OM in the News: Where to Park Scores of Boeing 737s and Other Production Problems

A partial line-up of Boeing 737 MAX aircraft stored at Paine Field, Everett (WA).

Boeing’s decision to reduce the production rate on the 737 MAX  was a surprise in timing and scope, reports The Wall Street Journal (April 5, 2019). It came quickly and was steep, cutting production from 52 MAXes per month to 42. The cut comes on the heals that a second software problem was found, delaying submission of the MCAS software upgrade to the FAA for review and approval. This is lightning speed in the plane industry, where changes typically have 12-18 month lead times.

The impact to Boeing is going to be huge and include: (1) Airlines that had the MAXes in service will want compensation for their grounding aircraft; (2) Customers awaiting deliveries that are now deferred will also want compensation; (3) A few airlines threatened to cancel MAX orders; (4) Future sales campaigns could suffer; and (5) With completed 737 MAX planes piling up at its Seattle assembly plant, Boeing has been looking for other storage sites. (Some planes have been moved to its widebody-jet plant north of Seattle).

The move overrides Boeing’s planned increase to 57 a month by this summer. Higher production would have allowed Boeing to make almost 600 deliveries of the 737 this year, 90% of them the MAX model. The production cut will increase pressure on MAX customers ahead of the busy summer travel season. With more than 370 MAX jets already out of service and others remaining undelivered, airlines have already rejiggered their schedules. Southwest, the largest MAX operator at 34 aircraft, is due to receive an additional 31 this year and 30 in 2020.

For suppliers, the impact may be more immediate. Spirit AeroSystems. for example, derives more than 40% of its sales from the 737, but the company said it would continue supplying at the 52-a-month rate to Boeing.

Classroom discussion questions:

  1. How does a slowdown impact the production line (see Ch.9)?
  2. Will this issue be a permanent drain on Boeing?

OM in the News and Video Tip: The One Worker Assembly Line

At Japanese manufacturer Roland DG, assembling thousands of parts into wide-format printers is as easy as coloring by numbers, writes The Wall Street Journal (June 2, 2014). That’s because Roland DG makes everything from billboard printers to machines that shape dental crowns using an advanced production system known as “D-shop.” Under this method, workers in single-person stalls assemble products from start to finish, guided by a 3-D graphic and using parts delivered automatically from a rotating rack. Every worker is capable of assembling any variation of the company’s 50 or so products.

In 1998, Roland became one of the first companies in Japan to abandon the assembly line in favor of one-person work stalls modeled after Japanese noodle stands. With orders coming in smaller and smaller lots, Roland decided it needed a manufacturing system in which a single worker could build any one of its diverse products. On a recent day, one employee was assembling from scratch an industrial printer that ultimately would be more than twice her size and weigh almost 900 pounds, while another was assembling a dental-crown milling machine.

A computer monitor displays step-by-step instructions along with 3-D drawings: “Turn Screw A in these eight locations” or “Secure Part B using Bracket C.” At the same time, the rotating parts rack turns to show which of the dozens of parts to use. Meanwhile, a digital screwdriver keeps track of how many times screws are turned and how tightly. Until the correct screws are turned the correct number of times, the instructions on the computer screen don’t advance to the next step. The system is so simple, say managers, that nearly anyone can assemble products anywhere. The computer even gives workers a pat on the back at the end of the day, with the message, “You must be tired, and we thank you.”

You and your students will enjoy the 2 minute video embedded in the WSJ article.

Classroom discussion questions:

1. Why did Roland develop the D-shop?

2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach over the traditional assembly line?