EVERETT — On a sunny day in July 2007, the Boeing Co. welcomed its 787 Dreamliner into the aviation world with a lavish rollout party in Everett.
Boeing’s Mike Bair, then the 787 program vice president, stood outside the factory’s immense doors smiling like a proud papa alongside retired “NBC Nightly News” anchor Tom Brokaw, who emceed the event.
Bair had told the thousands of workers, customers and suppliers who watched the rollout either in person or on satellite about the importance of incorporating the latest technology when bringing a new aircraft to market.
“You’ve got to get it right,” Bair said.
From a technology perspective, Boeing got its new 787 right.
From a preliminary execution standpoint, Boeing got its 787 wrong.
Standing there next to their Dreamliner on 07-08-07, Boeing executives surely had concerns about the aggressive schedule in front of them. Even then, Bair and other company leaders knew their first 787 was filled with temporary parts and lacked the wiring and systems it needed for first flight, scheduled for late August 2007.
But no one imagined it would take Boeing not two months, but nearly two years to put its 787 Dreamliner into flight.
Within two weeks of that day in July 2007, a series of schedule slides began for the mostly composite jet. By early September, the company had pushed the 787’s first flight to December but maintained the original May 2008 delivery date.
“Right now we don’t see this translating into delays,” Bair said. “The most important thing is to deliver the airplane on time.”
In early October, Boeing marketing guru Randy Tinseth gave assurances the 787 was on track. Less than 24 hours later, Scott Carson, president of commercial airplanes, admitted that Boeing would not deliver the first 787 on time.
Over the next 14 months, the delays dribbled in, soiling Boeing’s reputation and spoiling a potentially wide lead Boeing could have held over rival Airbus. Analysts and bloggers often broke news of 787 setbacks before Boeing. And problems — underperforming partners, incorrectly installed parts — piled up, pouring over into other jet programs.
After the Machinists strike last fall, Boeing announced delays to its 777 Freighter and 747-8 programs, blaming the 57-day work stoppage, design changes and a shortage of engineering resources for the setbacks.
The problems on the 787 forced Boeing to keep engineers on the Dreamliner longer than anticipated, the company said. Therefore, the engineers were late transferring over to the other programs.
Meanwhile, as Boeing pushed the 787’s first delivery date further, its rival Airbus picked up more orders for its A330. The European jet maker saw a surge in orders for its A330 since Boeing first announced delays to its 787 in 2007. Airbus received 198 net A330 orders in 2007 and another 142 in 2008.
Boeing’s gift to Airbus also meant the European jet maker’s new A350 jet, also made mostly of composite materials, won’t be far behind the 787 into service. The A350 is sized more to compete with Boeing’s 777. Still, the Dreamliner will be delivered just three years before the A350. The 787’s delays and extra costs give Boeing less time and cash to dream up a competitor to the A350.
But Boeing’s chief executive, Jim McNerney, sees some silver lining in the 787’s delays and is confident in the Dreamliner’s future, he said at the Sanford C. Bernstein strategic decisions conference in late May. The technology that Boeing is using on the Dreamliner will be used on aircraft for decades, he said.
“We’ve figured out how to build airplanes for the next 75 years,” McNerney said.
Boeing is using a spun composite barrel for its 787. Airbus plans to use composite panels instead. McNerney isn’t sure Airbus’ strategy will pay off.
Although Boeing’s suppliers have struggled on the 787, the delays have allowed them to smooth out the process — an advantage in the long run, McNerney said.
“I think that’s a huge advantage,” he said of the 787’s technology.
“Innovation is the key to us getting the lion’s share of the market.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
