4 ms·

Also everyone is futzing with business models. There are maintenance facilities from many companies all over the world that can work on airframes, engines etc.

Also everyone is futzing with business models. There are maintenance facilities from many companies all over the world that can work on airframes, engines etc. The airframe and engine manufacturers are seeing all this post-sale income go to those companies, and not back to the manufacturer. So they are "fixing" that. For example Rolls Royce does "power by the hour" where the airline is essentially paying rent on the engine while it is in use. That means Rolls takes care of the maintenance etc (all rolled into the per hour price). There are far fewer Rolls locations that can do that work. Then suddenly a lot of maintenance work needs to be done, and planes have to wait. For those interested in aviation, I recommend following leehamnews[1]. The industry is very similar to what is faced in the software industry but over far larger timescales. eg airframe manufacturers have constant streams of improvements, but have to work out if and how to charge for them, how to do deal with existing aircraft of the same model without them ("backwards compatibility"), and the constant spending money to make money. You even see second system effects (arguably the birth of the 787 was just that financially, manufacturing and technically). [1] https://leehamnews.com https://leehamnews.com

a2tech 8y ago
And Rolls wants their suppliers to be doing JIT delivery of all their parts--no one in the supply chain wants to be stuck holding the bag on inventory so Rolls expects to whistle at Pratt-Whitney for parts, and Pratt expects to be able to whistle at their suppliers (and down and down the supply chain) and still be able to get parts within an incredibly short window. Oh and they don't want to pay for anything they order until 6 months after receiving delivery. Its an incredibly tough squeeze on the supply chain. You can tell some of my customers are in aircraft engine manufacturing.
- kpil 8y ago
  The problem with JIT is the same as the problem everywhere else: When the wrong type of bean counters look at a cost too nearsightedly, they typically address the "static" costs and miss the hidden costs that are much harder to both understand and measure - typically "dynamic" costs that are both under-reported and hard to measure, and also to understand since there are a lot of moving parts. The whole point of JIT is to take control of the dynamic effects so it's a bit ironic.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    JIT works when those making the decisions are experienced engineers with financial knowledge, not bean counters without domain experience (IMHO).

a2tech 8y ago

And Rolls wants their suppliers to be doing JIT delivery of all their parts--no one in the supply chain wants to be stuck holding the bag on inventory so Rolls expects to whistle at Pratt-Whitney for parts, and Pratt expects to be able to whistle at their suppliers (and down and down the supply chain) and still be able to get parts within an incredibly short window. Oh and they don't want to pay for anything they order until 6 months after receiving delivery. Its an incredibly tough squeeze on the supply chain. You can tell some of my customers are in aircraft engine manufacturing.

kpil 8y ago
The problem with JIT is the same as the problem everywhere else: When the wrong type of bean counters look at a cost too nearsightedly, they typically address the "static" costs and miss the hidden costs that are much harder to both understand and measure - typically "dynamic" costs that are both under-reported and hard to measure, and also to understand since there are a lot of moving parts. The whole point of JIT is to take control of the dynamic effects so it's a bit ironic.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  JIT works when those making the decisions are experienced engineers with financial knowledge, not bean counters without domain experience (IMHO).