So when those B737s nose dived into the ground was that a non-union or outsourced problem?

Was those DC10 problems caused by non-union or outsourced problems?

 

I always love the pilot fingerpointing at "bean counters" and "MBA's" like they have horns and pointy tails. This has nothing to do with union vs non-union. This aircraft has been plagued with problems for many years. Cue the the cubicle troll management baseless accusations in 5 4 3 2.....

In the grand scheme of things these are some relatively minor issues when launching an aircraft this sophisitcated, i.e. A380
__________________

 

The 737 Power Control Units you reference were outsourced to Parker Hannifin. Boeing management conspired to cover up a known flaw:

the Boeing 737 Rudder Lawsuits

 

The 787's electrical system always seemed suspect to me. a 270 volt DC system is going to get hot fast when it encounters resistance. There has not been a contactor ever built which is absolutely impervious to dirt, condensation and corrosion. The 235 volt V-AC side shares similar issues.

Simply stated, a lot of power is getting pushed through a small conduit. Anything not working right is going to get very hot, very quickly. I've not seen how they safeguarded the design, but one would think that fusible links would be impractical. Remote switches encounter control and contactor issues.

Getting rid of bleed air may have been a step too far in this sort of application.

 

Japanese 787? which airline?

 

There was 2 of them. One was All Nippon Airways (ANA), the other was, Japan Airlines I think.

 

Clearly you have not followed the problems Airbus has had in new aircraft introductions. So far the 787 has had outstanding dispatch reliability since it went into scheduled service. In fact its been much better then airbus has achieved. Yes they have having a problem with the Lithium Ion batteries made by a Japanese company. I am sure they will work it out or switch back to NiCads. The aircraft is meeting all specs for range and fuel consumption. The numbers are compelling and its going to be a game changer. Sadly my airline does not seem to want any.
Its also a aircraft built to integrate the pilot into the flying. Airbus attempts to isolate the pilot. Two very different approach but I know which one I prefer.

 

The FAA has grounded them now also. This is a turn for the worse, and will hopefully involve just a quick fix to an isolated system glitch.

 

I rode back to LAX from Houston on a unical 787. Nice ride, good first class. Hate to hear they're having problems, but serves Boeing right for screwing over their loyal employees.

 

Wasn't the DC-10 cargo door, kind of outsourcing issues in reverse? IIRC, the door was outsourced to General Dynamics (?) and there was some sort of failure during the first ground pressurization testing. I think that test also foreshadowed the issues with the floor buckling in those conditions and the fact that all of the -10's control cables ran through the floor vs other designs at the time. I think there were some memos between GD and McD at the time discussing the concerns and the possible need to redesign the door, but that McD brushed it aside because they were worried about getting to market late vs the 747 and L-1011. It's been a long time, but I remember reading a book called the Rise and Fall of the DC-10 and I think it even contained copies of some of the memos and other hush-hush correspondence. Corporate hijinks can easily trump that of the workers on the line.