BREAKING: Boeing selects Charleston for 2nd 787 final assembly line

It's official:

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=906

In a way, this decision shows that the company is very confident of the 787's prospects. The move is similar to Airbus's A320 move to a lower cost region - Tianjin, China. After buying out the Charleston supplier facilities, this had to be the next logical step. But, a huge, seismic fracture for Boeing's presence in the state.

For Everett, Washington, they still have the primary line - and they still have all means at their disposal to prove they're the best.

Best of luck to all those involved. Hopefully over time, these two lines will power Boeing forward and instil pride in every person remotely connected with that company - right across the board.

It's official:

boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=906

It is official, Boeing has it on their news site.

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=906

Congrats to South Carolina. The union really have no one to blame but themselves.

These union people are really out of touch with the reality. They boycotted last year when the rest of the world is in recession. Frequent strikes over the years as if that will not ultimately hurt them.

You guys don't even have a clue. Boeing didn't care if we went out on a strike. Customers weren't taking delivery of planes anyways and they were running out of room on the flightline. The primary customer for airplane galley's were having shift in management and as a result lost many employees and were unable to even provide Boeing with stuff to put into the plane. So there were about 20 777's sitting on the feild that they couldn't deliver. The strike was a perfect excuse and a good way for Boeing to blame a 60 day strike on their near 3 year delay.

Thats why they put forth such a crappy contract that took away retirement benefits and such, they new they would get a strike and get to play it up as being a victim of the union.

Sorry about the double post. The first one took even longer to get through than usual.

I do have two questions, before people in Charleston start popping open the champagne (although it might be too late already). I have no idea what the answers to these questions are, any more than any other aerospace enthusiast, so I'd be curious to hear any comments on them.

1) For how long will there be super-high demand for the 787?

2) When that demand goes down, will Boeing find it worthwhile to keep two assembly lines going, especially when one of them is non-unionized and thus relatively (yes, only relatively) easy to shut down?

The Boeing article says the goal is ten 787s per month. With 800+ orders, that's... seven years of production, plus future orders. What happens to the second line when the backlog goes down and the time comes to lower the production rate?

"...and ultimately drive down the cost of the 787..."

Really? Standing up a whole new production line in a whole new state with a whole new workforce needing a whole new infrastructure at a time when you don't expect to make a dime of profit from the 787 for god knows how many years is going to drive down the cost of the airplane? Wow, why didn't I think of that?

Liz M,

Yes, just like having airplane sections built in several factories spread around the globe, and then using a small fleet of highly-modified 747s to do nothing but fly the many thousands of miles required to bring each section of each 787 to Everett, drives down the cost ;]

But seriously, if these things cause more 787s to be sold, then the development cost can probably be spread over more airplanes, and so they do end up cheaper. Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows for sure.

There is still the question of how fast and effective the supply chain will be and in what time period.

It seems to me that the first line has to be operational and efficient with strong supply chain support before they can open the second line and produce and supply both.

So. what time frame are we talking about .

Seven airplanes per month in Everett, three per month in Charleston. Eventually Everett will build the -9's, and Charleston the -8's.

Followup to Wingbender:

What specific time period are you envisioning. That is, how long do you think it will take until Everett can produce 7 planes/month smoothly.

When does the 2nd line "click in" ( chronologically) and will Everett be able to start producing 787-9 during a "surge" while it is at the rate of 7/month....and how long will it take S.C. to build up to 7/month from its initial 3/month.

Sounds complicated and risky...with alot of logistics and expenses

The language of IAM District President Tom Wrobliewski sounds rather accusatory and beligerant. He claims Boeing was offered what it needed but what Boeing really wanted was a scapegoat and the tax benefits from South Carolina.

This certainly does not sound like a cooperating partner for "surge" production or cooperation over work matters.

You cannot accomplish gains and efficiencies without a cooperative workforce and this statement is so unuser friendly that I question the nature of Labor relations during these transition period.

@ Boeing Investor
I would expect Boeing CHS to be producing at the rate on par with Everett by end-2010, or Q1 of 2011, which is 6-9 months before the next round of negotiations with the IAM are due with the union.

The planned production capability would obviously be at a rate well in excess of the 9 per month, to mitigate for another potential strike at Everett in 2012.

Skilled managers from Everett would probably have first cut jobs and to relocation (semi-permanent, migrating to permanency later).

Just reading several posts around from talk about how big of a mistake this is, how could it save cost, no trained workers in South Carolina, and just had a general question. Currently, forward parts of the fuselage, center wing box, center wheel well, multiple aft fuselage sections are flown from around the world to guess where, Charleston, to do systems integration before the parts are sent to Everett. I would hope the cost savings start to become evident here that by not having to pack all of these things up, again, and put them on a Dreamlifter, that some large costs could probably be realized. The other item is the "lack of skilled workers" in South Carolina. Adding up the count of the composite parts for the 787 that are currently being manufactured and integrated from around the world in South Carolina compared to the number of composite parts for the 787 being built and integrated in Everett, isn't Charleston winning? Especially since they have now shifted to shipping complete assemblies? Just curious if I missed something, but looks to me that Charleston has more experience building composite fuselages and some good background already integrating the 787.

I think to blame the union **entirely** for this is somewhat unfair. As someone who lives in the Puget sound, I do recall hearing, at the time of the strike, that there was a collective sigh of relief as engineering was so far behind on the 787, that it allowed time to catch up. Having said that, I am also sure that the vociferous and often bellicose attitude of the union had some role in the decision of Boeing to move. So, before the circular firing squads get all lined up, I would ask our union friends to take a deep introspective look at themselves to see what role, if any , they played in this move, and for Boeing to do the same. A disgruntled workforce is no good for anyone.

I look at this and see that South Carolina came to the table with a better overall offering than the union or the officials of Washington state would give. I don't blame Boeing for the relationship with the union. I feel that while unions are good at times they tend to hurt the company their members work for.

What needs to happen now it no more crying over spilled milk. I heard the words from the union works in Washington. ow they believe they can only do the best quality work. I think a healthy competition between the two lines will be good for Boeing and the union. If the union members think they are the best. Let's see them prove it in their work. The same goes for the workers in SC.

I'd like to see some competition of who can build the most planes in one month and with the highest quality! Let the challenge begin men and women of Boeing!!

Good luck with the investment in a project that hasn't logged 1 air mile...
We knew on 07-08-07 that McDonnell-Boeing was looking for a out of state location to build the project- S.C. or San Antonio.
I hope the new SC workforce will put out better products than they've been sending us this far..
Those that blame 1 day of delay on the IAM are either misinformed or intentionally falsifying the real record of compromises and contract rejections in the immediate history..1999-2008.
We've been building the best aircraft in the world since 1935..explain that.
This will be interesting to watch and listen to more excuses.
To show their confidence, I think the 787 upper echelon should all be on the first flight to "walk the talk"

The delay is not the strike, not the wing box structure issue, it is software and systems issues that the company does not want the public to know about. They haven't even started on the structure fix because it is such a simple fix that they need an excuse to try to work the software and system issues out. They have been having software problems from the start. That is the big secret. Nothing is loading up correctly and the systems are not functioning properly. They tried to taxi the A/C and the nose wheel steering would not operate. So all you arm chair aviators out there who think you know what's going on with the 787 program and want to blame the Union for all the problems should get a life. Most of you jackasses are
not even in the industry and watching from the sidelines, getting spoon feed from the media.

It only made sense for the 787 second line to go to S.C. Less transport of parts to Seattle. As far as skilled owrkers in S.C. there will be some training needed, but there are some VERY skilled AC Mechanics in the market that will be happy to join in and do a great job. I know a lot of them that are top of line that are waiting for something like this. The IAM needs to SU and do their job in Seattle.
I have watched the IAM protect sorry workers just because they were getting dues from the worker. Beside there is a great desl of work possibly coming to Boeing that all of them will share in. Like the 777 and 737 move to composites and possibly the KC-777 form the Air Force. GO BOEING....

Once again I hope Jon can sort out this decision and put some type of time line and cost outlay as well as possible production outputs on both lines or at least discuss what advantages and obstacles he sees.

The concept of a "surge" in Everett is puzzling to me. What exactly is meant by that. Can the supply chain ramp up for that...and what is involved.

Does Boeing and Jim Albaugh have such confidence in its capacity to fly and produce this model that it is actually accelerating a schedule it just recently set. What occassions this burst of confidence

Here's something that I think has been lost in the comments thus far ...

Boeing is competing against EADS/Northrop for the Tanker contract. Boeing's bid is a mix of 777's and 767's most likely. Where will Boeing get the extra capacity if they chose the Everett site (which means they likely would have converted the 767 line)? None of the other lines can support the extra 777's and 767's at the moment since 777 is humming along, 747-8 is almost out the door, 787 is (hopefully) out the door soon, and the narrobody line is not equipped for a widebody mod, and no one would dream of modding the 737 line since that's the golden goose right now.

I would be a fool to ignore the cost advantage of S.C., and that definitely played a role. But part of me thinks that Boeing was forced to make this decision.

Boeing not only gets non-union labor, it directly pits non-union pay against union pay for identical work, albeit in a lower cost area. This creates leverage when compensation is renegotiated. Production will continue even if IAM strikes, which will produce pressure for quicker resolution. The ultimate result could be to force WA into being a right to work state. In short there will be competition within Boeing as well as without. Looking forward, the new site will give Boeing more flexibility for producing the 787 derivatives and refresh of 777 and 737.

The lack of a skilled local work force is overstated imo. Morale will be higher as people are brought in who are happy for the job. Skilled people from all over the world will apply, even from WA. I think this was a done deal from the beginning. The center of BCA will remain in WA, but this changes things.

You may want to start saving your money now. September 2012 will be the beginning of a long strike. There won't being built anywhere for a long long time.

To think they plan on producing 10 787's a month in 2013? Ha! We'll still be on strike!

Boeing has shot themselves in the foot once again!

Yes, the 787 delay is not related to union. In fact, the 787 delay is entirely management, especially from many of the old McDonnell Douglas' management who ran the company into the ground.

Scott Carson and Jim McNerney are both responsible. Neither of them pay attention to the program at all. They are unbelievably incompetent. If Allan Mulally were still at Boeing, none of this BS would have happened.

Nevertheless, the union is a huge factor in the last few years causing numerous disruptions. Despite all the technical problems with Airbus, they don't have such a problematic union.

And the union boss is now trying to cover its a**. Coming up with all these nonsense so that he could keep his union boss job. WHAT A FREAKING JOKE!!!!!

1)"To think they plan on producing 10 787's a month in 2013? Ha! We'll still be on strike!" 2)The statue in front of the IAM union hall is a picket line. 3)IAM District President Tom Wrobliewski's statements.

And the union guys wonder why Boeing is opening a second line in SC? You have to be kidding me! Why would anyone build new/second facilities in a high cost of living area, with high taxes, a combative and obstructive work force? As for skilled workers, there are plenty that are out of work from other companies and airlines who would love to work where there is a big work backlog. The big Polack just wizzed thousands of jobs down the toilet. The rank and file better start looking where his loyalties lie. He still has his job.

People who blame either the Union or Boeing entirely have it all wrong. It's BOTH their faults. Boeing has wanted to break the unions since the merger, this was one of Stonecipher's lasting legacies. The union's last strike was just plain stupid. The offer wasn't bad, the economy was tanking. It was just dumb. I have yet to see any one from the union side specifically answer what was worth striking for. Especially given all the fallout.

The union and Boeing have bad blood between them. It's both their faults. Companies tend to get the unions they deserve. Contrast Boeing with, say Southwest Airlines. Both are heavily unionized, however LUV has much better employee relations. This is directly related to managment style.

In my opinion, this won't make Boeing any more profitable, nor make the 787 more money. In fact, I think this will cost more than it earns. My feeling is that Boeing's management is so angry with it's union that no matter what was offered they were going to move. I think eventually ALL of Boeing will leave Puget Sound if the current managemet has its way.

What is Boeing? Well, this company, like all others, is made up of many parts - building and equipment, capital and shareholders, but most importantly, people and ideas. Those people are unionized and non-unionized. They're assembly line mechanics, floor stewards, engineers - of so many disciplines, accountants, managers, - these people ARE BOEING.

This bad blood is unacceptable.

"Most of you jackasses are not even in the industry and watching from the sidelines, getting spoon feed from the media."

Surprised they moved away from the unions?

The IAM lost out because they have over the years underestimated the Boeing leadership. The IAM has operated in a steadfast attitude void of a willingness to change the way a union operates.

When you stoop to the point of stopping production, show that your intentions are child like. Cutting off your own pay and leaving your customers scrambling to adjust to the delays only servers to diminish your standings and forces these customers to look to more stable companies to provide them with products that will be delivered on time.

The IAM need to change their image. When people know you for a picket sign, you know you have a problem. Forcing something on someone never accomplishes anything. It instills a hidden hate for those that are doing the forcing.

The IAM needs to re-invent what a union is, or suffer the consequences; such as factories relocating overseas or moving to place where a business can operate without a rope dangling from its neck.

Boeing builds the best airliners in the sky today. Built by dedicated professionals who wear a ball and chain called the IAM.

It should be obvious to everyone what bad blood exists between Management and Labor.

It really is a class war that has been declared with each side blaming the other

There is no understanding expressed by either side for the other and so this radical decision had to be made...whether in the works for years or days.

What choice was there. What choice did the Union give to Boeing and conversely, how much of the shop should Boeing give to its workers.

Maybe this will enable some better understanding to be formulated. It is just tragic to see internal forces create situations that will ultimately damage the enterprise

This is management blaming the someone or something for their absolute incompetence. This has nothing to do with strike (not a big fan of the union) or any other BS that they have put out so far. Someone above hit the nail on the head, the wing issue is just a cover problem for all the other systems that are not functioning as advertised. The management are running like headless chickens trying to solve the problems that were brought up early in the program but were ignored or swept under the rug by the MBAs that running the 787 program. This move to SC is just a distraction while Mcnearny and and gang keep the stocks afloat and run, They may fly the bird soon, but they ain't going to deliver anything at all in the near term. Mind you, the management that runs the program thought and still thinks that once the airplane is in the flightline, it will be a week to wheels up. Guys, it takes 3 full days to just load the software.

Management in Boeing is clueless and out of touch. They have been promoting their own incompetency. As one of the old Boeing manager told me, Boeing is in a serious need of a management enema!