Posted on 03/20/2008 4:51:19 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Industry insiders and Wall Street analysts are expecting further delays on Boeing Co's (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) new 787 Dreamliner, as the U.S. plane maker grapples with last-minute design changes and production problems.
Most now point to the second half of 2009 as the likely start of deliveries of the lightweight plane, at least six months later than Boeing's current target and about 15 months beyond the original schedule.
The latest problem involves redesigning the plane's crucial center wing box, according to Steven Udvar-Hazy, chief executive of International Lease Finance Corp, which is the biggest customer for the 787. ILFC is a unit of insurer American International Group Inc(AIG.N: Quote, Profile, Research).
Speaking at a JPMorgan investor conference this week, Udvar-Hazy said he now expected first delivery around September 2009, after Boeing fixes the problem and gets the plane through testing and certification.
The first 787 was originally set for delivery in May 2008, and is now officially scheduled for sometime in early 2009.
Udvar-Hazy, who runs the world's largest and most influential plane lessor, called the state of the 787 program "not pretty," according to JPMorgan analyst Joseph Nadol.
Boeing has said it will issue a new production schedule next month, and is widely expected to announce a delay, but it gave no indication of that on Thursday.
"The center wing box issue has been addressed," said 787 program spokeswoman Yvonne Leach, in a statement. "Boeing is working its normal processes for developing a new airplane."
Boeing is officially sticking to its plan to deliver the first 787 early next year, after production problems forced two delays in the past six months.
But most in the industry are expecting more delays and a drastic cut to the production schedule.
Boeing had originally planned to deliver 112 787s by the end of 2009, later scaling that back to 109. Most Wall Street analysts are expecting far fewer, with Nadol of JPMorgan now forecasting only 30 deliveries of 787s in 2009.
Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst at Teal Group, is forecasting only 10.
Earlier this month, Goldman Sachs analyst Richard Safran predicted further delays on the 787, pushing first delivery to July next year at the earliest.
Boeing shares rose 1.7 percent to $74.67 on the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday. They are down 31 percent from their all-time high of $107.80 in July last year, largely due to delays on the 787.
(Reporting by Bill Rigby, editing by Leslie Gevirtz)
And Boeing wonders why they didn’t get the new fueler contract?
If you want on or off this aerospace ping list, please contact Paleo Conservative or phantomworker by Freep mail.
This is a entirely new aircraft. Look at the Airbus A380 program. It's well over a year behind schedule, and it had much bigger problems.
Let’s hear from all the folks who were laughing at the 380 problems.
Perhaps after this redesign, the parts will actually fit together when they get to final assembly.
I am going to cheer for American jobs vs. jobs overseas - period.
Me too. Wonder what those who applaud Boeing's loss of the tanker will say when a new Chirac rules France, and we go looking for spare parts to help fight a battle France that disapproves.
Me, too. Right here in Mobile, AL.
Now tell me though (if you know), which contract produces more American jobs?
I really don't care if they are in Alabama, California, or anywhere else.
Both sides claim more American jobs. I don’t know the whole picture. But I do know that thousands of jobs will be created here in south Alabama.
I must say, though, if Boeing could convince me their plane was better for the military mission I would back them in a heartbeat. As it is now, the Air Force says the Northrup plane is better. That’s the bottom line for me.
Exception made for Timeout for having stated his reasoning...jobs 'here in Mobile'.
(Which is an honest version of...jobs are a wash, this just moves some of them from Seattle and into Mobile)
I want to see Alabama hard art work as well. It's clear that Toyota, Kia, & other assembly operations can provide wages to local residents. I'll also bet you can hear the same praise for out sourcing from residents of Islamabad, New Delhi, and backwater China, as you hear today from Mobile.
Clue:
EADS is a state sponsored cartel that has labored heroically to replace the USA with domination by France and Germany.
Clue:
Boeing is a US based private corporation that builds airplanes and has made enough off of that enterprise to swallow up it's only US competitor ... without state guarantees and the same jingoism that leads the EU to challenge the new world on a daily basis.
The lease offer is a red herring, it would never have taken place absent a US Government failure to want something they could pay for. The substitute RFP (and new funding) was adjusted to fit the euro-offer; if it is in fact a better value under new rules, so be it...but federal regulations say that's not allowed.
I'm concerned that the debate is more about the form of future procurement contracts and less about the product and total cost to the public...but that's a guess.
I don't like Boeing worth a damn - but I'd rather see an honestly managed procurement go to a US firm, sustaining jobs in the US, than to an EU entity that calls up the marching bands every time they beat American corporations.
(Please do not bore me with Nortrup-Grumman; they're EADS' smiley face)
I'm with you - if you are using American's tax dollars, create American jobs in the USA.
Since the Air force evaluation did not consider US job creation (strange if we're in the middle of a recession like Congress would have you believe), hard fast numbers are difficult to come by.
EADS/Northrup/Grumman estimated 5,000 direct jobs in Alabama, 25,000 total job (direct and indirect) nation wide and then evidently jumped this number up to 48,000 at the last minute (although I haven't found as second source for this).
Boeing, I think, has said 18,000 nation wide. I don't know the breakdown between direct and indirect.
I don't think we'll ever have hard fast numbers....1) its difficult to estimate and even more difficult to measure once contract is underway and 2) There is no penalty for fudging the numbers. Costs are a different matter - those numbers will be known eventually, but whether or not they equate to people is problematical!
In the past Boeing had modify planes after they had been delivered. The 747-100 especially had lots of teething problems. In fact the 747-100 was offered to existing 747 customers as a way of keeping the program going. P&W was having trouble meeting the engine performance specifications, so Boeing got authorization from customers to develop a shoter range but lighter 747 that became the 747-100. The 747-200 which came out almost two years later was what Boeing had really intended the original 747 to be. Some airlines like QANTAS and KLM refused to have 747-100's substituted for their original orders, because they needed the range and MTOW of what became the 747-200. Eventually Boeing came up with the 747-100B that had all the fixes to the original 747-100. Not very many 747-100B's were built as 747-100B's, because most customers preferred to switch their orders to the 747-220, but most 747-100's were converted to the 747-100B standard. Several years later, the 747SP was developed as a shortend version ot the 747-100B with some refinements to make it even lighter.
Singapore A/L’s just took delivery of their 2nd A380.
I've been somewhat skeptical that the A380's problems were mainly wiring.
IIRC, the ship has issues of 5 tonnes that it can't seem to shed, a weak wing, and a fuel efficiency that is quite a bit lower than originally advertised.
I suspect that the engineers may have erred in making the wings too short, with the chord being too long. Way too much drag to overcome to live up to claimed efficiencies.
If my recollections or suspicions are wrong, please feel free to correct.
Boy do I want to fly on those things already.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
