XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jun 18, 2014 10:56:50 GMT 1
I asked Jujug Spotting where they have put MSN167, the responded the a/c is on the flightline and not inside a hangar.
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Jun 19, 2014 3:46:51 GMT 1
I see. The way it would look like then would be Time for Assembly ... 13 weeks Going into Storage ... 17th June 2014 Roll Out ... XXX Shame our dates don't exclude the known time between convoy arrival and start of body join which varies but could be up to 2 weeks, plus holidays, plus..... Possibly any attempt to produce comparison dates is impossible as there is much we don't know.
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Jun 19, 2014 3:52:12 GMT 1
Comments re Skyark and finance have been raised.
Is it just a delay of paying for engine delivery.
Is Skymark the only RR customer currently ready for rollout? Is it an RR issue? I know the BA frame is coming through
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jun 19, 2014 4:18:18 GMT 1
Welcome back noistar! Long time no see.
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jun 19, 2014 9:48:34 GMT 1
I see. The way it would look like then would be Time for Assembly ... 13 weeks Going into Storage ... 17th June 2014 Roll Out ... XXX Shame our dates don't exclude the known time between convoy arrival and start of body join which varies but could be up to 2 weeks, plus holidays, plus..... That's only a few days / weeks, we can't be that accurate. If someone will look at MSN167 and sees March 21 - October 30 (as example) between convoy start and roll out, he will think it took 31 weeks to complete assembly. Which is wrong. How do we fix that? It is very confusing - it is pretty similar situation to the QR frames....those were also practically in storage - nothing was going on with them - or went really slow. So I do believe we have to be content with the situation that the timing of those frames could not be accurate. I was thinking the same about the Qatar Airways A380s, but I never started the discussion. Now MSN167 did trigger the discussion. The difference being, I strongly believe assembly on MSN167 has finished, except for its engines (which can be seen separate from the assembly process, engines are sometimes replaced in XFW as well). I suggest a small variation on XWB's proposal : - we don't consider MSN 167 as rolled out, we make no decision for the moment ; - we'll decide later when we have further information. Agreed.
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Jun 19, 2014 10:50:34 GMT 1
Welcome back noistar! Long time no see. Never far away! Any mileage in the comment about delaying payment for the engines? Presumably 162 was a very expensive ornament while it waited to go to XFW. A light-hearted comment might see 162's engines being returned to Toulouse for 167. Save idle time in outfitting. Can see airline accountants trying to flesh out that brilliant idea!
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Jun 28, 2014 12:05:13 GMT 1
Shame our dates don't exclude the known time between convoy arrival and start of body join which varies but could be up to 2 weeks, plus holidays, plus..... That's only a few days / weeks, we can't be that accurate. If someone will look at MSN167 and sees March 21 - October 30 (as example) between convoy start and roll out, he will think it took 31 weeks to complete assembly. Which is wrong. How do we fix that? It is very confusing - it is pretty similar situation to the QR frames....those were also practically in storage - nothing was going on with them - or went really slow. So I do believe we have to be content with the situation that the timing of those frames could not be accurate. I was thinking the same about the Qatar Airways A380s, but I never started the discussion. Now MSN167 did trigger the discussion. The difference being, I strongly believe assembly on MSN167 has finished, except for its engines (which can be seen separate from the assembly process, engines are sometimes replaced in XFW as well). I suggest a small variation on XWB's proposal : - we don't consider MSN 167 as rolled out, we make no decision for the moment ; - we'll decide later when we have further information. Agreed. I'm never far away and always ready to give my opinion on the various manufacturing stage misnomers. Going by facts: We know the date of convoy arrival at Toulouse and the FAL rollout date. Surely that milestone is "x weeks from convoy arrival to FAL rollout"? Reference to "x weeks in FAL" is an inaccurate misnomer. We know the First Flight date We know the transfer to XFW date. So time between FAL rollout and either of these benchmarks is a known. Whatever state 167 is in, it is a fact that it is not in a FAL workstation. Whether it is receiving FAL attention, we don't appear to know. It certainly seems to be an anomaly, but at the time of FF or transfer, these dates will be known. It seems rather pointless to make excuses about apparent 'down-time'. Then there's XFW. Times are not "x weeks in outfitting". They are "x weeks between transfer to XFW and OF rollout". Until we get some realistic comparisons, we seem to be inventing manufacturing durations. What about the period between OF rollout and CFF, or OF rollout and delivery? All we can confidently say is "x weeks from convoy arrival at Toulouse and delivery". The interim stages seem to be open to distortion. Ah well, I can anticipate one forum member ripping my thoughts to shreds. Come on down
|
|
UK380
First Flight
Posts: 788
|
Post by UK380 on Jul 18, 2014 22:24:50 GMT 1
not seen during my visit today does anyone know where it is stored?
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jul 18, 2014 22:29:31 GMT 1
I believe it was moved to one of the side hangars.
|
|
UK380
First Flight
Posts: 788
|
Post by UK380 on Jul 18, 2014 22:39:10 GMT 1
thanks, that would make sense, only one of these hangars was open and an EK was in that
|
|