We went through a similar situation. Building cars since the plant opened. (Separate truck plant next door)
We started making vans. They couldn't be lined up sequential. We ran 3 cars, 1 van, 3 cars, one van, rince & repeat.
Same with station wagons.
I could see the same situation at BGA. Run 3-4 coupes to 1 vert, rince & repeat.
Q) any word when RH drive units start up?
(someone posted a pic a while back showing the steering shaft at the floor. The rubber grommet had a "LH" imprint I couldn't help but notice. That shows there'sa "RH" in the mix).
We started making vans. They couldn't be lined up sequential. We ran 3 cars, 1 van, 3 cars, one van, rince & repeat.
Same with station wagons.
I could see the same situation at BGA. Run 3-4 coupes to 1 vert, rince & repeat.
Q) any word when RH drive units start up?
(someone posted a pic a while back showing the steering shaft at the floor. The rubber grommet had a "LH" imprint I couldn't help but notice. That shows there'sa "RH" in the mix).
. After 38 years on the assembly lines in Oshawa it sounds like GM uses their Global Manufacturing System corporation wide. When we added the Camaro convertibles to the coupes in Oshawa, they were both built on the same skillet lines in trim and Hardware. If GM wanted the lines running quicker, the workers tasks were shortened and more jobs created. Of course more people costs more money. Every time GM adds different models or options, they have to balance the time on each job. Its difficult to divide up the initial installation of a convertible top so they space these cars out. The line worker actually falls behind each time he installs a convertible top, but catches up again on the next 2 or 3 coupes that have less work assigned to them. Body shop and paint shop have "banks" between them and can run at different speeds but eventually, all need to supply each other efficiently. The idea of Flexible Manufacturing System sounds appealing but is a huge undertaking every time there is a change.
