PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
Old 28th Aug 2019, 15:34
  #2072 (permalink)  
Ian W
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by krismiler
Basically then, an aircraft manufacturer approaches specialist equipment suppliers with a description of their requirements and sees if they are currently producing anything suitable. If not, then would they be willing to design and supply something new in return for a commitment of a minimum number of orders or sole supplier status.

A modern commercial airliner is far too involved to be built by a single entity. Airbus and Boeing simply couldn't produce everything in house as it would be too expensive to develop the expertise to match outside suppliers who have been concentrating on a single area, such as landing gear or brakes for the last fifty years.
I don't think A or B have an 'in house'. Components have always been outsourced engines tires etc. But it is more than that the major factories become assembly lines more than construction, with all the parts for the kit being shipped in. So what is needed is space to build the factory and a local workforce that can carry out aero-engineering. Enter the politicians both real and the ones in management with MBAs. They will decide where assembly lines will be placed based on geopolitical considerations. Airbus has assembly lines in the USA for example and Boeing has a plant in China ironically building 737-Max, GE/Safran has engine factories in China. These sourcing/outsourcing and assembly line placing deals are all seen as ways of securing or increasing sales of 'locally built' aircraft and making local politicians wary of rocking the boat that provides jobs to their constituents in what is an extremely narrow market.
Ian W is offline