The Last 3 A/Ps to roll out of Boeing's Plant 2.

A place of history, like many around the country, that contributed to WWII, now to be torn down.
Connie Super G, The Boeing "BEE" B-17 and the Museum's B-29.

http://www.rbogash.com/Plant%202/Plant2.html

 

I have got to speak again. I started work for Boeing in 1950 and spent a bunch of overtime in Plant 2 working on the B-50 modification programs one of which is shown near the door in one picture. Then the XB-52 and The YB-52 and B-52A. When the 737 was started there I was in Renton working on the 727 and then went to Everett to work on the 747 when all the factory walls weren't finished yet. I even rode around in a B-17 during the war when I was at Langley Field. History keeps hanging on.

 

Boeing is very good at and likes to tear down and demolish things, They tore down all the buildings in Long Beach and destroyed the Douglas line, never to be used again.

http://wikimapia.org/1363259/Former-McDonnell-Douglas-later-Boeing-assembly-facilities

 

They have also torn down almost all of the Renton facility except a small engineering building and the 737 assembly line. The 727 production buildings are gone , the administration buildings and supporting tech buildings were so badly damaged in the last earthquake that they were uninhabitable. If you don't use it, lose it.
Switches

 

Plant 2 was built in 1936 and hasn't been used for production for 40 years. After the last couple of earthquakes it suffered structural damage. Very old and past it's time.

They inherited Henry Stonecipher's (Douglas) habit of liquidating and offloading assets to bolster the bottom line, (Like the Spokane composites shop to Triumph and Wichita to Spirit).
Looks good for the short term but not so good in the long term, (see 787 global supply chain woes)

They weren't selling anymore MD83/717s and knocked Long Beach down.
I imagine they could have used the facility for 787 activities but the cost of doing business in Kalifornia is DOUBLE that in South Carolina, even while having to buy out Vought and build a new factory..


It's all about share holder value................................




.................

 

It's sad to see these old plants torn down, but many of them weren't built to last that long anyway.

At Allison we had Plant 5 that was built for the war effort and finally most of it was torn down in the last 8 years or so. That plant was (at one time) the largest building under roof and then was eclipsed by Willow Run, and later even bigger buildings. It was built in just 90 days in the months after Pearl Harbor. Think about that, it was a wood block floor and timber beams and it had long since become very expensive to keep up. There is a brick section and offices that still stand, but much of the old plant is gone.

I also worked in what was during the war the Packard factory in Toledo, where they made the engines for the PT boats (not the Merlin). Same thing, wood block floors and timber beams holding the roof. Hugely expensive to maintain and when we had severe storms the roof would leak, the wood block floor expanded and buckled into three foot high waves of oil soalked blocks...

With more modern manufacturing and transportation methods we will never see anything like these factories again. Not sure that is a good thing from overall productivity, but the world has surely changed. For those of us still alive there are memories, but I doubt the kids will ever appreciate what was done early in the war in terms of construction and manufacturing. Considering the smaller population and the men going off to war, what they did in such a short time was amazing.

 

Don't forget that Lockheed Burbank and Convair San Diego are all gone. Grumman only tore down Plant 4, but nearly all of the other Grumman buildings in Bethpage are now being used by many other people for other purposes.

On my recent trip to Seattle, it took me awhile to figure out where Boeing had moved the company store in Renton; it was now in the 10-18 office building, sister building to the 10-16 building nearby where I worked on 777 design. I did notice that the site of the cafeteria building where I witnessed several Mulally-led "all-hands" meetings was now just an empty field.

 

Actually for the record, a 717 is not a MD-83, It is a MD-95 and a better bird than any MD-80 derivative. There was a demand for the bird but it was in direct competition for the 737. The infrastructure was sound and so were the jigs to produce more KC-10's which is a better airplane than the 767 tanker will ever be. They were all destroyed! I dont see any 767 tankering 356,000 lbs? 777 would kick ass as a tanker and I dont know why it was not chosen for reasons other than political since your lift is less than the existing KC-10.

Long Beach bent over backwards to avoid the wrecking ball to save jobs and to take advantage of the economic multiplier effect on keeping some sort of production live alive, whether it be a 787 or whatever plane? The bottom line was Boeing wanted nothing to do with the heritage associated with Douglas. You cant convince me that tax advantages outweigh the existing infrastructure to build airliners that are years behind in delivery promises.

There is long history of bad blood between the two. Stonecipher is a sellout and screwed us all who were Douglas employees. I hope to piss on his grave! Stonecipher's lifelong heathcare promises lasted 2 years for my Father who was a Test Pilot for 26 years at the Long Beach facility. I am young enough to have moved on but will never forget!

Stoncipher got what he deserved, he always put his dick ahead of any sort of ethics, I am glad it finally caught up with him.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/mar2005/nf2005038_5360_db035.htm

 

Just one of the many, many reasons that they were and are still this nation's greatest generation. This has always been my opinion through observation even before Tom Brokaw coined that phrase. I am lucky to have been the oldest in my family so I got to be around and partly raised by those folks and their parents (my Great Grand parents) all the time. I adored and respected them as a child and that has never changed, not for what they did but for who they were. Just salt of the earth, real strong people.

By the way, those wood block floors, providing the roof don't leak, are a hell of a lot better on your feet than modern concrete floors. They tore up what was left of ours in the B-1 building a few years ago making way for the future F-35 assembly area. I walked over there during lunch one day and when I stepped over on that wood block floor from the concrete it was a night & day difference. I went over there every day after until I left the factory for the flight line, thinking about all the B-29's that rolled across them. Wish those blocks could talk.

 

Jim, we should really meet sometime since we work at the same plant.

I started my Boeing aviation work on the 777 final body join in 96' and thought then that if I had to work on airliners in the field for a living, I'd hands down pick the 777. I loved the absence of all those hydraulic lines in the leading edge like the 727 had. I was a neighbor of one of the test pilots on that program and he always spoke highly of it as did every pilot I know that flew them for Delta and American. My hat's off to you guys.

 

True

Apples to oranges. You are talking the difference between more payload versus more booms in the air. If the A/F wants more capacity they'll go for the bigger plane but what would Boeing have done with a KC-10 production line in the mean time? (years and years).

As it is, Boeing has been nearly at full idle on the 767 line waiting for word on that deal as it is (years and years).

The 777-200F Freighter is ready for tanker/freighter duty as well.
Is it not true pilots that depend on tankers prefer more booms over more capacity?.

I can't convince you then BUT, It wasn't just about taxes, it's about wages. South Carolina has a work force that is making slightly more than Walmart wages. That's why they are building THERE.
The 787 line here in Everett is at about 10% cycle capacity right now. They could go a hell of lot faster if they had the parts and sub-assemblies they need, but they don't.
The flight line is packed with unfinished 787's, none of which can be delivered until they get the parts and the flight test program is complete.
Additional infrastructure isn't currently needed except for storage.

I'll have to agree there.

It's a sad bad joke that McDonnell Douglas took over Boeing using Boeing's own money. Stonecipher was installed at the top and the high level positions were flooded with ex McD execs.
I saw it.
That's when the liquidation of company assets and mass offloading began.

 

Yeah, and I was one of the many that got offloaded. Merry Christmas guys, thanks for your hard work. Now look for a job after the holidays...

It's all part of working for a corporation that size, I've come to expect it.

 

Hopefully you haven't had to endure a layoff like that since.

I have managed to escape the layoffs so far by the thinnest of margins.

 

They would have continued building MD-11 freighters for customers like Lufthansa who had firm orders and options outstanding when Boeing decided to shut down the MD-11 line. Lufthansa was not happy about the situation. The president of Lufthansa made it very clear at the delivery ceremony for their final MD-11F that they were happy with the aircraft and would have kept buying them.

 

For one customer?

As TURBQV points out, like the MD95 competing against the 737, the MD11 would be competing against the 747F. It isn't good business to dilute ones product line with similar products.

BTW, Lufthansa was the launch customer for the 747-8 Intercontinental. Still waiting to see if they spring for 747-8F.

 

The MD-11f and the 747f are not direct competitors which is one of the reasons it fit into a niche. 777 is the only plane that can beat it's range, payload and fuel burn. I think you mean 777? The MD-11 only has a MTOW of 630,000 lbs versus 910,00 lbs in the -400f which puts the MD-11 into the 777 category. Some carriers liked the elimination of ETOPS by having a third engine. 4 engine maintenance costs and operating costs are much bigger than a 3 engine airplane.

The bottom line is Boeing wanted nothing to do with any Douglas production line and the Product Support that goes with it. By destroying everything, that is now a certainty.

The MD-95 is a great airplane, those who bought it wanted more. I was at the Midwest Express final delievery ceremony and talked to several CEO's of airlines who were pissed to see the line shut down.

You can justify it all you want with a bean counter explanation, to some of us it was just sheer greed and predatory destroying all things associated with Douglas.

Cheers

 

Yes.

Sorry if I come across as arguing motives, I actually agree with your points, just offering additional factors in their decisions.

 

Knock on wood, not yet. When I hired on here ship #12 was at the front door waiting to be towed to the flight line. I remember supervisors telling me we were going to retire out of this program. With the fickleness of our gubberment, pentagon, USAF HQ, DOD, secretary of defense, et al... there was no way in hell I ever believed that would happen and here nearly 8 years later my prediction came to pass.

This is the longest I've worked in one place since I got out of the USAF, so while I'm content for now, I still keep my eyes open for warning signs. It is said that when the last Raptor leaves the tarmac here we'll have mod work to do and there's still the C-130J program going well and C-5 mods that hopefully will absorb us all so no one has to hunt another job. It sucks not having any seniority to speak of in a place like this.

Keeping my fingers crossed...

 

Roger that, Its all water under the bridge and we enjoyed the ride. All we can do is focus on the future and my new Boeing birds.

Cheers and thanks for your insight as well

Paul