Originally Posted by
UAL T38 Phlyer
Agree with both: the tolerances were tightened, and the box should have been there all along (but I'm sure they did a bean-count that said "over the life of the plane, this extra 100 lbs will cost $6.9 million!!!").
Another vexing issue: the few 787 guys I've talked to have said dispatch reliability is poor, and the airplane STILL cannot take external power at most airports. If they try it, due to some tolerances in the paralleling system, it dumps computers....be they flight control, navigation, or display, I don't know. But allegedly, that is why dispatch reliability is low.
As such, they have to keep the APU running during turns, or even overnight.
That would tend to eat up some of your operational efficiencies.
So I've been told.
I could see this being something they have to deal with. Most airports probably have less "filtered" power than the APU provides to the onboard systems. Perhaps they will get this worked out over time.
I do find that the 787 is comfortable and is high and fast on the trips I have taken. Talking with the guys who fly them, they do seem to like it. Really enjoyed the two times I was able to ride the jump.
The battery is very different than the inexpensive (dare I say "cheap") consumer electronics batteries. Plus, they are controlled by the BMS and the other onboard systems. I feel the steel box and venting is something that should have been there to begin with. But I haven't heard of it being used much since the original issue. I feel very safe with it.
I am wondering about the other items in this reporting piece. The misalignments of fittings, etc. Seems like they were trying to make Boeing look bad.