Slashdot Mirror
FAA To Investigate 787 Dreamliner
Dupple sends word from the BBC that the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration will be conducting a safety review of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner after a number of incidents have called the aircraft's hardiness into question. "An electrical fire, a brake problem, a fuel spill and cracks in the cockpit's windshield have affected Dreamliner flights in the past week. ... The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is one of the most advanced aeroplanes ever created. Much of it is made from very strong, light carbon-fibre composite material. However, a spate of technical issues has hurt its image. On Friday, two new problems were found, adding to Boeing's woes." A spokesman for Boeing said they were "absolutely confident in the reliability and performance of the 787," and were cooperating fully with the FAA's investigation. The 787 went into service in 2011, and 50 have been delivered to various airlines since then, with hundreds more on order. Qatar Airways has received five of them, and it has criticized Boeing for manufacturing faults.
I wonder if the manufacturing and quality problems has anything to do with the change on this plane that it is made all over the world, by tons of suppliers, then all moved to a common location for final assembly. This is a departure from the way Boeing has done manufacture in the past where most things are done under one roof.
It seems that most revoloutionary aircraft have nearly sunk the parent company. The 787 hasn't come close to sinking Boeing, so one can conclude that it's not good enough.
Sillyness aside, new aircraft always have teeting problems (the A380 blew up an engine during flight) and this is a particularly new and unusual aircraft. So, expect lots of teeting problems.
They'll probably be great when all those are ironed out.
That said, I've never seen an explanation as to how to do the equivalent of replacing a skin panel when the skyfood loading truck reverses into the plane.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
It's really not that big of a deal. I've had all of those problems on a SINGLE TRIP in the embraer. (Ok, the electrical issue was caught before it was an actual fire, but still). It's a new type, this kind of stuff happens.
They'll no doubt find the problems, but more are likely to occur. Whether Boeing is able to maintain a good image for the airplane is another question.
Of course your post is both a troll and falimbait.
The 787 is built from components made around the world, mostly by non-union workers. The Boeing plant in South Carolina that does 787 assembly is non-union.
You are an idiot.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
The really new technology is the carbon fibre used in the aircraft. Not seen any reports of faults with that yet though.
Balanced information:
U.S. regulators say Boeing 787 is safe but needs review.
FAA Orders Review Of Boeing 787 Dreamliner quote: "... we are confident about the safety of this aircraft, but we are concerned about these incidents."
A bigger issue: When composite burns it releases poisons. I haven't seen any discussion of Boeing's view of that. Here is a PDF file: Postcrash Health Hazards from Burning Aircraft Composites.
There is NO intent in saying that to imply that a 787 might crash. But if there is a runway or other accident, would passengers be less likely to survive?
Actually, several months of the original 787 delay was down to the IAM union strike in 2008 which shut down the Seattle FAL (although the strike lasted just 8 weeks, the FAL took 3 months to come back up to speed) - the SC FAL was only chosen and built after this strike.
Apparently you are supposed to care. Logging in would lend the bullshit scare message so much more legitimacy. Moderators would be falling over themselves just to give it a +1 Informative or +1 Insightful. Slashdot would grind to a halt and Cpt_Kirks would be labeled a "Hero of the Internet". The GNAA would end its reign of terror and millions of lives would be saved. Justin Bieber fans would stop cutting themselves over his drug use. The world would be better.
But, no, it is not going to happen. He failed to log in and now we are all fucked.
"When composite burns it releases poisons. "
unlike everything else?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Everything that goes on a plane is made not to burn. I'm sure they tried to light a mock fuselage on fire to see what happens.
Considering all of the aircraft that have thus far had issues came from the Seattle FAL, I'd say that the union product isn't much better - the fuel system is installed by union workers, it has had several major QA issues, the electrical equipment which was at the centre of the recent issue is installed by union workers.
I'm not particularly pro or anti union, but the arguments for and against unions in this thread are ridiculous.
Why do they ever bother with these quotes - what else are they expected to say? As Mandy Rice Davies once said when asked to comment about a Lord denying he had anything to do with her, "Well, he would, wouldn't he"
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
The 787 is having problems because of the bloated feature creep that went into its design. It will eventually be seen as a classic example of 2nd System Effect.
I'm guessing you're in the US where the role of unions seems a little more unhelpful. I get the impression over there they're all about protecting lazyness and wierd working practices. Elsewhere, they tend to do rather more good, working more constructively with employers and employees.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Ha ha? Did I miss Airbus releasing their first carbon fiber aircraft? No? Then they can shut up until they do. I seem to remember there being a couple of Airbus crashes in the past few years. Perhaps Airbus can focus on fixing their planes instead of laughing at Boeing.
Don't get so worked up about this. For a long time we patiently listened to our American cousins gloating about the Airbus 380's problems and how well everything is going with their Dreamliner, then production delays happened and now this... and alluvasudden the gang on the other side of the grew awfully quiet. It's our turn to enjoy some schadenfreude you guys have been going to town with that since the A380 wiring fiasco.
I imagine not very well if they add fire retardant to the resin.
Aluminum burns nicely, too - and can't be put out with water. Thing is, usually people are more concerned about the jet fuel, which makes up a large percentage of the weight of the plane itself and is meant to burn.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I start my day by inhaling the fumes of jet fuel and aluminum, myself. Would never touch that composite smoke, unless it came from carpet, upholstery, and cabin interior plastics.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Erm, unions are generally a good thing. They protect the worker's rights and keep employers in line. You must be thinking of the neutered version of unions you guys have in the US. Then again, the US is a shithole when it comes to work, so it's not surprising for you to think that way.
If the outside of the plane starts burning, then the people that were inside probably don't have many worries left.
You seem to be under the impression fires in composite aircraft pose a risk of poisoning or harming passengers.
It's not that simple though. Composites (FRP) are made from a fiber and a resin, which can be thought of like a glue. Most plastics can be used as a resin. On an aircraft, they use many different resins in different places as they are tailored to the local requirements. Also, these plastics are subjected to a number of tests that are used to determine toxicity in a few reasonable ways; most of them concentrate on what happens when we burn the plastic.
Near passengers, they have requirements ensuring the parts are self-extinguishing in a short (1 minute) time frame and have no toxicity in their smoke (The flammability test is UL 94, V0 is a typical requirement; I forget the smoke and toxicity test numbers I've used). So the plastic that holds your luggage above your head is made of a less weight-efficient material because it must meet design requirements focused on passenger safety in the event of a cabin fire. And of course, in the middle of the wing, it doesn't much matter if the smoke from a fire would make a passenger sick--passengers aren't anywhere near there--but fuel is probably nearby, so the design requirements and fail-safe measures for flammability and smoke are different there and in other zones of the aircraft.
In the paper you cited, note that the focus was on emergency response personnel. If as a passenger you're exposed to such an explosion, respiration of the fibers that carry potentially toxic plastics isn't the top concern - if you're inhaling that, I would be wondering what punched a hole in the fuselage and how many people are dead. The respiration and other hazards are a big deal to a ground crew or fire department who would put out non-crash-related fires. But the words in bold, "A bigger issue: When composite burns it releases poisons," are easy to misinterpret as a major passenger safety hazard unique to this aircraft.
The idea of unions vs the reality of unions just end up being very different things in the US.
"Don't teach a man to fish, feed yourself. He's a grown man. Fishing's not that hard." - Ron Swanson
I assume by "Elsewhere they tend to do rather more good" you're not including the UK. Over here in the UK they are also all about protecting lazyness and weird working practices such as holding back modernisation, reinstating bullies, etc
(I know this is a generalisation, and therefore I'm sure there are exceptions, however the biggies such as train staff in particular and public sector unions fall into this category)
"... we are confident about the safety of this aircraft, but we are concerned about these incidents."
Unless the wings were about to fall off they couldn't say anything stronger. That's the way it works when your biggest national aircraft manufacturer has a problem. The FAA don't want to cause panic or lost sales, but at the same time need to cover themselves if something does happen.
So basically we can't tell anything from their statement, and assuming their obviously biased opinion is "balanced" isn't so smart.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
to Dreamliner's problems: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF_P77VEPKA
You either build a radical new airframe with cutting edge materials and do it in-house OR you radically outsource your operation to cut costs building a traditional airframe. Boeing chose to do both. This is the result.
Why is it better to build up knowledge and processes for cutting edge technology in-house rather than using a vendor that already knows how to do them?
Which totally can explain the fuel, brake, and cockpit window issues...
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
I'm guessing you're in the US where the role of unions seems a little more unhelpful. I get the impression over there they're all about protecting lazyness and wierd working practices.
Let me tell you a recent union-related story, and the public perception of it:
1. Management goes to the union and says "We need to cut your wages 30% in order to keep the company afloat."
2. Union agrees.
3. Management celebrates by giving themselves large bonuses.
4. 2 years later, management goes to the union and says "We need to cut your wages 50% in order to keep the company afloat."
5. Union threatens to strike.
6. Company bankrupt. At least half the public blames the union.
I am officially gone from
Before concluding that Unions support laziness, consider that workers in the U.S. are generally expected to work more hours with less vacation than the vast majority of the free world. So according to employers, trying to achieve parity with the E.U. is promoting laziness.
As for weird working practices, for each and every 'crazy' union rule, there is a corresponding previous attempt by management to cheat in some way either to edge the union out or to extract more work than agreed upon or to pay less than agreed upon./
Neutered? When people think of unions over here they tend to think of the Detroit autoworkers...you know, the guys who recieve in excess of 100-120k a year in non-wage compensation, on top of their normal pay. even the guy who just turns one nut on every car that goes past on the line. Or they think of the chicago teacher's union, where the ag salary is 78k a year. Meanwhile teachers around the rest of the country make do with between 33 and 38k a year.
Neutered? Not hardly.
but you are right when you say unions are different here. Here they dont exist to keep employers in line or protect rights (we have laws to do that).
No, they exist to push political agendas and safeguard/extort excessive pay, beyond what the market would otherwise bear.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Fuel was probably just a case of overfilled tanks.
Shit happens with brakes in every airliner from time to time, same goes for cockpit windows.
Unions are like communism, it sounds good in theory but is impossible to get it to work in practice. I used to be deputy FOC of a print union so I do have some background with them.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
And don't forget longshoremen, who make in excess of $100K to move containers around and block any software to reduce costs. Then they go on strike because they aren't making enough for a high-school dropout.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
I'm not sure. The correct method would be for Boeing to make sure the public understood all the issues before they started building 787s. Now they risk public relations hassles.
.
Granted, I've never even worked in a union myself. But honestly, if a German union and all its workers were suddenly transported here, with all the time off and other benefits they receive, can you imagine anything but mortal conflict with US management?
Blue collar America has taken an incredible beating with a huge decline in standard of living over the last 30 years, today's auto workers are lucky to make half of what their fathers did. Unions are the instrument by which they've struggled, without much success, to fight against that decline. It is hard to imagine some ugliness not resulting from such a struggle.
I flew on them to and from Australia to the US. Well worth the cost to get on one, but on the return trip, we were delayed for 4 hours due to some engine problem. They did fix it, and we were back in the air, but the experience, and other subsequent reports, makes me nervous about them. I hope they get the problems resolved, as they really are a joy to fly on for long trips.
BOOP!
Between those and cracks in the Airbus 380 carbon wing, I'm not sure which is safer.
Anonymous troll very effectively led the topic of discussion astray.
Maybe slashdot should order comments by score rather than by time as default. Even youtube does that these days.
Granted, I've never even worked in a union myself
Nor have I but I'd dealt directly with them almost daily at times. I've had wrenches thrown at me because I dared to produce a stopwatch. (I'm an industrial engineer - that's what we do) I don't hate unions but I think they've forgotten their real purpose and have become far too adversarial with the companies.
But honestly, if a German union and all its workers were suddenly transported here, with all the time off and other benefits they receive, can you imagine anything but mortal conflict with US management?
The benefits any pay for workers in certain unions such as the UAW are second to none. I've seen guys with no college degree who make upwards of $80-100K+ for an assembly line job. Until very recently average wages of a GM worker was $39.69/hour and benefits tacked another $33.58/hour on top of that. We're not talking about specialty skilled labor here either. Guys with little to no special skills used to be able to get jobs that paid far better than the requirements of the job dictated. That has proven to be unsustainable.
Blue collar America has taken an incredible beating with a huge decline in standard of living over the last 30 years, today's auto workers are lucky to make half of what their fathers did.
Their fathers got a deal that was out of line with what could actually be sustained by the profits of the companies. Blue collar america is simply experiencing a reversion to the mean. They've had a good run for a while and now the bill has come due.
6. Company bankrupt. At least half the public blames the union.
The public arrives at this conclusion, aided in no small part by the conservative media, as part of it's lesson that the noble class is to be catered to in every whim, because that's the only way anyone has jobs.
With the 787, Boeing went from being an engineering firm to an assembly firm. They outsourced the various pieces to a bunch of third parties and then assembled them in house to create the final product. Oddly enough, the various parts that were never tested as a complete system are now having problems.
Nobody could have seen that coming....
I am almost certain that if they do an after the fact accounting of what they will end up spending on fixing all of these issues, they are going to realize that they spent as much, if not more than they would have spent if they had done it all in house.
(sarc) Why would we want to handle the future of our company in house? It is so much more profitable for our share holders if we derive operational synergies by engaging our trusted partners to collaborate with us on this monumentous undertaking. As our friends in Redmond have shown us, it is not done until SP1. The 787 is a true, 21st century airliner. We can leverage agile development methodologies to push numerous, incremental improvements to key systems once the product has been successfully launched. (/sarc)
So, tell me... If this is a "union labor" issue, why don't we see these problems with the 767, built in Seattle by your dreaded union labor? Probably because the issue has nothing to do with union vs non-union.
If anything beyond a "bleeding edge" technology issues, it's outsourcing major components that should be looked at.
But thanks for your red herring political screed⦠Howâ(TM)s the Tea Bag holding up?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
On the order hand, capitalism works as intended, 99.9% of you are in fact worthless and should be serfs to the choose elites, born fromagical diamond wombs.
Management celebrates by giving themselves large bonuses.
You can bet those bonuses amounted to far less then the amount saved by a 30% pay reduction to all employees. I'm not saying it is right, but had management not taken the bonuses, the company would likely still fail. In this scenario, it is the union who deserves most of the blame while management is only guilty of antagonizing the union.
I've worked in both union and non union shipyards my whole life. For the past twelve years I've worked non union. As far as quality of work, its tough to say if one is better than the other. As far as qualified journeymen there is no doubt that unions provide people with an already appreciable skill level. Whereas non union yards have an enormous turn over rate. The yards here in Seattle can send someone back to the hall if they feel they are unqualified and if you're sent back from three sequential jobs the union will drop you. The yards get the benefit of qualified workers as well as lower employee medical costs as the group rate covered by the union is lower. On the flip side after nearly thirty years of working in the industry since I have chosen to work non union my pension now amounts to the few thousand dollars I've been able to scrape into my 401k (profit sharing has been offered more than once then stripped again) and I can feel my body slowly deteriorating. There is no job security and as I have seen before when you can no longer produce there will be no more work. I hope every day that my coding skills will get good enough that I will come to the attention of someone, because when I cannot carry 100lbs up a ladder I'm done.
once more into the breach
Hate to tell you but there is zero demand for grey haired coders. See ya at the soup kitchen!
Unions are like communism, it sounds good in theory but is impossible to get it to work in practice. I used to be deputy FOC of a print union so I do have some background with them.
Disclaimer
The above comment is bollox.
It is bollox, indeed. The particular implementation in the us seems defective, it does work very well in many other places (unlike communism, see).
Well, no. If a company goes tits-up it's by definition the fault of management - they failed at their job, managing things. Ifat the same time, they were also ripping off the shareholders by taking a bigger slice of the piehey are not just incompetant but also corrupt.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
As for weird working practices, for each and every 'crazy' union rule, there is a corresponding previous attempt by management to cheat in some way either to edge the union out or to extract more work than agreed upon or to pay less than agreed upon./
From personal experience in workplaces I've been at trying to unionize, and from people I know that work for the unions, the number one cause of getting people to unionize is bad management. Pay rarely figures into the equation these days. What a union might get the company to increase is easily lost to the union by the workers. Rather it's being told they have to work back to back shifts again because the manager decided to change the schedule without notice, have to come in on the weekend because somebody else quit, and generally being expected to dance when some bad manager yells to dance, usually to try and cover up for their own bad management. ("I am altering the schedule. Pray I don't alter it any further.") Where I work now, even the managers who were around before the union say its better now. Everybody has guidelines and knows what is expected of them and there are no more yelling fights with workers and everybody is happier and gets more done.
And the non union product is crap.
That's the idea, divert attention away from the TSA and onto some executive decision causing Americans to lose their jobs, while the executive rakes in millions in bonuses.
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
One thing we can agree on in union vs. non-union debates, is that it's always management's fault.
Huh? There are 787 (Dreamliner) services between Aus and US? Nope. You're thinking of the A380 or 777. The 787 only started flying passengers in Oct 2012 with a Japanese airline (ANA).
I'm guessing you're in the US where the role of unions seems a little more unhelpful. I get the impression over there they're all about protecting lazyness and wierd working practices. Elsewhere, they tend to do rather more good, working more constructively with employers and employees.
Elsewhere? You obviously havnt been to Australia and seen how efficient the MUA are!
One thing we can agree on in union vs. non-union debates, is that it's always management's fault.
In Boeing's case, demonstrably true.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.