Changes in Estimates	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
Change In Estimate [Abstract]
Changes in Estimates	Changes in Estimates The Company’s long-term contract estimates are based on estimated contract revenues and related costs over the Company’s current contract blocks. Estimated contract revenues are generally not subject to significant revisions as most of the Company’s contracts are fixed price and known at the inception of the contract; however, the contract cost elements of these estimates change frequently as the programs mature and that has historically been the primary driver of changes in our estimates. Contract costs are estimated based on actual costs incurred to date and an estimate of remaining costs over the current contract block, which can extend for multiple years. During the early phases of our program contracts, the future cost estimates are subject to significant variability and are based on numerous assumptions and judgments which require management to use its historical experience on similar programs until aircraft programs are type certified; low rate production is achieved; production processes mature; supply chain partners are contracted; and unit costs stabilize; which typically results in assumptions that costs will improve over the life of the contract block. This learning curve concept is typical in our industry; however, the level of design change and time spent in low rate production that was anticipated when we initially established these curves has been significantly exceeded as original delivery schedules have been delayed and engineering changes have continued. During 2013 and 2012, a combination of events occurred that resulted in significant changes in estimates on several new and maturing programs, resulting in forward losses being recorded on some of these programs. The following is a summary of those events. 2013 Changes in Estimates Performance Issues - A350 XWB Our A350 XWB fuselage recurring program has experienced various production inefficiencies mostly driven by early development discovery and engineering change to the aircraft design, as well as higher test and transportation costs. Airbus is assisting us as we work through these issues and has provided additional resources to work alongside our personnel. In the third quarter of 2013, we recorded a forward loss of $78.6 for the A350 XWB fuselage recurring contract due to these production inefficiencies. There continues to be risk of additional forward loss associated with the recurring contract as we work through production issues. Non-Recurring Contract Agreements - A350 XWB In September and October of 2013 we agreed with Airbus on the work scope for the design and tooling related to the -1000 derivative of the A350 XWB fuselage and wing contracts, respectively. Based on current estimates, the agreement for the non-recurring phase of the -1000 derivative fuselage resulted in a $32.7 forward loss, which was recorded in the third quarter of 2013. There is a risk of additional forward loss if we do not successfully execute the design and engineering change process as projected. Supply Chain Cost Reductions - G280 and G650 At the time we recorded the forward loss charges on the Gulfstream G280 and G650 programs in the third quarter of 2012, we had included in the respective estimates at completion significant cost reductions primarily related to sourcing costs between 2015 and 2018. These amounts were based on the experience of the supply chain team and operational management. During the second quarter of 2013, it became apparent that a substantial portion of the total cost savings included in the contract estimates for each program would not be realized. This determination was based on a number of changing conditions and new developments including an assessment of our actual experience with our customers regarding their receptiveness to proposed changes, completion of our detailed part analysis during the second quarter of 2013 as part of our effort to project future sourcing costs and our inability to achieve estimated supplier price reductions via negotiations with suppliers. Labor Estimates- Tulsa Facility The labor cost forecasts within the contract estimates for the G280, G650 and Boeing B787 are based on certain assumptions, including the level of disruption expected in the future. In our contract estimates through the first quarter of 2013, we assumed that certain disruptions to the manufacturing line caused by (i) supplier quality issues and late deliveries, (ii) customer inspections occurring in our facilities and (iii) our own manufacturing quality issues would be resolved by the middle of 2013. During the second quarter of 2013, key performance dates were missed, and we extended the expected period of time during which these issues would be resolved in our assumptions for our contract estimates. As a result, we experienced higher actual costs as well as significant increases to forecasted costs, resulting in additional forward losses recognized on all of these programs in the second and fourth quarters of 2013. Contractual Items - G650 As we worked with Gulfstream to meet its production demand, we negotiated a temporary transfer of a portion of our work scope to Gulfstream for completion. In the second quarter of 2013, due to the effect of continued production challenges on our forecasted ability to achieve scheduled deliveries, we changed our assumptions to extend the duration of the work transfer and updated our estimates regarding this temporarily transferred work scope which is accounted for as a reduction in forecasted revenue. As described in more detail in Note 21, "Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees," we instituted a demand for arbitration against Gulfstream to resolve certain contractual disputes primarily related to engineering changes made by Gulfstream and the impact of those changes to weight and delivery schedules as well as for incomplete payments to Spirit. We continually assess these contractual items and adjust our estimates as appropriate each quarter. Changes in these particular estimates resulted in additional forward loss recognized on the G650 in the second quarter of 2013. B787 program As we move into higher rates of production, our performance at the current contracted price depends on our being able to achieve production cost reductions as we gain production experience. During the second quarter of 2013, we continued to experience production inefficiencies at our Tulsa facility as we transitioned to production on the B787-9 derivative, which drove forward losses of $37.3 on the B787 wing program. Additionally in the fourth quarter of 2013, we revised our estimates of the amount of near-term achievable cost reductions for the B787 program based on cost savings ideas generated, the maturity of these ideas and the expected realization for the programs. This change in cost savings estimates drove a forward loss of $384.7 in the fourth quarter of 2013. 2012 Changes in Estimates Performance Issues-Tulsa Facility The Company’s Tulsa facility has significant work content on three of the development programs (B787, G280, G650). The multiple complex development programs at this facility have created various performance issues that have resulted in previous changes to our contract estimates on these development programs. The performance issues at the Tulsa facility were magnified in the third quarter of 2012 when the Company implemented a recovery plan which would bring the company current for its B787 wing components. The Company began implementing the recovery plan during late July 2012 which resulted in the addition of significant additional resources to meet delivery schedules. As the Company was implementing the recovery plan, it became clear during the third quarter estimation process that the remediation would have a significant impact on the future cost curves due to significant amounts of additional headcount and disruption. Type Certification On September 4 and 7, 2012, Gulfstream received type certification on the G280 and G650 aircraft, respectively. These type certifications impact three of the Company’s development programs, G280, G650 and BR725 (the engine nacelle on the G650). Type certification is a significant program milestone for commercial aerospace products as it represents the airworthiness authority’s approval of the completion and functionality of engineering design and the ability of the aircraft to enter into service, and leads directly to the commencement of full rate production. However, following type certification the ability to redesign for cost is significantly less if no derivative aircraft design is planned. We currently have no plans for derivative models, making redesign for cost improvements difficult after type certification. The pace of cost improvements was not keeping up with projected learning curves particularly related to redesign opportunities and as all three programs are preparing to enter full rate production, we revised our estimates to reflect higher costs. Decision on Work Package Transfers Given certain challenges of new programs at the Company’s Kinston, North Carolina site and the fact that our newest facility in Chanute, Kansas was in the process of multiple work package transfers during the third quarter, the Company decided to delay the transfer of any additional work packages into these facilities. Overall, this had a significant impact on the BR725 program and the timing of anticipated cost reduction from the planned transfer of work content to lower-cost facilities. Finalization of Supplier Contracts During the early phases of our development programs, the Company will frequently procure small quantities of required sub-assemblies and parts from our suppliers. This practice generally forces us to pay higher unit prices for these sub-assemblies and parts, but allows us flexibility in evaluating supplier performance and quality as well as addressing design changes that frequently occur during the early phases of these development programs. Once design changes subside, we will generally contract on a longer-term basis with our suppliers which allows us to experience more favorable supply chain pricing. The Company has been successful in negotiating lower costs with suppliers on most of these development programs; however, these costs are not as low as original estimates. This pressure on supply chain cost runs across all of our development programs. As Boeing and Airbus have increased production rates on existing commercial programs, our suppliers have limited capacity to deal with even modest rate increases on our business jet programs. In addition, the capacity constraint in our supply base has prevented us from off-loading to the supply chain certain work we currently perform in-house. As a result of higher current costs which have exceeded estimates and recent negotiations with suppliers, the Company has revised supplier costs across several of the development programs. New and Maturing Programs Summary Performance Due primarily to the events described above in this Note 3, in 2013 we recorded forward loss charges of $78.6 on the recurring A350 XWB Section 15, $32.7 on the non-recurring A350 XWB Section 15, $240.9 on the G280 program, $288.3 on the G650 program and $422.0 on the B787 program. Additionally, due to program performance and/or changes in estimates in 2013 we recorded forward loss charges of $41.1, $16.4 and $21.7 on the B747, B767 and Rolls-Royce BR725 programs, respectively. The Rolls-Royce BR725 program also recorded a reduction of forward loss charges of $8.4 for a total net forward loss of $13.3 in 2013. These amounts were recorded within the Company’s results of operations as part of cost of goods sold as well as on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as forward loss provisions within inventory to the extent each program’s inventory balance was sufficient to absorb the charge. In the case that program inventory was not sufficient to absorb the full amount of a charge, the remainder was classified as a current liability. Due to performance, type certification, work package transfers and finalization of supplier contracts, as well as other events, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012, we recorded forward loss charges of $184.0 on the Boeing 787, $162.5 on the Gulfstream G650, $151.0 on the Rolls-Royce BR725, $118.8 on the Gulfstream G280, $8.9 on the Airbus A350 XWB non-recurring wing, $11.5 on the Boeing 747-8 program and $8.0 on the B767 program. These amounts are recorded on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as forward loss provisions within inventory. Our consolidated net adjustments for costs related to the aforementioned changes in estimates and other circumstances for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, decreased operating profit, before income taxes, by approximately $1,133.3 and $644.7, respectively. These adjustments decreased net earnings for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 by approximately $713.0 ($5.04 per share) and $412.0 ($2.88 per share), respectively.

Changes in Estimates

The Company’s long-term contract estimates are based on estimated contract revenues and related costs over the Company’s current contract blocks. Estimated contract revenues are generally not subject to significant revisions as most of the Company’s contracts are fixed price and known at the inception of the contract; however, the contract cost elements of these estimates change frequently as the programs mature and that has historically been the primary driver of changes in our estimates. Contract costs are estimated based on actual costs incurred to date and an estimate of remaining costs over the current contract block, which can extend for multiple years. During the early phases of our program contracts, the future cost estimates are subject to significant variability and are based on numerous assumptions and judgments which require management to use its historical experience on similar programs until aircraft programs are type certified; low rate production is achieved; production processes mature; supply chain partners are contracted; and unit costs stabilize; which typically results in assumptions that costs will improve over the life of the contract block. This learning curve concept is typical in our industry; however, the level of design change and time spent in low rate production that was anticipated when we initially established these curves has been significantly exceeded as original delivery schedules have been delayed and engineering changes have continued. During 2013 and 2012, a combination of events occurred that resulted in significant changes in estimates on several new and maturing programs, resulting in forward losses being recorded on some of these programs. The following is a summary of those events.

2013 Changes in Estimates

Performance Issues - A350 XWB

Our A350 XWB fuselage recurring program has experienced various production inefficiencies mostly driven by early development discovery and engineering change to the aircraft design, as well as higher test and transportation costs. Airbus is assisting us as we work through these issues and has provided additional resources to work alongside our personnel. In the third quarter of 2013, we recorded a forward loss of $78.6 for the A350 XWB fuselage recurring contract due to these production inefficiencies. There continues to be risk of additional forward loss associated with the recurring contract as we work through production issues.

Non-Recurring Contract Agreements - A350 XWB

In September and October of 2013 we agreed with Airbus on the work scope for the design and tooling related to the -1000 derivative of the A350 XWB fuselage and wing contracts, respectively. Based on current estimates, the agreement for the non-recurring phase of the -1000 derivative fuselage resulted in a $32.7 forward loss, which was recorded in the third quarter of 2013. There is a risk of additional forward loss if we do not successfully execute the design and engineering change process as projected.

Supply Chain Cost Reductions - G280 and G650

At the time we recorded the forward loss charges on the Gulfstream G280 and G650 programs in the third quarter of 2012, we had included in the respective estimates at completion significant cost reductions primarily related to sourcing costs between 2015 and 2018. These amounts were based on the experience of the supply chain team and operational management. During the second quarter of 2013, it became apparent that a substantial portion of the total cost savings included in the contract estimates for each program would not be realized. This determination was based on a number of changing conditions and new developments including an assessment of our actual experience with our customers regarding their receptiveness to proposed changes, completion of our detailed part analysis during the second quarter of 2013 as part of our effort to project future sourcing costs and our inability to achieve estimated supplier price reductions via negotiations with suppliers.

Labor Estimates- Tulsa Facility

The labor cost forecasts within the contract estimates for the G280, G650 and Boeing B787 are based on certain assumptions, including the level of disruption expected in the future. In our contract estimates through the first quarter of 2013, we assumed that certain disruptions to the manufacturing line caused by (i) supplier quality issues and late deliveries, (ii) customer inspections occurring in our facilities and (iii) our own manufacturing quality issues would be resolved by the middle of 2013. During the second quarter of 2013, key performance dates were missed, and we extended the expected period of time during which these issues would be resolved in our assumptions for our contract estimates. As a result, we experienced higher actual costs as well as significant increases to forecasted costs, resulting in additional forward losses recognized on all of these programs in the second and fourth quarters of 2013.

Contractual Items - G650

As we worked with Gulfstream to meet its production demand, we negotiated a temporary transfer of a portion of our work scope to Gulfstream for completion. In the second quarter of 2013, due to the effect of continued production challenges on our forecasted ability to achieve scheduled deliveries, we changed our assumptions to extend the duration of the work transfer and updated our estimates regarding this temporarily transferred work scope which is accounted for as a reduction in forecasted revenue. As described in more detail in Note 21, "Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees," we instituted a demand for arbitration against Gulfstream to resolve certain contractual disputes primarily related to engineering changes made by Gulfstream and the impact of those changes to weight and delivery schedules as well as for incomplete payments to Spirit. We continually assess these contractual items and adjust our estimates as appropriate each quarter. Changes in these particular estimates resulted in additional forward loss recognized on the G650 in the second quarter of 2013.

B787 program

As we move into higher rates of production, our performance at the current contracted price depends on our being able to achieve production cost reductions as we gain production experience. During the second quarter of 2013, we continued to experience production inefficiencies at our Tulsa facility as we transitioned to production on the B787-9 derivative, which drove forward losses of $37.3 on the B787 wing program. Additionally in the fourth quarter of 2013, we revised our estimates of the amount of near-term achievable cost reductions for the B787 program based on cost savings ideas generated, the maturity of these ideas and the expected realization for the programs. This change in cost savings estimates drove a forward loss of $384.7 in the fourth quarter of 2013.

2012 Changes in Estimates

Performance Issues-Tulsa Facility

The Company’s Tulsa facility has significant work content on three of the development programs (B787, G280, G650). The multiple complex development programs at this facility have created various performance issues that have resulted in previous changes to our contract estimates on these development programs.

The performance issues at the Tulsa facility were magnified in the third quarter of 2012 when the Company implemented a recovery plan which would bring the company current for its B787 wing components. The Company began implementing the recovery plan during late July 2012 which resulted in the addition of significant additional resources to meet delivery schedules. As the Company was implementing the recovery plan, it became clear during the third quarter estimation process that the remediation would have a significant impact on the future cost curves due to significant amounts of additional headcount and disruption.

Type Certification

On September 4 and 7, 2012, Gulfstream received type certification on the G280 and G650 aircraft, respectively. These type certifications impact three of the Company’s development programs, G280, G650 and BR725 (the engine nacelle on the G650). Type certification is a significant program milestone for commercial aerospace products as it represents the airworthiness authority’s approval of the completion and functionality of engineering design and the ability of the aircraft to enter into service, and leads directly to the commencement of full rate production. However, following type certification the ability to redesign for cost is significantly less if no derivative aircraft design is planned. We currently have no plans for derivative models, making redesign for cost improvements difficult after type certification.

The pace of cost improvements was not keeping up with projected learning curves particularly related to redesign opportunities and as all three programs are preparing to enter full rate production, we revised our estimates to reflect higher costs.

Decision on Work Package Transfers

Given certain challenges of new programs at the Company’s Kinston, North Carolina site and the fact that our newest facility in Chanute, Kansas was in the process of multiple work package transfers during the third quarter, the Company decided to delay the transfer of any additional work packages into these facilities. Overall, this had a significant impact on the BR725 program and the timing of anticipated cost reduction from the planned transfer of work content to lower-cost facilities.

Finalization of Supplier Contracts

During the early phases of our development programs, the Company will frequently procure small quantities of required sub-assemblies and parts from our suppliers. This practice generally forces us to pay higher unit prices for these sub-assemblies and parts, but allows us flexibility in evaluating supplier performance and quality as well as addressing design changes that frequently occur during the early phases of these development programs. Once design changes subside, we will generally contract on a longer-term basis with our suppliers which allows us to experience more favorable supply chain pricing.

The Company has been successful in negotiating lower costs with suppliers on most of these development programs; however, these costs are not as low as original estimates. This pressure on supply chain cost runs across all of our development programs. As Boeing and Airbus have increased production rates on existing commercial programs, our suppliers have limited capacity to deal with even modest rate increases on our business jet programs. In addition, the capacity constraint in our supply base has prevented us from off-loading to the supply chain certain work we currently perform in-house. As a result of higher current costs which have exceeded estimates and recent negotiations with suppliers, the Company has revised supplier costs across several of the development programs.

New and Maturing Programs Summary Performance

Due primarily to the events described above in this Note 3, in 2013 we recorded forward loss charges of $78.6 on the recurring A350 XWB Section 15, $32.7 on the non-recurring A350 XWB Section 15, $240.9 on the G280 program, $288.3 on the G650 program and $422.0 on the B787 program. Additionally, due to program performance and/or changes in estimates in 2013 we recorded forward loss charges of $41.1, $16.4 and $21.7 on the B747, B767 and Rolls-Royce BR725 programs, respectively. The Rolls-Royce BR725 program also recorded a reduction of forward loss charges of $8.4 for a total net forward loss of $13.3 in 2013. These amounts were recorded within the Company’s results of operations as part of cost of goods sold as well as on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as forward loss provisions within inventory to the extent each program’s inventory balance was sufficient to absorb the charge. In the case that program inventory was not sufficient to absorb the full amount of a charge, the remainder was classified as a current liability.

Due to performance, type certification, work package transfers and finalization of supplier contracts, as well as other events, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2012, we recorded forward loss charges of $184.0 on the Boeing 787, $162.5 on the Gulfstream G650, $151.0 on the Rolls-Royce BR725, $118.8 on the Gulfstream G280, $8.9 on the Airbus A350 XWB non-recurring wing, $11.5 on the Boeing 747-8 program and $8.0 on the B767 program. These amounts are recorded on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as forward loss provisions within inventory.

Our consolidated net adjustments for costs related to the aforementioned changes in estimates and other circumstances for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, decreased operating profit, before income taxes, by approximately $1,133.3 and $644.7, respectively. These adjustments decreased net earnings for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 by approximately $713.0 ($5.04 per share) and $412.0 ($2.88 per share), respectively.