Boeing has all along maintained an acknowledgement over glitches. It subtitles those glitches as teething woes. Boeing has attacked any new airplane breaking in period with a robust approach of leaving no stone unturned in the perfection phase of mastering the 787. The optimist says, "All glitches are protected by its internal controls from engineering, design, and redundancy. It can fly with out a battery, if you will. The FAA has concurred with its latest report on 787 safety. It is a safe airplane. Early on this blog mentioned that aspect of 787 safety. It has so many overbuilt systems that failure is mitigated in flight with an array of safe back-ups most airplanes lack. That heavy built emphasis of "what if" technology protects flight with passengers on-board. The FAA concurs!
Boeing 787 design and manufacture safe, FAA says
Take-Away:
Boeing wasn't lying about the glitches being teething pains. It was a necessary evil to go through this period while shoring up unknown outcomes of designed parts from suppliers. The FAA is correct at pointing towards Boeing for that responsibility and its suppliers. A new paradigm is established with this aircraft as so many segments of development not by Boeing, but within its supply chain. The supply chain has been a sore spot for Boeing and its 787 from the onset. It is new way of doing business. Thus you have the same amount of glitching in this new way process as the airplane itself.
The FAA recommends that "Boeing's New Way", is to exercise better control over that element as well as FAA own self when a new generation aircraft has a heavier reliance on a no Boeing involvement on its parts, as it uses a preponderance of out side technology. Boeing cannot be complacent if the supplier assumes responsibility for the technology, like its battery problems. The FAA recommends that suppliers must meet the same scrutiny and standards of safety that Boeing is measured on. It also maintains the FAA must implement more inspection and advisory control of subcontractors as if it part of Boeing's over-all construction of a new aircraft.
Boeing has used these three years in service years with it customers, to wade through items not meeting performance standards such as batteries, brakes and plastic hull making.
The many issues with subsystem programming from subcontractors, delamination in critical areas (wing cracks), and failure of brake performance are examples where a more robust involvement of both Boeing and the FAA would or could of prevented those in-service glitches. Even though, Boeing didn't understand the full scope of supplier participation, the suppliers operate at a different level of assurance than Boeing does, and a dependence on suppliers having it right for Boeing opens the development of a 787 weakness. The FAA is in a similar position as Boeing is considering oversight of the supply chain. Whether its under Boeing's roof or a supplier's roof the same due diligence is required for the all aircraft components going into the new processes, designs and the way of conducting the 787 project. Even if all sources are scattered over the world or are in-house at Boeing's facilities.
Having said this, the 787 is safe. Because many or most of the weaknesses have been addressed and changed out with a very solid protocol within those replacement methods. It makes the aircraft far more safe level than whats its own redundancy had provided prior to entry into customer service. It is a very safe aircraft.
The recent JAL airline 787 engine failure demonstrates its emergency capability. After the #2 engine was shut down during its Trans Pacific route to North America the pilot redirected the Aircraft to Hawaii. One of the greatest fears is a trans-pacific engine failure. The Boeing 787 worked seamlessly to safety. All the precautions, lessons learned, and systems concerning an engine shutdown worked as expected. The Boeing redundancy and the FAA oversight keeps risk of travel to a minimum on this particular model. The FAA reports indicates, all issues are tracked, corrected, and implemented with change, from manufacturing through flight maintenance. The 787 is a far better aircraft than what it first flew into service in November of 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment