Jim McNerney, CEO of the Boeing Co., echos this company position from the top of the mountain. on Friday said, "that the problems the company is having with its 787 Dreamliner are to be expected, given that the aircraft is still new to the market."
Qatar Airways, CEO, Akbar Al Baker, bluntly doesn't like it at all. Al Baker's words are important, because he stands for an unforgiving march towards excellence, and takes no prisoners in this quest. His demands may sound unreasonable at times, even over-the-top, for all the attention given his aircraft.
“These problems are unacceptable because this aircraft has been flying for the last 14 months,” Al Baker said in an interview, referring to the Dreamliner, which entered commercial service late last year. “They have to get their act together very fast because we at Qatar Airways will not accept any more defects.”
My Boeing Note Pad: Immerse Boeing Vision and Mission Statement into Qatar's and every other customer's Vision and Mission. The customer is your Vision and your mission is to see that they reach that vision with your product. Therefore, partner with your customer's quest in achieving that Vision and completing your mission with excellence. Share in customer dissatisfaction as if it happened to your own vision, because it just did!
Thank Akbar Al Baker for keeping your Vision in focus and don't refer to it "as a new airplane on the market problem".
Boeing wanted to show off its Aircraft at Farnborough last summer in Great Britain. Lots of people walked on the Qatar 787 carpet while dropping stuff, dirt and travel sweat onto the aircraft. "Hey look, I scratched the mahogany arm rest with my purse buckle crowd." Boeing knew in advance they needed to deliver a pristine example to Qatar. It even needed 4 months more of work on it before final delivery. When you pay 150-230 million for an aircraft, Al Baker isn't just exited or giddy to get the aircraft. He is immensely focused on getting exactly what he paid for, "a perfect example of the 787". He wants no excuses of its new highly advance aircraft, with first time start-up cliches. That will not work on the Mr. Akbar Al Baker of Qatar. I respect both Boeing's and Qatar's plight, However when you purchase something more expensive than the Hope Diamond you don't expect it to arrive with finger prints, cracks found in the many facets and the stone setting having workman like glitches.
Qatar Airways, CEO, Akbar Al Baker
This brings us to the generator problem, and McNerney's quipping the problems saying, "are to be expected given its still new in the Market". He is talking to the "giddy and happy I've got a 787 crowd." Air India is excluded from this conversation, since they are still operating in Train Wreck Mode. United got a bad generator (electric control panel) problem, so does Qatar have a similar problem during its delivery flight. I am thankful for Generator (control panel) redundancy in the aircraft. However, there seems to be be a statistically significant problem, that goes deeper than an anomaly. Whether it is a programming issue for electrical flow control, or hardware fault, those remains to be determine. McNerney is right in saying its a new aircraft glitch, but it makes me wonder with all the thousands of hours flown by the 787 that it showed up on two brand new aircraft for United and Qatar, just months/days apart. Something changed in quality control for either the assembly on the 787, with its installation, manufacturing, or materials found in the electrical system. This is a serious crack for the Hope Diamond, which can and will be fixed, and should be found in the McNerney's right answers book.
Right Answer Page One:
"Mr Akbar Al Baker, we will make it right immediately and understand the importance of your concern. I will not downplay this in the press, as typical new airplane start-up problems. Boeing will do everything to make your $180 million diamond right."
Maybe this type of conversation has already happened, but Boeing should fall on its sword, rather than soft play the incident making Akbar Al Baker look dis-in-genuine by framing the problem as typical.
Check out newly (updated/additional) information on the electrical glitch in the "FLY On, 787" Link Below:
United says, "its a electrical control panel problem causing a fault reading. Citing the generator as the problem, while the generator is not the item faulting". The control panel has a problem. So Qatar shoots first and asks questions later method of PR, is same as the guy loudly exclaiming to the crowd, "it wasn't me", on a stinky elevator going up a hundred floors.
The "Now" started just three weeks later after this posting. With the Battery Fires and Smoke in Boston on January 7, 2013.
June 5, 2013 LiftnDrag:
Boeing has gone through the battery gauntlet with the FAA, Customers and suppliers; and as of June 5, 2013 is back on track. What kind of Akbar Al Baker anger still exist, is justified, as he had fired out this warning back in December of 2012, and then was grounded for four more months, until a fix was completed on the "New Battery Problem". Mr. Akbar Al Baker, you were right, as much as Boeing has tried to smooth relations via the press. I can't imagine what Boeing has told you in private. But I'm sure its a sword swallowing event of great proportions. Boeing is fully gutted in the PR world for its 787. I now know why you won't be a 787-10X launch customer. However, I can see you later on as a -10 customer, once you see how the aircraft performs, after a year in service. This is the price to pay for new technology, and sometimes quantum leaps are just that quantum leaps. You will order about a year out on the order book, after first delivery is determined. By then, the -10's landing's will have stop hurting, because the leap is so strong. Avoiding the -10 experimental year, will be a temporary solution, since you have many other -8's coming forward. The -10, inspite of Boeing's sales dogma, will be a great airplane. Being launch customer for the -10 is not necessary at this time, because you made your point well last December 12, 2012.
Fly On, 787.
==========================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment