My Blog List

Friday, December 21, 2012

Who's On First What's On Second For The 787

Uresh is the ultimate eyes, ears, and throat of Boeing's factory floor for the 787. His All Things 787 can be found through clicking on the hyper link.  Uresh has the journalistic high ground of knowing from raw numbers what is happening at both Everett and Charleston plants. I admire and acknowledge his due diligence for giving us all the latest confirmed numbers of what's happening  in those plants. An observer, like Sherlock Holmes may deduce with extreme accuracy what is going on behind the curtain with those aircraft. I like to use his score card just to illustrate this point.

Status Snapshot


Disposition

Total
Testing Complete
1
Undergoing Fatigue Testing
1
To be assembled in Everett
23
To be assembled in Charleston
7
Parts Arriving
3
Undergoing final assembly
10
Storage
8
Storage/Change Incorporation and Re-Work
12
Change Incorporation and Re-Work
9
Pre-Flight Prep
4
Pre-Delivery Flight Tests
5
Non Customer Flight Tests
0
Ready for Delivery
3
Delivered
46
TOTAL
132

My fast production flow analysis::

10 aircraft are being built not ready for delivery but will be out the door by February and delivered by spring.

8 aircraft are built, on hold in various stages of final completion and could be out the door rather quickly depending on face saving status of customer.

9 Aircraft are going through the do-over process in various stages from its redo work orders, all are assembled and are on the cusp of sitting outside.

27- The number of aircraft that are residing behind the curtain waiting for the final stage calls for 2013 is going to make for stout delivery months through June of 2013
==================================================


Early January and February ready for delivery  numbers

4-  are out of the great Boeing Barn awaiting its dance partner for B-1 flights
5-  are spending time  doing wraps-up before its ready for delivery stamp and have already cycled B-1's
3-  are there for customers to fly away.

12- aircraft have been invited to the customer flight line dance and should go out in the next 35 days. Pending customer cash flow, induction availability, and customer work force readiness.

Rumor is that Boeing hired more valet attendants for spring break-up of its flight line.





Monday, December 17, 2012

(Update) Boeing's All Electric Problem Generates More Smoke

First there was fire in the 787 control panels, back on its last runs, during test completion of the long delayed project. Then there was a United Aircraft reporting a generator fault and diversion flight because the number six generator failed, and Qatar's number 6 generator shut down on its 3rd Aircraft delivery flight. In total a test copy, two United aircraft and a Qatar unit all experiencing "all electric problems", when flying the 787. What does this hold for Boeing's aspirations in selling this Bird to the whole world? Let us quickly refine the inference.




Redundancy, due diligence, and extensive test process have won the day so far. Without it,  would be told a different story. I believe these lessons are not lost on Airbus. Had Boeing rushed through three years of delays and did not conduct a copious amount of work on an all new technology aircraft, I would not want to think how it would magnify the risk.

Is it the generator, or the a newly designed power panels? That is the question before Boeing. So far they have endured the angst of Akbar Al Baker from Qatar, and the disappointment from United's management. But to the Boeing Company's relief, they have been manageable progressions of teething its new aircraft, that is so different than anything before flown.  The 787 looks likes a metal aircraft until its wings lift skyward, has the same isles to walk down, and even the seats are close enough together to make money and remind passengers its an airplane after-all. Faking passengers into thinking, "Nothing new here, just newer and more convenient passenger gimmicks in play".

The 2010 panel fire established the importance of doing it right the first time. A redesign of the area forces out the opportunity of sloppy mistakes causing a fire, or other problems in the most critical area of the "all electric architecture" design.

Generator Fault events 2-4 (recent in the news for United and Qatar) are the reporting errors (faults), causing to shut down the aircraft's generator #6,  because something wrong is detected, and therefore # 6 ceases operation. This is a built-in safety mode after detection of fault.  Boeing and everybody else would like to know what happened from the control panel to the generator.  Software, switching, or firmware glitch? Installation problems, inferior parts, or design problem? These are all the questions needing answers, and goes beyond just the basics. Redundancy saves the day, but it also could be a redundancy tuning problem.  That is just one example of what engineers are asking of its programs, controlling all electrical flows with continuous back-up systems. Having this preventative redundancy system, protects from catastrophic failures, is done through its sequencing through various check-offs of its systems, and may cause a minor blip shutting down a generator in an irregular manner.  What you don't want is a cycling of that type of problem that will shut down other generators in succession over time during a flight. Once again Boeing and its partners have a lot to test, even after its 3 years of delays. This problem sounds glitchy and can be solved with some extra testing, workings and implementation.

Qatar's concern is a underlying challenge of Boeing, for an aircraft performing as advertised. The CEO, Al Baker does give recognition for the aircraft's performance and general nature of a fine aircraft. His own fire is not for the electric control panel but for principals of having a 100% working copy of the 787 for its customers.  Boeing is doing its job of extinguishing that fire with its hat-in-hand extinguishers, by continuing forward with Quality Management (QM) of continuous improvement through the birthing stages of a new technology.  Continuous Improvement works and is found in the leading manufacturers in the world. The built-in safety measures allows Boeing to continue on this path. Risk are mitigated and solutions are found, refined and implemented.  This is what Boeing is saying, when it states in a dismissive manner to a problem, that any new project has these types of problems during the start-up, and "we" will deal with them immediately, even after three years of delay. A strong downplay is too much by Boeing, as is a strong overplay by a customer.

Those close to the situation, probably know what happened already, but need to validate that assumption with a real replication of the incidents. I would not be surprise to see "a in storage test 787" flying again soon, focus on some customer concerns, and electrical testing issues. Boeing will validate the problem and certify the fix.  Right now "All Things 787"  has its score card at 0 Non Customer Flights. That may change soon.


Update 12/22/12:

ZA005 is now on the flight schedule! Do not know if this is related to electrical issues for testing. It is in the Non-Customer Flight Category. I can assume ZA005 is rolled out for flight testing for any new issues that Boeing is going to resolve. Note that ZA005 is a GE, and United/Qatars are GE's. So far the Rolls equipped aircraft have not shown an electrical issue like the recent GE powered ships.  Boeing could be testing systems on ZA005 comparing to the faulted systems on the delivered GE powered aircraft, in order to determine what is different on delivered aircraft with its test model. Definitely checklist items for problem solving is on board the ZA005 along with any other new upgrades for testing.

Friday, December 14, 2012

(Updated II Post Fire Brief) Boeing CEO says: 787 Problems Normal For A New Plane

Then: December 14, 2012

Jim McNerney, CEO of the Boeing Co., echos this company position from the top of the mountain.  on Friday said, "that the problems the company is having with its 787 Dreamliner are to be expected, given that the aircraft is still new to the market."

Qatar Airways, CEO, Akbar Al Baker, bluntly doesn't like it at all.  Al Baker's words are important, because he stands for an unforgiving march towards excellence, and takes no prisoners in this quest. His demands may sound unreasonable at times, even over-the-top, for all the attention given his aircraft.  

“These problems are unacceptable because this aircraft has been flying for the last 14 months,” Al Baker said in an interview, referring to the Dreamliner, which entered commercial service late last year. “They have to get their act together very fast because we at Qatar Airways will not accept any more defects.”

My Boeing Note Pad: Immerse Boeing Vision and Mission Statement into Qatar's and every other customer's Vision and Mission. The customer is your Vision and your mission is to see that they reach that vision with your product. Therefore, partner with your customer's quest in achieving that Vision and completing your mission with excellence.  Share in customer dissatisfaction as if it happened to your own vision, because it just did! 


Thank Akbar Al Baker for keeping your Vision in focus and don't refer to it "as a new airplane on the market problem".


Boeing wanted to show off its Aircraft at Farnborough last summer in Great Britain.  Lots of people walked on the Qatar 787 carpet while dropping stuff, dirt and travel sweat onto the aircraft. "Hey look, I scratched the mahogany arm rest with my purse buckle crowd." Boeing knew in advance they needed to deliver a pristine example to Qatar.  It even needed 4 months more of work on it before final delivery.  When you pay 150-230 million for an aircraft, Al Baker isn't just exited or giddy to get the aircraft. He is immensely focused on getting exactly what he paid for, "a perfect example of the 787". He wants no excuses of its new highly advance aircraft, with first time start-up cliches. That will not work on the Mr. Akbar Al Baker of Qatar. I respect both Boeing's and Qatar's plight, However when you purchase something more expensive than the Hope Diamond you don't expect it to arrive with finger prints, cracks found in the many facets and the stone setting having workman like glitches. 




Qatar Airways, CEO, Akbar Al Baker

This brings us to the generator problem, and McNerney's quipping the problems saying, "are to be expected given its still new in the Market". He is talking to the "giddy and happy I've got a 787 crowd."  Air India is excluded from this conversation, since they are still operating in Train Wreck Mode.  United got a bad generator (electric control panel) problem, so does Qatar have a similar problem during its delivery flight.  I am thankful for Generator (control panel) redundancy in the aircraft. However, there seems to be be a statistically significant problem, that goes deeper than an anomaly. Whether it is a programming issue for electrical flow control, or hardware fault, those remains to be determine.  McNerney is right in saying its a new aircraft glitch, but it makes me wonder with all the thousands of hours flown by the 787 that it showed up on two brand new aircraft for United and Qatar, just months/days apart. Something changed in quality control for either the assembly on the 787, with its installation, manufacturing, or materials found in the electrical system. This is a serious crack for the Hope Diamond, which can and will be fixed, and should be found in the McNerney's right answers book. 


Right Answer Page One:


"Mr  Akbar Al Baker, we will make it right immediately and understand the importance of your concern. I will not downplay this in the press, as typical new airplane start-up problems. Boeing will do everything to make your $180 million diamond right."


Maybe this type of conversation has already happened, but Boeing should fall on its sword, rather than soft play the incident making Akbar Al Baker look dis-in-genuine by framing the problem as typical


Check out newly (updated/additional) information on the electrical glitch in the "FLY On, 787" Link Below:


United says, "its a electrical control panel problem causing a fault reading. Citing the generator as the problem, while the generator is not the item faulting". The control panel has a problem. So Qatar shoots first and asks questions later method of PR,  is same as the guy loudly exclaiming to the crowd, "it wasn't me", on a stinky elevator going up a hundred floors.


The "Now" started just three  weeks later after this posting. With the Battery Fires and Smoke in Boston on January 7, 2013.



June 5, 2013 LiftnDrag:

Boeing has gone through the battery gauntlet with the FAA, Customers and suppliers; and as of June 5, 2013 is back on track. What kind of Akbar Al Baker  anger still exist, is justified, as he had fired out this warning back in December of 2012, and then was grounded for four more months, until a fix was completed on the "New Battery Problem". Mr. Akbar Al Baker, you were right, as much as Boeing has tried to smooth relations via the press. I can't imagine what Boeing has told you in private. But I'm sure its a sword swallowing event of great proportions. Boeing is fully gutted in the PR world for its 787. I now know why you won't be a 787-10X launch customer. However, I can see you later on as a -10 customer, once you see how the aircraft performs, after a year in service. This is the price to pay for new technology, and sometimes quantum leaps are just that quantum leaps. You will order about a year out on the order book, after first delivery is determined. By then, the -10's landing's will have stop hurting, because the leap is so strong. Avoiding the  -10 experimental year, will be a temporary solution, since you have many other -8's coming forward. The -10, inspite of Boeing's sales dogma, will be a great airplane. Being launch customer for the -10 is not necessary at this time, because you made your point well last December 12, 2012.

Fly On, 787.  



==========================================================================

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Boeing 787 not profitable for another 9 years?

I said prior in a prior posting, that I believe Boeing will reach Break-even when 150 787-10's are sold or delivered.  I don't know when that will happen but, I believe this can be done well before 2021, but not by 2015. Boeing will have to exhaust a significant portion of its order backlog through deliveries by 2015 to meet that goal. However, by 2015 Boeing will have all risks retired, and certainty of "when it will exactly meet, the profitability barrier beyond 2015".  A 2015 forecast for the year 2017 from Boeing, is a better forecast than this year’s 2012 forecast for 2015. Two years from now a solid view to the future will excite the investor, and I believe Boeing will state it will make money by 2017, not 2021. A financial cushion of time would lean towards 2018. Boeing will make money on the 787 project as a whole surging past its breakeven point late 2017 or early 2018.

Why?  By then, Nines are long since airborne and are flying out the door. Eights are beyond halfway through the order Que, with refined models popping out the giant doors every three days without hesitation.  2015 is time to secure the market share, because they will know how well the A-350 will perform and also have a new 777-X in the offering.  It means that 2015 is not a 787's profitability year, but the year becomes a major change for the airline wars. It's easy to see Boeing mastering of plastics, to the extent that it will announce the building of a monumental plastic winged airplane by late 2015. A mini jumbo putting to bed the 747, and causing additional stress fractures on the psychic of the A380's design team.  A right sized mini jumbo would carry more towards the low end number of 400 or high end of 300 passengers, then fly 8,000 mile and fit in all metro airports with 9-10,000 feet of stopping and starting distances. Airport boards put your shovels away and bring out the water cannons when the 777-X mini jumbo comes to connect the world.

Logistics for building this type of model would be significantly different than found on the 787.  Large parts may go by ship from Japan in 10 days. Having a Boeing design, and spec built cargo ship enables landing cargo from Puget Sound and then rail parts a very short distance from the "Puget Drain" straight to Paine. Making the two miles from the north, wedge between the affluent and the foliage. Why ship just-in-time parts by air? Just to have those parts sit in in building 45-X or on a runway for six months, while mechanics and engineers argue about how to assemble and fly this beast. Parts by specially modified ships is better to shuttle in and out several deliveries a week.  This opens the door for fabrications to shop out of LA, Tokyo and San Diego.  Providing a safe transport of super large barrels, wings and things for an all plastic mini jumbo. I believe by delaying the 777-X announcement, a plan B is in the works. Boeing desires moving away from an all metal jumbo's and going for an all plastic mini jumbo. Boeing has collected enough data, suppliers and technologies to do this thing with style.  The 777 still has a remarkable shelf life, allowing time to get an plastic follow-on right, over the next few years, before a 2015 announcement for an all new 777X family of aircraft.

I like ships too!




This could be a Mini Jumbo Barrel, wing or other parts coming from a Boeing Boat landing near Mukilteo , WA.

Friday, December 7, 2012

787 Nuts and Bolts Report


By Fred George

Five pages of cyber Geeking on the 787 is worth the read. The Nuts and Bolts of it, really displays 787 complexity and development compared to an advanced 777 model. The 787 may operate and fly in a similar fashion to the 777, but under its skin its a very different world.  This is a link worth saving when comparing the upcoming A-350 break-out in 2014. Please direct yourself to this fine article, presenting what "we" know about this miraculous bird. Save it and use for future reference as an electronic scrapbook on the 787. Refer to it later as Airbus tries to emulate Boeing's efforts.

Monday, December 3, 2012

Separation Of Design And Makers At Boeing

In a key strategic move by Boeing's chiefs, a proposal of  separating the dreamers from the woodcarvers is going on. The dreamers are the designers and woodcarvers are boots on the ground.  Currently these Boeing subgroups awkwardly work through a plethora of change incorporation, design change and production schedules. Please( Link Crains Chicago Business) to this article announcing a change through a separation of divisions with its engineering and production.

There are several questions obviously already answered prior to Boeing's decision.

Synergy Found On The Factory Floor

  • How will engineering changes integrate to the production floor?
  • How will production innovation migrate back for improving engineering design? 
  • How does engineer's concepts become a production reality?
  • Will walls exist between production realities, engineers dreams and Bean Counter(accountants) boundaries?
  • What does this do to the implementation process for new models from CAD to the floor?
  • Is there an independent interface department between divisions responsible for transitioning concept to production?

At the time, these are just a few hurdles for consideration. I imagine engineering work stations will remain on the factory floor, assisting production during start up. I also assume that big logistics room also remains a player. Tracking all moving parts, reporting at any given moment; any part, any delivery time, or any change.

Engineer Work Stations On Factory Floor

Therefore, the separation of duties with engineering and production does not lose the continuity of efficiency gained on the 787 project, but rather separates resources for better management of project cost that formerly co-mingled with production. With so many concurrent projects going on, this is more about efficiency and cost accounting measures identifying those cost and resources on specific projects within a division, and less about the team effort going forward from engineering to the floor.

Logistics Center

Boeing will not drop the synergies found in the 787 project, but will rely more on those synergies for upcoming projects. However, identifying cost, work functions, and resources; is more important when managing 5 separate airplane building projects, and will keep Boeing away from the word "late" in the newspapers. Division management is most import when lines are clearly drawn for the direction given.