MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
said suppliers could be pointing out to Boeing that exclusivity contracts are based on Boeing actually buying items, and with production rates the way they are, or could be, it could be the suppliers are getting a little restless.
G
G
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Washington state
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only way the US government and financial sectors would be able to stop Boeing from going under after another crash, would be to so heavily subsidise its products, that airlines have no choice but to buy them. Boeing would then be effectively a state-aided nationalised company in all but name.
And yet Boeing complain about Airbus being subsided ?
Many parts of an airliner these days aren’t specific to a single type or would need minor modifications, engines, APU, brakes, FMS, AVIONICS, cabin interiors, galleys, lavatories etc can easily be outsourced. The fuselage, wings and tail you need your own design for but I doubt anyone would be wanting to copy too much of the B737 design given its age and recent record.
Back in the 1960s, virtually ever British car manufacturer had its bodies made by a company called “Pressed Steel”, this was bought by the British Motor Corporation which then had all its rivals secrets.
Many parts of an airliner these days aren’t specific to a single type or would need minor modifications, engines, APU, brakes, FMS, AVIONICS, cabin interiors, galleys, lavatories etc can easily be outsourced. The fuselage, wings and tail you need your own design for but I doubt anyone would be wanting to copy too much of the B737 design given its age and recent record.
Back in the 1960s, virtually ever British car manufacturer had its bodies made by a company called “Pressed Steel”, this was bought by the British Motor Corporation which then had all its rivals secrets.
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many parts of an airliner these days aren’t specific to a single type or would need minor modifications, engines, APU, brakes, FMS, AVIONICS, cabin interiors, galleys, lavatories etc can easily be outsourced. The fuselage, wings and tail you need your own design for but I doubt anyone would be wanting to copy too much of the B737 design given its age and recent record.
So it maybe that the OEM has industrial secrets, not Boeing or Airbus.
That's the game, try everything to hinder your rival's progress. Especially when your engineering is lagging behind...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing or Airbus provide the specs : geometry, resistance, etc.
The landing gear manufacturer do the design and certification job through his certified manufacturing facilities and expertise.
Think of installing a certified Garmin GPS appliance in a TC aircraft, for instance.
The product is certified, 'DO-160ed' etc
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Heard that before regarding assembly line at Charleston. Even as far as some people working there would not fly on any particular aircraft assembled there. Seems strange statement to make, however if they are have the proof of that then everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: French Alps
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard that before regarding assembly line at Charleston. Even as far as some people working there would not fly on any particular aircraft assembled there. Seems strange statement to make, however if they are have the proof of that then everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
So yes, if I worked there, I would think twice about anyone I cared about flying on any aircraft assembled there.
Psychophysiological entity
Lucas lighting sets . . . oh.
Here we go again. Stall Prevention. "Not really, but sort of". Cause of both crashes. Really? The data coming from that single system was it seems, causal, but the bizarre fact is that it was two quite unrelated facets of that system that initiated the crisis.
Boeing has been fixing the stall-prevention system (MCAS) of the aircraft, which was concluded to be the cause of both crashes.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Washington state
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One could imagine that a company who made this sort of super intelligent decision to maximize their cash flow might find that they had a shortage of parts on the floor, as well as a shortage of suppliers willing (or able) to supply them.
Boeing Co is stepping up efforts to conserve cash, cut costs in its supply chain and trim inventory of parts in its factories, while telling vendors that it will take longer to pay bills, Boeing and aerospace industry executives said. Under the new terms, Boeing is taking up to 120 days to pay, rather than 30 days in the past, these people said. The new payment schedules are being rolled out this year. Boeing is reducing its factory inventory and relying on suppliers to hold parts instead, these people said. These moves come at a time when investors are closely watching Boeing's cash flow.
Last edited by Water pilot; 29th Aug 2019 at 01:28. Reason: disclaimer
This could open the floodgates, how many other airlines have ordered and received the MAX or have unfulfilled orders for the aircraft but had routes and timetables already in place based on its arrival on a specific date ? The Lawyers must be rubbing their hands at the thought of the potential fees.
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection might be the next step as there is no way Boeing could pay out for all the lost income airlines have suffered due to the grounding.
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection might be the next step as there is no way Boeing could pay out for all the lost income airlines have suffered due to the grounding.