What's Wrong With the Boeing 787 Dreamliner?

[PeterRS]

As if the 737 Max problems and its grounding for more than a year and a half were not enough for platemaker Boeing, its 787 Dreamliner is also becoming something of a bad dream. After the self-combusting battery fires in its first year of service had been solved, all seemed to go well for this long haul aircraft. Then new troubles started. Deliveries were halted in October last year after one set of production flaws arose. After the 5-month hiatus by March all seemed well and deliveries of new aircraft resumed. In June, though, yet another problem arose and new deliveries were once again suspended for at least another five months.

Now the Wall Street Journal has reported that the FAA has recently rejected the Company's proposal that it reinspect the 787. The FAA is unhappy that Boeing's employee group set up as an in-house regulator first needs to agree with the Company's changes to the aircraft. That has not yet happened because the employee group has disagreement amongst its own members. The FAA has stated it will not sign off on the inspections "until our safety experts are satisfied." A few customers were by now pissed off and three airlines cancelled orders for five of the jets.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/08/boeing-orders-continue-to-outpace-cancellations-dreamliner-deliveries-still-paused.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/04/boeings-delivery-of-new-787-dreamliners-reportedly-may-remain-halted-until-late-october.html

Another comment on the Professional Pilots Rumour site pprune.org suggests the Boeing's decision in March to move all its 787 production to its South Carolina plant is one reason for the 787's continuing problems. Its long term plant in Washington State has been unionised for decades. Boeing has resisted efforts to unionise South Carolina often using bullying tactics. In November 2018 it sacked three long term workers with excellent records on made-up excuses but in reality because they were union members. Boeing's 2011 move to open its South Carolina plant was widely seen as a union busting move. At that time only 2.7% of the state's workers belonged to a Union, the lowest of any US State. Undoubtedly cash was a reason. Average hourly wages at the Washington plant in 2018 were around $33; in South Carolina for the same job $24. The difference in the cost of living between the two states was only around 10%.

Another article illustrates the depth of the ill feeling amongst workers in both plants towards the Boeing management. To be fair, Boeing has since fired its former CEO and revamped its Board in the wake of the 737 Max scandal. But it can surely ill afford to keep on having problems with its other major money spinner, the 787.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/03/boeing-union-workers-fired-south-carolina

https://psmag.com/economics/a-tale-of-two-boeing-factories

For my part, I have taken several flights on both the 787 and its competitor the Airbus A350. Although I enjoyed all, I have a clear preference for the A350 especially on overnight flights.

[reader]

Having flown in the 350 and 787 many times, I, too, enjoyed the ride in both types. But by far my longest flights (nearly 18 hours) have been in the 350 Ultra Long Range (ULR) version.

While on the subject of Boeing, last night Frontline, the PBS documentary series, aired Boeing's Fatal Flaw, an investigation with The New York Times that examines the commercial pressures, flawed design and failed oversight behind Boeing’s 737 Max jet.

https://www.pbs.org/video/boeings-fatal-flaw-xenaq0/

[vinapu]

7 hours ago, PeterRS said:

 

 

 I have a clear preference for the A350 especially on overnight flights.

count me in but to Thailand I can fly even on barn's door

[PeterRS]

I have just watched that PBS Frontline documentary. Although i have followed the 737 Max saga virtually since the first crash in Indonesia and read hundreds of informative articles, especially from such knowledgable sources as The Seattle Times which won the Pulitzer Prize for its Max coverage, watching that programme filled me with horror. There is no need to explain why as this quickly becomes obvious.

I used to love Boeing's 747 series. I first flew one long haul in 1979 when my trip from Europe to Asia had three en route stops. I remember the start of non-stop flights on the 747-200 series when passenger numbers had to be limited to 70% of capacity to allow for the extra fuel tanks. And then the glorious 747-400 designed specifically for Pacific routes, a plane I just loved boarding and loved flying in. I must have taken at least 500 flights on a mix of long haul and relatively short haul sectors.

Learning that Boeing's own chief test pilot could not control the 737 Max and crashed it in his first flight in a simulator in November 2012 is chilling. Since then, the deliberate lies, the deliberate deceptions, the unrelenting pressure to keep information from the FAA, the far too cosy relationship between the Company and the FAA and then, following the crashes, the deliberate attempts to deflect blame on to foreign pilots should be engraved in large letters on all Beoing headquarters and manufacturing plants. As for the allegations that "American pilots would not have lost control", that is yet again another deliberate lie. Prior to the crashes several US pilots did in fact report to the anonymous hotline for pilot incidents that their 737 Max had gone out of control. Fortunately they were at a sufficiently high altitude that they were able to gain control of their aircraft.

I have written before I will never fly a 737 Max. Some suggest it must be the safest plane in the sky after the last two years. Frankly I don't care. I trust neither the plane nor Boeing. The 787 problems appear to be manageable and so I will fly that plane if there is no alternative. But never in a 737 Max.

[fedssocr]

I much prefer the A350, but Airbus has been having some issues with that aircraft too. Qatar Airways has been having issues with cracks in the fuselage (I believe)

[PeterRS]

12 hours ago, vinapu said:

count me in but to Thailand I can fly even on barn's door

I've found the best and cheapest way for you to travel to Thailand. You don't even need to wear a tie. But I guess there is no guarantee you will actually make it all the way there. 🤣

[vinapu]

how did you get my picture ? we  never met !

[reader]

Although this has nothing to do with the aircraft mentioned above, it does reflect on the places they land.

The current issue of Barron's looked at the economy and investment prospects in Thailand. One of only a few stocks it liked was Airports of Thailand (AOT).

The other was KASIKORNBANK bank.

======================================

From Phuket News

AoT to take over three more airports ‘to boost tourism’

BANGKOK: Thailand’s Transport Ministry has revealed that three airports currently run by the Department of Airports (DoA) will soon come under the control of Airports of Thailand (AoT) to help drive tourism growth.

Transport Minister Saksayam Chidchob said the ministry has resolved to shift the management of Udon Thani, Krabi and Buri Ram airports to the AoT, which can help expand their capacities and turn them into regional air transport hubs that are well-positioned to handle more tourists, reports state news agency NNT.

https://www.thephuketnews.com/aot-to-take-over-three-more-airports-to-boost-tourism-81424.php

[PeterRS]

9 hours ago, vinapu said:

how did you get my picture ? we  never met !

Oh dear, you found me out! Although we have never met, I did photoshop that pic a bit as I feel I know you a little from the elegance and intelligence, to say nothing of the suave quips, from your various posts. I take it I have your permission to keep the photo in the post. LOL

[vinapu]

2 hours ago, PeterRS said:

 as I feel I know you a little from the elegance and intelligence, .....

who you are talking about? it surely can't be me