Boeing 787 work being moved in house after failed Outsourcing

If you are going to outsource at this kind of level of production you need 100% oversight. To do so it may not be cost affective especially if you run into serious issues that will slow down or temporarily stop production. Boeing needs to get back to the glory days of building 100% of the aircraft in the USA.

If you want a Boeing product then build it here and sell it worldwide.
Same goes for Airbus. Build it in Europe and sell it worldwide.
Building components for the systems in other countries is not the issue.
Building the structural sections and flying them back to one location for final assembly is.
 
The 787 was first announced ten years ago this month, and has cost Boeing more than $30 billion to develop according to the Seattle Times. Boeing has admitted they may never make money on the 787,but the technology will benefit future Aircraft.
 
Don't forget the A380 development cost came to ~$17B, using slightly less cutting edge technology. the 380 also had its own groundings, and still has an issue with cracked wing spars to deal with.
 
Sounds like the 'Dreamliner' NEEDS to be UNION built in Everett Washington instead of by those DICK-HEADS in 'good-ol'-boy' SC. !!!!!!!!!!!
As I recall (and I said it was a damned-fool thing to do at the time), Boeing, in the hopes of garnering sales in-effect combined their R&D, prototyping, first article production, and scattered it all of the world with so little oversight they were getting shipments of parts with no clue they weren't to spec. Educated idiots trying to follow a BS vision re: a "Global Economy" bit the company square in its ass.

Now - the question of the day - did Boeing REALLY learn anything or are they simply trying to keep their stock price afloat?
 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2013/01/21/why-787-dreamliner-battery-woes-are-the-tip-of-boeings-iceberg/

Failed out sourcing model.