Why Boeing's 787 Dreamliner was a nightmare waiting to happen

[marmar]

Why Boeing's 787 Dreamliner was a nightmare waiting to happen
Aviation debacle is a result of battery and outsourcing problems exacerbated by a relaxation of government oversight

Dominic Rushe in New York
guardian.co.uk, Friday 18 January 2013


There is a burnt-out metal box at the National Transportation Safety Board's offices in Washington that once housed what may well prove to be the most expensive battery in history.

The charred metal box housed a lithium-ion battery that once powered the auxiliary power unit on a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 Dreamliner. That plane, one of 50 in service of the 850 sold so far, caught fire at Logan International Airport in Boston earlier this month. The same kind of battery is thought to have led to the grounding of a Nippon Airways flight this week. That plane was forced to make an emergency landing after a burning smell was detected in the plane's cabin.

Boeing's battery woes are the latest in a series of problems to have beset the Dreamliner. Such problems have led to a global grounding of the aircraft, including all US-registered 787s, and a wide-ranging Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigation, the first time in four decades that it has pursued such drastic action.

Boeing's chief executive, Jim McNerney, expressed "deep regret" for the debacle and said the company was "working round the clock" to restore faith in the aircraft. The company will need all its considerable political clout in Washington to speed through a resolution from regulators who are already facing allegations that they fast-tracked the troubled aircraft in the first place. .......................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jan/18/boeing-787-dreamliner-grounded

[tech3149]

1. The Dreamliner story is a perfect example of the errors in current business philosophy

Last edited Wed Feb 6, 2013, 06:11 PM - Edit history (1)

I am the guy on the ground that has to make the grand schemes of corporate management and engineers actually work without doing any harm. There may be perfectly good financial reasons for outsourcing manufacture of complex systems to those that might be more capable in that narrow field of interest.
The first problem is that whole communication, coordination thing. Next is that the people making these decisions generally have little knowledge of what it takes to design and deliver a product that can do the job intended regardless of price. After that is that regardless of our capabilities for instantaneous worldwide communication, every separation between design, manufacture, and support create more hurdles to providing a viable product.
I've had to live with the product of this mentality too many times. Engineering done in Illinois, software in India, manufacturing in Taiwan. QA and Beta testing segmented and not evaluating real world conditions.
The end result is the customer and I had to suffer with years of problems and costs that were never considered when the product was conceived.
The article linked shows to me that people still refuse to understand the effects of divestment of design/manufacture/support being able to provide a valuable product. Most engineers could learn much from those grunts on the line trying to make their ideas work.

With regard to the APU batteries, I've been using Li batteries for years without problems. Two major but simple factors affect their safe usage. First is discharge rate. Batteries subjected to a discharge rate within their specification will never get hot enough to self destruct. Any idiot should be able to provide for that.
The next problem is charge regimen. Li batteries require strict charging parameters and don't take kindly to not obeying the rules. As has always been the case, battery longevity and safety require charging each cell only to its capacity. This isn't so much a safety as longevity problem.

Well let's get on to the next and most serious potential problem with Li batteries. The internal short that will ignite the Li and cause it to burn or explode. Can it happen? Damned straight! I've seen it happen and it was spectacular. The internal short not caused by operation outside of design parameters or severe physical damage. That gets back to design and implementation. Li batteries can be as safe or dangerous as sugar. Build it right and use it right and you have no problem.

After seeing some worthwhile and experienced users of the technology, the major problem seems to be using too large a capacity in too large a cell with no, or little consideration for the positive feedback loop of one cell heating up the adjacent cells and ending up with a Chernobyl scenario. As a modeler I understand that any error in calculation or implementation will severely impact my wallet. What I can't understand is when designing a system where lives are in the balance, why in the fuck wouldn't you go for the safest implementation of any technology?

[MindPilot]

2. You are absolutely correct

I've seen this play out in both the auto industry and consumer electronics. It always amuses me to see the tv commercials touting the latest collaboration software and how that will make your company's productivity soar. That may be ok for a spreadsheet, but a real part in a real thing is a different story.

[slackmaster]

3. There may be something to this. My dad worked on a few FAA certifications in the 1960s and 70s.

The process was intense, rigorous, and strict. The inspectors were very experienced, and often came up with things to test that the engineers who developed the planes had never thought of. There was a lot of perspiration shed during the process.