Did I tell you or did I tell you? As Seattle Times Boeing reporter Dominic Gates reports today, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner might not be ready for its first flight test until 2010.
The initial word from Boeing about a structural flaw in how the wings attach to the fuselage had been that it was a minor problem, requiring a few patches. It didn’t sound minor, and Boeing suppliers were already murmuring about “months not weeks” a month ago. Now it’s clear that the fix will require several months if a successful patch can be determined.
Late last month here on PubliCola, I wrote about how the 787 resembled a software project instead of a hardware one. Software projects are squishy. Bugs appear, and it’s impossible to know how long they take to fix. It’s also impossible to estimate reliably how long a given large task will take to complete.
It’s possible that this wing flaw could be the straw that breaks Boeing’s back. The company doesn’t know how to fix it or when it will be fixed. It’s possible there will be no relatively easy fix (with months being an easy fix), and an entire redesign of the assembly structure will be required, pushing the first test flight back 18 to 24 months.
That would cost Boeing billions, and mean more layoffs here and elsewhere. Boeing has only itself to blame. The unions warned about global outsourcing without good controls; self serving as the warning was, it turned out entirely true. But this latest issue goes beyond that into fundamental design issue. This plane has to fly; but can it fly?
Tweet
Software doesn’t have to be that way and can be accuratly planned. You just have to recongnize that patches are expensive plan it like you would hardware from the beginning.
The fact that the Seattle Times infographic shows the possible fix as involving 3 bolts is not promising. If they thought 3 bolts would do it, they’d be feeling more confident.
Are there *any* examples of a company successfully managing a global outsourced supply-chain for a complicated finished good?
“Insourcing” is sure to be the trend of the next decade.
Has anyone seen an article anywhere that tries to quanitify the economic fallout for all the local companies that Boeing outsources to? If this plane doesn’t fly, it’s not just Boeing that’s going to tank, it could be a significant chunk of the region.
Welcome to the Flat World. Unfortunately, even in the flat world, real-life stuff has to actually fit together sometimes. Too bad, because Boeing seemed to have a real winner on their hands with the 787…
It isn’t just self serving unions that called this one. I know a couple engineers on the inside who have said the engineering and management of this program have been screwed up for a long time. Boeing management changed after the merger with McDonnell Douglas. The bad guys took over and quality across the board has dropped. Any money they would have saved through global outsourcing will be eaten up by delays. And now Boeing wants to move a production line to South Carolina because Puget Sound unions drive up costs? Maybe they do, but they also do better work and have more experience. Stockholders have got to start making some noise.
What is a common component, new airplanes,and delays, hmmmm, let me think.
http://www.tgstech.com/releases/BoeingsDream_AirbusNightmare.pdf
@1: Go read Dreaming in Code, and then get back to me.
I don’t have the exact statistic in hand, but it’s roughly 20 percent of all business software projects come in close to on time and under budget. A large percentage are abandoned. A large percentage are dramatically underfeatured and over budget. And that’s just internal corporate projects, not commercially developed software!
Software doesn't have to be that way and can be accuratly planned. You just have to recongnize that patches are expensive plan it like you would hardware from the beginning.