One of my good friends is in Quality Control at Boeing and says she would but I'm not so sure. The Li ion batteries for my bicycle get pretty warm while charging and I don't leave them unattended when charging even though the manufacturer says I can. I think I trust Li ion batteries to help me up a steep hill but not at 35,000 feet with no exit.
My Ballard Forum » Open Forum
NBR Would ou fly in the 787?
(42 posts)-
Cate
offlineMemberPosted 3 months ago # -
Ernie
onlineMemberNot when they are grounded by the FAA, but once they fix the problems, absolutely! Can't wait.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Sunset Hill David
offlineMemberDefinitely. I can barely wait.
Posted 3 months ago # -
phoo
offlineMemberThey were not using regular Li Ion. I can't quite remember the chemistry, but it was a different chemistry. However, it's a chemistry that needs to be very carefully regulated and not overcharged, or it will catch fire. I've heard they are considering changing the battery type, but that's a huge undertaking.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMemberIt's only huge because it would be less green and another couple of years more delay for flight.
I really think they rushed a 3 year delay for what should have been a 7 year delay.
Anyway, the FAA said a-okay... then. Maybe you'll question it's judgement someday.
'nuff said.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Edog
offlineMemberI can be pretty Cranky, but don't speak "Crank" well enough to understand a single word of what Oneder just wrote.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Ernie
onlineMemberOnder has to have strong, black and white opinions on every subject, this is one where he has no idea what he is talking about, but he comments anyway. Making no sense is the result.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMemberI do, most certainly know what I am talking about.
Maybe you need to read something beyond what I post about an issue?
A simple google search would be a start.
anyway, same shit, different day.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Edog
offlineMemberI think Oneder knows what he is talking about. I just don't know the Nuge dialect of Crank well enough to follow him, but I have no doubt he has an informed opinion.
Posted 3 months ago # -
VeganBiker
offlineMemberCate - I will when they get FAA approval to fly again, the 787 looks like it could be a comfortable plane to travel in. Makes me wish I still had the travel benefits I used to have when I was married to the flight attendant. :)
I also read that they are not quite the same battery that you have on your eBike, but the more I read about Lithium batteries the less I want to swap my cheap SLA eBike batteries for the expensive Lithium ones.Posted 3 months ago # -
BuffaloHawk
offlineMemberE
I miss skipping all the mumbling and going straight to the music video to understand the reply;)
Posted 3 months ago # -
boatgeek
offlineMemberIt's hard to tell if he has any clue at all. Whenever anyone asks for an explanation or clarification or challenges his strongly held opinions masquerading as fact, he goes straight to the name-calling. Dammit, we should KNOW what he meant, and the fact that we don't means that we're unworthy of an explanation!
In this case, I read the translation as "The FAA is a government agency, therefore everything it did must be all screwed up." Note that this is a perfect circular argument the prevents the FAA from ever winning. If FAA actually does real oversight, they're getting in the way of Boeing. If they believe Boeing, then they're not doing their job. Classic Oneder.
Another classic is the "It's only huge because it would be less green and another couple of years more delay for flight." So it's only a big deal because another 4 years of delay and some extra weight on an already late and overweight plane are big deals for Boeing. As if those weren't in the top four things promised to the customers. It would be like a skyscraper builder saying to the customer, "I'm sorry my project took three times as long as I promised. I hope you don't mind that I didn't build the top two stories."
Please, Oneder, prove me wrong. If you don't like the characterization, tell us in a straightforward way what you actually meant.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMemberThere ya go, buff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvuL5jyCHOw
The rest of your clap-trap is living large.
Posted 3 months ago # -
BuffaloHawk
offlineMemberSad Panda
and to think this is how much I thought of you:(
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMember"Note that this is a perfect circular argument the prevents the FAA from ever winning."
They are all getting paid to fail+raises=winning.
Forgive my math.
Do you need a video too?
Posted 3 months ago # -
VeganBiker
offlineMemberOh and Cate - I was once actually in a plane that crashed! Back in 1978 I was one of five people in a Cessna 210 single engine plane flying from Seattle to San Francisco on a Friday night when the engine seized just a little North of Oakland! We crash landed along side the railway tracks near Fremont and the plane caught fire. Four of us lived and the pilot died. So every time I get on a plane I figure that if it happens again my chances of surviving again are slim. Needless to say I am a very cautious flyer, I always listen to the safety talk and read the exit instructions and keep my seat belt on when in the seat.
Posted 3 months ago # -
pennygirl
offlineMemberI really didn't need to read that VB!
I don't like flying at the best of times, so I figure if we're going down, why not do it in comfort :-)
Posted 3 months ago # -
boatgeek
offlineMemberAnd you can tell FAA is failing because of all of the planes falling out of the sky? Edit: What could FAA do to make you think that they do a good job? Specifics, if you don't mind.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMemberTell me someone, anyone, from the FAA that got fired for clearing this scheme for sale.
...flight even.
Tell me someone, anyone, from Boeing that got fired for this mess.
If three years of delays, on a rush job(lol), found everyone on a defective plane, or, buying a defective plane ,or, defending a defective plane...
It's gotta be about the batteries...
Let's just call it as it is, for once.
A major production facility, yet again, scurrying to avoid ridiculous union compensation and wages for a very needed product.
Maybe Patty Murray will march yet again for the union before it gets buried by the dysfunctional and irrelevant FAA.
Three peas, one rotten pod.
Maybe you understand w'out a video?
prolly not.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Edog
offlineMemberWait a minute Oneder! Outsourcing, a way to get around the high cost of labor, is the culprit people are talking about. The batteries are but symbolic of that. And for extra credit, whats the difference between a 787s battery and Boeings Union, the battery actually caught fire during flight.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMember"Outsourcing, a way to get around the high cost of labor, is the culprit people are talking about."
Bingo.
You get a gold star.
Of course, you blame the cause, typical. /sarcasm
Posted 3 months ago # -
Edog
offlineMemberIn my best Nuge Crank:
Replacement refs??? With the expense of officiating what would you expect? Oh, I forget. Its not rocket science, don't like the calls, dont watch football we are building a workers paradise not planes. Sheesh idiots get what you play for anyway.
Posted 3 months ago # -
boatgeek
offlineMemberSo you want to start firing people before the investigation is done? I had no idea you liked the North Korean style of management!
Nobody from Boeing will get fired--it's all a supplier's problem. Hard to say if anyone from FAA will get fired, depends on the investigation results.
Unfortunately for your worldview, it's the stuff that was designed and built by the local unions that worked. The stuff that was outsourced had major problems (wing stiffeners: Japan, work not complete: Italy and others, batteries: France/Japan). If Boeing had held it all in-house, they would have had better control and probably had better results.
Posted 3 months ago # -
great idea
offlineMemberI'm no engineer, but I'm curious what's truly different (worse) when things are outsourced.
aren't they given the same instructions/specs that a local manufacturer would've been given? or were these always so lax they relied on the engineers going to the plant to work out design issus?
if they're not subject to the same testing procedures that would've occurred in the motherland, that's Boeing's fault. more oversight would've been easy with the money they saved shipping these services out.
was the op asking us in french where we'd take the plane?
Posted 3 months ago # -
VeganBiker
offlineMemberpg - sorry but I didn't mean to worry anyone, it is just when people talk about planes crashing or possibly crashing, then I feel compelled to mention that I survived a plane crash. And so survived is the operative word!
Now statistically, flying is one of the safer modes of transportation. You are more lightly to get injured by traveling in an automobile that a plane. So don't worry if you are about to board a plane soon but be very concerned if you are travelling in a car, on a bike or by foot.
And I am very sure that the maintenance on planes is far more meticulous than it is on most automobiles. One thing I learned at that time was that most of the bolts a plane's engine have a retaining pin somewhere that stops them from vibrating out! My incident was more than lightly caused by human error in the pre-flight check, and as it was not a commercial flight that came down to the pilot. Commercial flights have many, many checks and re-checks making them safer than other forms of travel and very few commercial flights fall out of the sky.Posted 3 months ago # -
boatgeek
offlineMemberThere's two main impacts when you outsource stuff: schedule and quality.
On the schedule side, you pretty much have to take what the supplier can deliver after the contract is signed and things are in production. Subcontractors are often late, and it's not like Boeing can move the tail fin production to Company B if Company A is late with deliveries. They're too far along in the process. Unfortunately, vendors and subcontractors also are exceptionally optimistic (if not outright lying) about schedule. If you need it done next week, they'll tell you it'll be done next week, at least until Thursday at 4:00. You can mitigate that some by having your own people on-site, but that's not perfect either.
A problem in between schedule and quality on the 787 was that many parts like the fuselage sections were shipped with temporary fasteners in place instead of the permanent fasteners. The people in Everett then had to do a lot of work that they weren't planning on doing to deliver the planes. If it's all in one shop, you will have a clearer idea of what still needs to be done. It's also easier to go to another division reporting to the same executive and ask them to change the way they're doing work than it is to go to another company entirely who doesn't have a direct financial motive. If they're delivering according to their contract, they don't have to change.
On the quality side, you won't necessarily have access to all of the test results and data, especially once you get into smaller components like batteries. If it's all in-house, engineers who see weird blips in tests are more likely to talk about it over a water cooler and then find and eliminate problems. If the blip is potentially a deal-killer, a subcontractor is more likely to explain it away as a malfunction in the test equipment and/or conveniently lose the bad test data. I don't have any inside info on whether that happened with the batteries, but it's possible.
It all comes down to communication and who you're working for. Boeing is certainly big enough to have poor communication and power struggles between departments, but they all report to the same people. If it gets really bad, the head of the 787 program can go in and knock heads if he has to. Once you bring in subcontractors, you take away a lot of that leverage and multiply potential problems because everyone is working in their own interest to a contract. Breaking those contracts takes lawyers, time, and money. When you're already behind schedule and losing money, that's the last thing you want to do.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMember"There's two main impacts when you outsource stuff: schedule and quality."
um...because I'm just a local pinata, I'll mention the the third, and most important to all of you pencil pushers shopping discount aisles.
Cost.
Boeing is fleeing this state, out-sourcing everything possible over costs.
Give me another reason.
Make it really good, include unicorns and rainbows.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMember...and because I'm not done yet, you mass produce idiots in public schools.
No wonder Taiwan gets your jobs, your planes, and your money.
Serves you correctly.
Posted 3 months ago # -
pennygirl
offlineMemberNo worries VB. It isn't the actual flying itself, more the enclosed space. Once I'm up there I adopt the 'well now I'm stuck' mindset :-)
Posted 3 months ago # -
boatgeek
offlineMemberOFCS. There's two main negative impacts. You happy?
Nice double standard by the way. Everyone else has to read your mind to find out what you mean by your incoherent rants, or they're a bunch of facebooking morons. You get to run around and nitpick anything where other people try to add value to the conversation. Way to argue like a 5 year old.
Posted 3 months ago # -
onederfullone
offlineMember"You happy?"
No, but it's because you don't see local cost as a negative impact.
"You get to run around and nitpick anything where other people try to add value to the conversation. Way to argue like a 5 year old."
I guess you don't understand that I appreciate the bald-faced honesty of any five year old. Maybe you need to get a grip.
Especially what you consider as a value.
Posted 3 months ago # -
teigyr
offlineMembernicely summed up, boatgeek.
VB, scary. Strangely enough (or not so strangely) the only close calls I have had have been in small Cessna type planes. There are all sorts of contingencies built in to both structures and training for the commercial types.
Cate, I'd be careful quoting or paraphrasing an employee. Despite the fact he/she said something good, a lot of employers prefer their employees to keep fairly quiet in media situations and while it's a fine line, it's probably better just to state your opinion and keep the employees opinion out of it especially in an unsecured, open, and permanent environment.
Posted 3 months ago # -
BuffaloHawk
offlineMemberteigyr
Is the 2nd suggestion considered "gracieing"?
Posted 3 months ago # -
pennygirl
offlineMemberOh! We have a new term!
BH takes this one :-)
Posted 3 months ago # -
oldguybc
offlineMemberWhat's the big deal? Every plane model ever produced was grounded at one time or another to fix bugs, the FAA is pretty good about this. Ion batteries? Hell, the 737 had parts of the fuselage coming loose! The 727 was grounded over twenty times due to one thing or another! Lockheed 1011? Don't even go there!
I'll fly in one, bring my own fire extinguisher...Hawk... behave yourself!
Posted 3 months ago # -
iPlod
offlineMemberRight on, oldguybc. Hell, the FAA permanently grounded the old guy here and the only battery he has (except in his hearing aid) is a few Napoleon cannons.
Posted 3 months ago # -
oldguybc
offlineMemberAids take #10s, have a few more that I refuse to talk about ;))
Posted 3 months ago # -
iPlod
offlineMemberNapoleons take #twelve. (pounders)
Posted 3 months ago # -
Cate
offlineMemberTeigyr - I don't think a Boeing employee saying they would fly in a Boeing product is a problem for anyone.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Cate
offlineMemberVB - Glad you survived, how terrifying that must have been. And the only reason I have a Li e-bike instead of a SLA is cause I bought used and it was the only used e-bike I could find in the NW at the time. Once people get one they hang on to them.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Cate
offlineMemberOops, the dreaded double.
Posted 3 months ago # -
teigyr
offlineMemberAnd yeah, BH does take this one though I'm sure I have co-workers who disagree :)
Posted 3 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.