Boeing Dreamliner

[Fairweather]

Have the engineers there been sniffin' too much epoxy, or what? Sorry Boeing, but I'll be requesting an aluminum aircraft when I book my future travel.

[JosephH]

It's a great project and has pushed the boundaries of how large manufactured structures are designed. An amazing amount of software has been advanced due to the Dreamliner which has been entirely computer-designed. That experience certainly hasn't been flawless, the structure analysis software has been a work in progress relative to analysis of larger and larger composite structures and assemblies. The feedback loop from design > analysis > manufacture and back to design and analysis has brought us leaps forward in our capabilities to design, build, and assemble large structures with computer models alone. That the first significant project of this scale has had to go through the loop a few times is to be expected - and the real payoff won't be with the Dreamliner itself, but rather the designs that follow it.

[Fairweather]

Wasn't the 777 built w/o a mock-up too? Are the issues really Cad-related, or is this more of a materials thing? I've heard the B2 Bomber has had delamination issues to the point that they avoid flying it in the rain. It seems that Airbus has had their problems too. I recall the composite tail came off of a plane over The Bronx just after 9/11 and killed 200+. I've also heard Boeing engineers have divided into at least two squabbling camps? In any event, it's a shame they aren't meeting their goals--but I guess it is reassuring that they are unwilling to deliver an aircraft with safety issues. It's kind of like Lasik. I'll wait and see if they stay in the air for a few years before I hop aboard.

[Hugh Conway]

It's a we moved the headquarters to Chicago where a bunch of dipshit MBAs did lines and came up with fantasy, marketed the shit out of it, sold a bill of goods, AND DIDN'T CARE THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO MANAGE THE FUCKING PROJECT TOO

 

talk about a prime example of what's wrong with America. Remember how the IFE was going to be wireless? Even Microsoft isn't dumb enough to pump such fantasy bullshit.

[JosephH]

Not at all, the project has been exceedingly well managed and those managers have been given the authority to push back the schedule to get it right. The problems have mostly been with structural analysis of mated assemblies across large scale joints - scaling up the structural analyses. At every step of the way they do physical tests to validate and verify their models, and that allows them to hone the software. But it's an iterative cycle that takes a few times through the hoops to get right. I take the fact they've delayed delivery several times now as a very good thing and a sign the project is being well managed.

[AlpineK]

the project has been exceedingly well managed

 

Actually no

 

The design group is a very insular lot who keep to themselves.

 

Instead of seeking outside advice on problems or issues, the design group rarely asks for assistance. Sure they're protecting the project, but every other aircraft Boeing built relied on help from lots of people not in the project.

 

If that strategy was a good one the plane would have been done a lot closer to on time.

[Hugh Conway]

Not at all, the project has been exceedingly well managed

 

Buying fasteners at Home Depot for a Potemkin rollout is well managed?

[builder206]

If it this project was well-managed, they'd have a plane, not a continuous stream of press pieces explaining away the latest snafu. To say it's "well-managed" is an Orwellian abuse of the dictionary. It might be well-managed for a test project or prototype project, but this was supposed result in a production line cranking out multiple aircraft, not improvements in computer software.

[Choada_Boy]

If it this project was well-managed, they'd have a plane, not a continuous stream of press pieces explaining away the latest snafu... but this was supposed result in a production line cranking out multiple aircraft, not improvements in computer software.

 

Um, when I toured the Boeing assembly plant in Everett at the end of July, they had multiple Dreamliners, under assembly, on a production line, which seemed to be cranking out multiple aircraft. They even had a plane. As far as "snafus", I guess building complicated things is complicated. Go figure...

[Hugh Conway]

Um, when I toured the Boeing assembly plant in Everett at the end of July

 

Ummmmm .... first flight was supposed to be in September 2007. Hangar queens aren't commercial aircraft and this is the 6th delay or some such.

 

ya, building shit's hard. somebody tell the POS MBAs

[JosephH]

No one has ever built a structure remotely this complex or large using these design, material, or manufacturing technologies. The Dreamliner team also didn't make the big call they were saddle with on divvying the plane substructures up to different countries and subcontractors for sales/political reasons; they also have no control over Boeing's supply chain management. Both the team and Boeing management are learning what works and what doesn't in the process. The composite and design technology development and use over the course of the project has been nothing short of stunning and have greatly advanced the state of numerous arts. The planes' final delivery date isn't the priority - rushing Dreamliners out the door could have been done, but it would have come at the expense of getting the overall buid processes ironed out. And overcoming the fundamental and unavoidable shortcomings of the decision to farm major assemblies out, and distributed supply chain control nightmares associated with it, is part and parcel with those decisions - decisions made by Boeing execs and imposed on the Dreamliner team.