The 787 is delayed for the third time — Airbus says HA!

by Grant Martin on

Chicago based airframe manufacturer Boeing announced the third delay to their 787 Dreamliner this week, in a move that many industry analysts have been predicting for several weeks now. I guess things haven’t been coming together as fast as they had expected.

This time around, corporate has put sloppier dates on their milestones so that they can be more flexible on their timing and hopefully won’t miss any further checkpoints — multiple customers are relying on these timetables and it has been well publicized that Boeing often has to pay stiff penalties for being behind.

First flight has thus now been pushed back to the the fourth quarter of this year, with the first delivery scheduled in the third quarter of 2009. CEO Scott Carson boasted about the company’s achievements earlier in the week, conceding, however that “… the traveled work situation and some unanticipated rework have prevented us from hitting the milestones we laid out in January. Our revised schedule is built upon an achievable, high-confidence plan for getting us to our power-on and first-flight milestones”

Let’s hope that this schedule is actually achievable.

United to cancel 777 flights today

by Grant Martin on

Has the FAA been bringing the pain super fast lately? Last week we saw hundreds of cancellations on American Airlines and Delta Airlines flights because of potential issues with wiring harnesses underneath the aircraft. The issue was solely on their MD-80 aircraft, each carrier grounded a few flights, checked out the problem and everything got rolling again. What caused the inspections, however, was a flag raised by the FAA questioning the methodology of the inspections, not dissimilar to warnings raised earlier on Southwest 737s.

Now, United Airlines has discovered that one of the tests to check the fire suppression systems in their Boeing 777 cargo holds hasn’t been run properly, so they’re cycling all of those aircraft in to make inspections. Thirty one of the eighty four scheduled flights in total were canceled.

Why the sudden spate of aircraft groundings for maintenance checks? It might have to do with increased attention to aircraft maintenance issues as a result of the Southwest incident a few weeks back. Airlines are now probably scrambling to double and triple check their records to make sure that everything is up to snuff as the FAA and congress clamp down on quality.

A congressional hearing on the matter is scheduled for Thursday, at which point we’ll probably hear much more on United and maintenance checks in general, and what our fair politicians plan to do to keep things running smoothly. We’ll let you know how that goes.

Could the 787 be delayed again?

by Grant Martin on

The last few months have been a little rough for Boeing. After all but laughing at their rival Airbus for delays related to their A380 program, the Chicago based airframe manufacturer has pushed back the delivery of their new 787 composite aircraft twice, citing supply chain and final construction issues.

Then, earlier this month, Boeing lost a key Department of Defense contract for airborne tankers to the European air and space conglomerate, EADS, in a performance based competition.

Now, some airline analysts are starting to predict another, more significant delay for the embattled aircraft. Construction and integration of the wing box, a critical section on the underbelly that interfaces with the wings, holds fuel and connects to the landing gear, appears to be the source of the issue. Steven Udvar-Hazy, chairman of International Lease Finance Corp, Boeing’s largest customer recently highlighted the problems and referred to the situation as “not pretty”.

This is, however, one opinion from one analyst in the industry. Boeing hasn’t made an official statement on the matter, stating that they’ve been “focused on [their] near-term milestones of power on and first flight”, but Yyvone Leach, their Senior 787 PR contact did proffer this foreshadowing:

“It is normal during the development of a new airplane to discover the need for design enhancements. We are working with our partners to address the need for design changes in some areas. While these changes are not good for final assembly because they are dealing with traveled work at this time, the design changes are not the sole pacing item.”

The program update for media and analysts is scheduled for April 23. Perhaps things will be more transparent by then.

Check out James Wallace’s blog for more info (and speculation).

Looks like the Dreamliner is going to be pushed back again

by Grant Martin on

Several news depots are reporting rumors that Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner aircraft is going to be delayed by another three months. Right now the airline is “reviewing their schedule” as their stock wildly flounders on the stock market.

The story? Same old supply chain issues. Apparently the airline company, who recently lost a their bid on a hotly contested air tanker order, still can’t manage to get their suppliers in line and their aircraft put together on time.

As an analyst from Goldman Sachs puts it,

“[Boeing] continues to underestimate the amount of work required on the 787. We think Boeing will notify suppliers of new production targets shortly, motivated by the need to keep delivery commitments to airlines.”

I guess designing and building an entirely new airframe takes time. Just look at the problems with the A380 — that was pushed back even further than the 787 (so far). I guess nobody is immune to manufacturing hiccups.

Why the fuss about the EADS Boeing tanker order?

by Grant Martin on

If you’ve been following the news over the past few days, you may have learned that congress and Americans alike are up in arms about the Air Force’s recent contract with the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), parent company to Airbus, to manufacture the next generation of their airborne tankers.

EADS recently outdesigned and outbid local favorite Boeing on the contract to win the 40 billion deal. The job is purported to create over twenty thousand jobs in Alabama and Kansas, while over forty thousand jobs would have been created (or retained, rather) at Boeing.

This is what has got so many Americans angry. But don’t be so quick to jump on the bandwagon. Here are a few points to consider before you start burning your stockpile of french fries, crepes and berets:

  • The US Airforce chose the aircraft that would work best for the armed forces. The two competing aircraft were compared based on five criteria, and in each of those categories, the EADS aircraft was superior to the Boeing. All of them.
  • The armed forces are required by law to not consider jobs created or lost in their selection process. A law called the Buy America Act also stipulates that they must hold several EU nations in the same manufacturing regard as the US. So even if they wanted to discriminate against workers in Europe or America, they couldn’t.
  • EADS, and thus Airbus, is not a French company. It’s a European conglomerate with multiple countries sharing ownership.
  • Competition is good! If we didn’t have two large airframe designers in the market, the resulting monopoly could result in poorly made, expensive machinery.

From an engineer’s standpoint, it’s simple to me: pick the product with the best price to performance ratio. In this case, it was the EADS aircraft. That’s it. I know our trade deficit will broaden, but this is not an area in which we want to pick a fight.

What irritates me is how politicians, bureaucrats and line workers paint the picture of the Air Force hating America and our troops because of this contract. As one union worker on NPR complained:
“It’s not the best. Boeing makes the best aircraft in the world. Not Airbus. Airbus makes cheap crap.”

We’re still creating jobs in the United States with this contract. We’re also finding the best, most cost-effective way to update our aging tanker fleet. Boeing, and our economy will survive.

Check out the NPR Morning edition article for more info.