Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 7, 2013 3:42:56 GMT 1
Are insurance companies likely to be impressed with this 'containment' solution? I've read in some articles that insurance will likely go up. But what I'm really unimpressed with is that this containment fix is going to add back some 150 lbs in weight. That negates almost all the weight savings Boeing made by going Li-ion, while still retaining a battery with an unstable chemistry. So overall, it feels like they made the change for the worse...ridiculous IMO.
|
|
a3801000
in Preparation for Body Join
I'm back!
Posts: 116
|
Post by a3801000 on Apr 7, 2013 10:18:35 GMT 1
Survey on Aero.de – in german www.aero.de/news-17126/aerode-Umfrage-wuerden-Sie-die-787-buchen.htmlQuestion: „would you book the 787?” RESULT: 21,19 % Yes - the 787 is safe! 14,10 % Yes, but I feel queasy! 24,17 % I wait first 40,53 % I will actively avoid Dreamliner flights number of participants: 1241 Cheers Considering that people that are somehow involved in aviation react already like this... makes me wonder what Joe Public would think if he knew. Or are the numbers so bad because the people have some knowledge? As in "little knowledge might scare them away"? Only 21% think that the aircraft really is safe. Lucky for Boeing that there are not too many people on aero.de considering buying a 787... I would be interested to see the results from a similar poll on our forum. Maybe Fabien can create one?
|
|
tomparis1
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 390
|
Post by tomparis1 on Apr 8, 2013 7:37:26 GMT 1
Hi Baroque and a3801000,
I completely agree with you. The Survey is not representative of the general public - like every Survey. I am very curious to see the results of our own Survey.
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Apr 8, 2013 11:26:54 GMT 1
Any idea if/when other Air Safety Authorities are going to express an interest in the B787 'fix'?
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Apr 9, 2013 2:07:12 GMT 1
Should a Safety Certification of the containment fix, be accompanied by a withdrawal of the ETOPS standard.
The B787 would appear to have a statistically higher chance of suffering a fire en-route, so I would assume the priority is to land SAFELY, ASAP. Being several hours away from a suitable landing does not appear to be a sensible option
I wish I could find something positive to say about this, but if a major manufacturer is prepared to gamble with safety, it is difficult to summon respect for them. I haven't heard a hint of "we'll be looking at a redesign to put safe batteries in". All I see and hear is panic to get the plane in the air quickly.
The current tests prove nothing. If the battery catches fire, fine - the fix will be proven (I hope). If it doesn't catch fire, well, all it's proved is that the battery didn't catch fire during the test regime.
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Apr 9, 2013 16:33:45 GMT 1
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Apr 10, 2013 12:34:56 GMT 1
This confirms that only the FAA will provide the Safety decision and all the other safety agencies will accept their decision.
|
|
|
Post by addasih on Apr 11, 2013 3:27:23 GMT 1
Jon Ostrower tweeted
|
|
noistar
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 388
|
Post by noistar on Apr 11, 2013 7:08:51 GMT 1
Hmmm If the "would you fly the B787?" post applied just to the first trip, I think, even with the opportunity, I'd have to say No.
|
|
petera380
Final Assembly Line stage 2
Posts: 489
|
Post by petera380 on Apr 11, 2013 13:30:31 GMT 1
The bottom line is that Boeing has not fixed the problem only provide containment for when the problem happens again!
|
|