Waste in the 787 Development Process

Boeing Scrambles to Repair Problems With New Plane -
WSJ.com

Interesting article in today’s WSJ about the ongoing problems in
bringing the new 787 “Dreamliner” to market. Sounds like a
nightmare of a process.

Look at the waste highlighted in the article. On the Lean theme of
“doing things right the first time”:

“The first Dreamliner to show up at Boeing’s factory
was missing tens of thousands of parts, Boeing said.”

Ok, you’ll say, I don’t understand the complexities of modern
global supply chains. Maybe I don’t, but look at the rework
involved:

“When mechanics later opened boxes and crates
accompanying the fuselage sections, they found them filled with
thousands of brackets, clips, wires and other items that already
should have been installed.
In some cases, officials say, components came with no paperwork at
all, or assembly instructions written in Italian, requiring
translation.

Boeing officials thought they could work through
this unexpected twist in a couple of weeks. Instead, they had to
put the plane up on jacks and
remove its engines and tail to get to tight spots.”

Is there any concept of “stopping the line” in the development
process here? Better to scramble and go out of process with a lot
of rework than to take the time to do it right?

Boeing says:

Rejecting the idea that Boeing might be better off
increasing production more slowly, Mr. Carson says, “I couldn’t
stand the pain of telling a customer it’s going to be worse for
them, just to make my life easier.”

It seems like they aren’t subscribing to the idea of “going slow to
go fast.” Boeing set up this global supply chain and chose the
suppliers. Now, they seem to be dumping on the suppliers, saying
how they wouldn’t use some of them again. And there might be good
reasons for that, but how many were set up to fail through poor
selection or poor planning?

I don’t know all of the answers here, of course, but it’s a real
eye opener to see that much waste in their efforts to bring a new
product to market. How would Toyota do this differently?