain, but why is this a surprise given that what they are being asked to do has always been a constant in this programme? Weren't Boeing supposed to have built any potential for delays into the original schedule? Or was that all just a fanboy boast?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


seattlepi.nwsource.com...


nice - remembered it was mentioned last year , but good memory


aye - boeing will do anything now to stop cancelled orders - 767`s at cost to keep the airlines sweet



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I wonder if heads will roll at Boeing over this, and the KC-X decision? It is incidentally due to the KC-X

According to the feature (over three pages) in the paper version of Flight that arrived this morning the output of 787's will be *less than* 10 per month until 2012. They were hoping to hit 10/month by 2010 and 16 by 2012 originally.


AWST confirmed this BTW in this weeks edition. The bottom line is Boeing made promises it cannot keep and will have to pay some really hefty penalties.

Heads will roll in both the tanker team and the 787 team. It will be slow so as not to give the impression of panic, but its there. As friend at Boeing told me that resources are being diverted and one plus of the tanker loss is that that group will be used to help with production issues with the 787 once the appeals etc is over.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


Yeah, they also may also lease new 767 to the airlines at almost no cost then convert them to freighter aircraft if they cannot sell them etc.



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


don`t forget the sales failure of the 747-8 - with 1 years run of the passenger version boeing are in a spot of bother as only the trip 7 is working as intened right now



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


H, The PAX version has been a failure, but the Freighter version has sold over 50 if I recall. Another friend at Boeing told me that they were quite content to sell the "F" variant and the PAX versions would simply be a bonus. I know several here have disagreed with that assesment but it is what it is.

The cash cow 737 (like the A320) is still selling like hotcakes



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join