AssemBLOG
  LoginNew User? 
Forgot Password 
BLOG HOME
Subscribe
About Us
Staff Directory
Webinar
Ask ASSEMBLY
Digital Edition
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
Turns out Building a 787 Dreamliner Ain’t so Easy
by Adam Cort
November 10, 2008

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



It was the summer of 2006, the Boeing Dreamliner 787 was still just a dream and I was interviewing Boeing’s now retired vice president of commercial development for a cover story on the 787. “We are not just an airplane company,” he told me. “We are a key element of a global transportation system.”

To this end, Boeing had decided to focus on those tasks it supposedly did best: large-scale systems integration; lean and effective global design and production; working with exotic metals like titanium and composites; interpreting the needs of the airline industry.

One thing it did not plan on doing was getting its hands dirty building things like wings and fuselage sections. Apparently this was no longer one of the company’s “core competencies.” Why bother with drilling holes and running wires, when you could just as easily have somebody do the job for you in Italy, China or Japan?

Fast forward to 2008—Turns out building wings and fuselages sections is a lot tougher than it looks, same thing for managing a complex global supply chain. First there was the fastener shortage. After that came a bunch of fuselage sections from a supplier in South Carolina that hadn’t been correctly prepared for final assembly at the company’s plant in Everett, WA. Now Boeing has discovered that as many as 3 percent of the fasteners in a number of the 787’s major subassemblies are being installed incorrectly. Apparently the company is going to have to find, remove and then put every one of those fasteners back in again.

During the recent machinists strike at Boeing, outsourcing was a major bone of contention. The union’s position was that its workers are worth the higher wages they command because they know what they are doing. Granted on paper it seems cheaper to have someone do the grunt work overseas or in a non-union shop on the other side of the continent. But then again, there is something to be said for experience. Doing things right the first time can often end up saving big money in the end.

Here at ASSEMBLY magazine, we are staunch proponents of companies doing whatever it takes to be competitive—that includes outsourcing. However, we have also cautioned companies to be sure and look at the “big picture” before shipping their work elsewhere in the interest of easy “cost savings.” Just because the actual process of assembling a product is easy for you, that doesn’t mean it’s going to be easy for everybody. Just because they’re less glamorous, that doesn’t mean tasks like running wire, installing rivets and, oh yeah, quality assurance, are any less important than all that headwork being done by the guys in the fancy suits.



Adam Cort
corta@bnpmedia.com
Senior Editor

|PrintEmail
  Comments (15)Post a Comment
Title: Turns out Building a 787 Dreamliner Ain’t so Easy


This also shows how Boeing could have problems in the future when outside/foreign suppliers are the ONLY people with the necessary manufacturing skills


Title: outsourcing


outsourcing subassemblies is routine in the auto industry. Perhaps one reason for the mess they're in now.


Title: Assemblers


I wonder if it ever occurred to Boeing management that they ought to send some of their experienced assemblers to South Carolina to show the unexperienced assemblers down there how to do the job right the first time. Then again, I suspect they realized that the cost would have ruined their "grand plan".


Title: outsourcing


why dont we continue to outsource all of our infrastructure. makes seense to me. the world is our friend and this will never come back to bite us.


Title: I'm sure this was a cost savings


I'm quite certain that this showed as acost savings when it was outsourced and will appear as a cost savings again when Boeing decides that it needs to take control of this part of the process.


Title: Outsourcing


I have worked in Asia over 30 years and was responsible for first production on a number of products for a number of large American corporations.
The most practical way is to have Boeing technicians spend all of their time on inspection and making sure the pilot run and first production is as specified.


Title: 787 Dreamliner


I hoped that Boeing didn't run into issues as they outsourced everything. Outsourcing some of the smaller assemblies (brackets w/platenuts and etc) makes sense. Outsourcing larger components puts you at major risk for quality/schedule issues. At least when it was done by their union shop, they had someform of quality control. Now it looks like they have to perform "damage control."


Title: Outsourcing


I have been in 'manufacturing' - on the tooling side - for over thirty years. In that time, I have experienced the whims of a good many yahoos in management, as have many readers. Why is it that we have only one so-so aircraft builder and only two American car makers? (Forget Chrysler!) P.S. - The question is rhetorical!


Title: Quality Control


The fiasco at Boeing should remind us all that "make buy" decissions must include the cost of quality control.

As US has lost most of it's heavy manufactuering industrty to overseas vndors such as MHI, Hitachi and others, it is imperative qualified US inspectors are placed at the overseas vendor shops to assure the qulaity of the outsourced products that US no longer has the capability to manufactuer.


Title: JUST cost savings?


Isn't there something to be said for manufacturing some parts of the airplanes in the countries that will be buying the finished product? Mind you, I'm not saying it was the greatest idea, or that it was done well...


Title: Out sourcing


I have watched out sourcing take place for the last 20 years, more so in the last 5 to 10 years. The quality has suffered in many products and the over all cost has been hidden well. Way to go all you non engineering MBA's.


Title: Where is our pride in workmanship???


I have never understood why so many US companies bid on work that they have no intentions of completing (themselves). Outsourcing of work most always results in duplicated management efforts with little savings in the long run and a lesser quality product. I guess Boeing has experienced some of the same Supplier Quality issues as Toyota(product recalls)...


Title: Leave before Launch


The genius of this scheme now is at the helm of Ford. Where did all the (Smartest guys in the room)from ENRON end up?


Title: Suppliers


It's amazing the effects that a few mistakes can make. A delay in assembly will place a delay on good suppliers.


Title: Successful Outsourcing


Having been on "both sides of the fence", successful outsourcing requires the buy-in and accountability of current process owners (ie: at Boeng) to ensure the process and yield conditions at the outsource company match or exceed current performance. Having not cited Boeing's internal yield baseline, a 3% fallout is difficult to interpret. Companies like Boening certainly have experience with 100% re-screening and reworking of internal "mishaps". A union environment that is geared toward job retention may add an additional challenge to the outsourcing objectives of achieving highest possible success out of the gate.


 

No HTML or BBCode in comments please.
 


Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.

InterTech
InterTech combines a wide range of patented technology for leak testing and functional testing with decades of experience to help both manufacturers and machine builders.









Click Here to view our new Digital Edition!

Webcast
Online University Webcast, Register today! Click Here.

E-Newsletter
Click Here to sign up for our Free eNewsletter!

Buyers Guide
Click Here
Riveting, Screwdrivers, Soldering, Welders, Presses, Robots and much more!
Over 1200 Suppliers at your fingertips!



© 2009 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy