Boeing steps up rollout of 787s (More salt in Airbusts wounds)

Seattle-Times ^ | 6/24/2006 | Dominic Gates

[Proud_USA_Republican]

EVERETT — Boeing's head salesman disclosed Friday that 787 jets will be rolling out of Everett at a minimum rate of 10 a month soon after production starts — a faster rate than for any previous wide-body jet in the company's history.

The increase, from an original plan for seven a month, probably won't require a large number of extra production workers. But, in a hot market where Boeing can sell as many of these new wide-body jets as it can build, a speedy ramp-up will boost sales.

"We're talking about stepping up fairly rapidly to 10 a month," said Scott Carson, vice president of sales at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, speaking Friday at a Chamber of Commerce breakfast meeting. Boeing has never before built more than seven per month of any wide-body model.

Boeing plans to deliver the first 787s in May or June 2008, according to internal schedules obtained by The Seattle Times. The company has firm orders or commitments for more than 400 aircraft, with sales proposals under evaluation for 500 more.

Because Airbus won't roll out a rival to the 787 until 2011 or 2012, the more airplanes Boeing can build before then, the more of the market it has to itself.

[Proud_USA_Republican]

They could eventually be completing 16 787's a month. Unreal numbers.

By 2008, your going to hear crickets chirping at Airbust's factory in Toulouse, France. By 2012, Airbust will finally be releasing a competitor to the 787. What a disaster. In the meantime, Boeing will have sold and delivered hundreds of 787's.

[JRios1968]

ping...

[conservative in nyc]

They could eventually be completing 16 787's a month. Unreal numbers.

Let's hope Boeing can actually deliver on their promises. One bottleneck in their worldwide production scheme, and Airbus ends up with an advantage.

By 2008, your going to hear crickets chirping at Airbust's factory in Toulouse, France.

Don't kid yourself. While the A380 has been a disaster, Airbus' factories will be filled with A320-series aircraft orders for years to come. There are over 1500 of them on order. Final assembly of A320s (but not the A320 variants) occurs in Toulouse. Airbus even has a few hundred A330/A340s left to build.

[Paleo Conservative]

Don't kid yourself. While the A380 has been a disaster, Airbus' factories will be filled with A320-series aircraft orders for years to come. There are over 1500 of them on order. Final assembly of A320s (but not the A320 variants) occurs in Toulouse. Airbus even has a few hundred A330/A340s left to build.

I wonder what Airbus will do with all the work they did to design the most recent version of the A350? Why don't they use it and call it an advanced A330? The new A350 or is it the A370 is really a competitor to the 777 not the 787. They'll need something between the A320 and A350/A370 unless they want to conceed the whole market to Boeing.

[TheBattman]

A380 has been a disaster

I'm not being argumentative, but I am curious what makes you say the A380 is a bust? I just saw a show on the A380 - and have read other good press on the plane. My understanding is that the A380 has had some great test flights, and some interest for orders.... But I'm not in the middle of the industry so don't know what other info might be realted to this...

[TheBattman]

The A380 is sold in two versions. The A380-800 can carry 555 passengers in a three-class configuration or up to 853 passengers in a single-class economy configuration. [click here] for detailed 3-class config.

The A380 has a range of 14,800 km (8,000 nautical miles). The second model, the A380-800F freighter, will carry 150 tonnes of cargo 10,400 km (5,600 nautical miles).

The A380 has a Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) of 590T. 747-400ER has a MTOW of 412T.

The project was estimiated to cost around Euro 8.8billion in 1999, however the final budget is Euro12 billion.

To-date, 159 A380s have been ordered by 16 customers, with the first due to be delivered to first operator Singapore Airlines before the end of the year (2006).

Airbus A380 Orders
Airline A380
Air France 10
China Southern Airline 5
Emirates 43
Etihad Airways 4
FedEx 10
ILFC 10
Kingfisher Airlines 5
Korean Air 5
Lufthansa 15
Malaysia Airlines 6
Qantas 12
Qatar Airways 2
Singapore Airlines 10
Thai Airways 6
UPS 10
Virgin Atlantic 6
Total: 159

But those sales figures are from Mune 2005...

[river rat]

Airbust's bubble is burst.

So sad, too bad.... F'em.

Semper Fi

[djwright]

The A380 is being seen as the white elephant that it is. See Richard Alvis column in the WSJ date June 21.

He is actually suggesting that they cancel the whole program. So they will have the resources to respond to the 787. Otherwise AB is in big trouble.

[conservative in nyc]

Airbus just announced more production delays on the A380, which will be very costly to the company. And Airbus announced that they can't make as many A380s per year as they first announced due to wiring issues. The A380 is still overweight and likely overbudget. And Airbus currently doesn't have enough A380s on order to come close to breaking even.

Couple that with one industry observer writing that Airbus should cancel the A380 and focus its efforts on the A350, and another very well respected aircraft leasing guru (the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum wing at Dulles Airport is named after the guy, Steven Udvar-Hazy) reportedly mulling over whether to cancel his company's A380 orders, and you very well might see a mass exodus from an airplane that's currently in the red and dependent on government subsidies for its existence.

The A380 could become the Concorde of the 21st Century - a great feat in engineering, but an utter market failure. That's a recipe for disaster.

Airbus seems to be taking Udvar-Hazy's advice and seriously rethinking the A350/A370/whatever they will call it. I think it could be a decent competitor to the 787 if Airbus gets it right. And who knows? Maybe they'll take his advice to redesign the A330/A340 along the same lines to better compete with the 777. But by the time Airbus finally comes out with a better product in the next DECADE, Boeing will be on to newer and better things, including a redesigned 777 to compete with whatever Airbus tries to come up with.

[djwright]

Alvis = Aboulafia

[Paleo Conservative]

Couple that with one industry observer writing that Airbus should cancel the A380 and focus its efforts on the A350, and another very well respected aircraft leasing guru (the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum wing at Dulles Airport is named after the guy, Steven Udvar-Hazy) reportedly mulling over whether to cancel his company's A380 orders, and you very well might see a mass exodus from an airplane that's currently in the red and dependent on government subsidies for its existence.

I'm familiar with that article. I posted it a few days ago. It may not have been as widely read as some other aviation threads, because it was posted in the Bloggers & Personal forum.

Aircraft fail due to technical reasons or market reasons or both (A380)
RichardAboulafia.com ^ | June 2006 Letter | Richard Aboulafia

Posted on 06/22/2006 10:48:32 PM CDT by Paleo Conservative

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off the aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.

[djwright]

yep and then he came out with an even harsher letter on Friday. If you follow aviation Richard is the "go-to" guy. So when he says the program should be canceled that is huge.

[Red6]

1. The A380 is behind in it's deliver schedule.

2. The A380 is over cost and this gap is growing.

3. The A380 has not sold enough to even break even at this point. Realize that often a substantial part of the orders are usually in before the first plane ever rolls off the line. Example- 787. It is LIKELY that Airbus will loose money on the A380 since their break even point is between 250-300 units and that leaves them nearly 100 more planes to sell in a market that comprise a 5% niche in the larger commercial market (Example: While the 737 is no impressive plane in any regards, that plane propelled Boeing to the top in revenue because of volume in sales) and even there they have competitors like the new 747. Besides the trend in the industry is away from the hub and spoke principal, and a huge cattle cars like an A380 is left carrying freight in markets like North America. Not a good prospect.

[Proud_USA_Republican]

1) The A380 has come in several tons overweight.

2) If Airbust can't lighten the plane, the customers will demand that Airbust pay financial penalties or customers will have legal right to cancel plane orders. Airbust will have to take a financial hit on each plane sold if they have to pay for things such a composite seats to deliver the plane at weight promised.

3) They have had major problems with the wings, electrical, and mechanical wiring which has pushed back the plane delivery till end of 2007.

4) They just annouced that they will now only be able to produce less than 10 A380's a year for atleast the first 3 years of production, many less than they projected, costing the company 500 to 600 million in lost revenue a year and pushing back even farther the delivery dates for the planes already on order.
The stock lost over 30% of its value on the day of this annoucement.

[SamAdams76]

The supply chain that Boeing relies on is so vulnerable that one earthquake in the wrong place means Boeing is screwed. Of course, a lot of companies have put themselves in this position. If a devastating earthquake was to hit Taiwan for example, many U.S. companies would be paralyzed within days and unable to deliver product.

[jimtorr]

If a devastating earthquake was to hit Taiwan for example, many U.S. companies would be paralyzed within days and unable to deliver product.

I think it's called Just In Time Delivery. It nearly eliminates the cost of warehousing factory input parts, but leaves a production line vulnerable to disruption of deliveries for any reason whatsoever. Earthquakes, floods, fires, accidents, labor problems in the entire supply line, etc., etc.

[phantomworker]

"The supply chain that Boeing relies on is so vulnerable that one earthquake in the wrong place..."


Good comment. Remember the Kobe earthquake in 1995? Not sure how it impacted American business. You'd think Boeing would have some contingency plans.

http://www.ce.washington.edu/~liquefaction/html/quakes/kobe/kobe.html

[phantomworker]

They could eventually be completing 16 787's a month. Unreal numbers.

My conservative bent is starting to show. And I know how conservative they are. They're going to have to move some furniture around to assemble the 47, 67, 77, and 87 in one building.