The Dream Is Over As FAA Grounds Nightmareliner

Tyler Durden's picture

The pain for Boeing never stops. Just out from Reuters:

  • U.S. FAA says requiring airlines to temporarily stop flying Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. #BREAKING
  • FAA: Battery failures on Boeing 787s could damage critical systems and structures, spark fire, if not corrected
  • FAA: Will work with Boeing, airlines to develop corrective action plan to resume 787 operations as "quickly and safely as possible"
  • FAA: Decision to ground Boeing 787s prompted by second incident involving lithium ion battery failure
  • FAA: Will also examine Boeing 787 batteries as part of comprehensive review announced last week

So, will Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (i.e., the US government) perhaps reassess his conclusion from last week that the Dreamliner is "safe" or perhaps this too is just more teething problems... Or merely an ultra aggressive case of industrial sabotage from EADS? In other news, perhaps it is time to find a more appropriate name for the Dreamliner?

Finally we are surprised how nobody has figured out this simple and brilliant solution yet: put Solyndra solar panels on all Dreamliners and call it a day.

For those interest, here is more from Reuters:

The Federal Aviation Administration said on Wednesday it would temporarily ground Boeing Co's 787s after a second incident involving battery failures caused one of the Dreamliner passenger jets to make an emergency landing in Japan.


The FAA said airlines would have to demonstrate that the lithium ion batteries involved were safe before they could resume flying Boeing's newest commercial airliner, but gave no details on when that could occur.


Boeing could not be immediately reached for comment.

Perhaps if Boeing had been reached for comment, it would have said: 'Shouldn't the FAA have ascertained the safety of the lithium ion batteries before clearing our airplane for flight after years and years of delays?

The use of new battery technology is among the cost-saving features of the 787, which Boeing says burns 20 percent less fuel than rival jetliners using older technology.

"Burns" being a great example of using the right word at the right time.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Unprepared's picture

They are learning from the SEC. The only things tested in the Dreamliner are the Black Box and making sure that passports don't burn in case of a crash and are parachuted to safety.

AgAu_man's picture

You're talking out of your rear end, cause it makes you feel 'smart'.  But you have no material knowledge, based in fact.  That is a fact.

Unprepared's picture

of course I have no material knowledge, how clearer could I have been?

Mark123's picture

The plane was rated AAA by Moodys.  Good enuf for me.


Moodys never saw the actual plane plane or any of its components, but based their assessment on a synthetic derivative computer model developed by a grad student at Harvard.

hairball48's picture

I don't/won't fly anymore. I could care less.

I hit the wrong key. should have had:

Flying used to be a pleasant experience. Crew was friendly and the food was actually decent, even in tourist. Last time I flew was to my mom's funeral in '08. I felt like I was heading to a Nazi concentration camp....dealing with fucking rude TSA people and well as a crew that was downright hostile.


The Gooch's picture

Fucking Hostile , even.

I used to fly for work every fucking week. No more.

Not to mention, if one of these TSA parasites tried to "search" my daughter, I'd snap their fucking neck as well as the TSA goon first responder. Maybe even the second.





pods's picture

Told my boss the next time I will fly is when I am in a pine box with a Fed Ex sticker on it.


The Gooch's picture

your tracking number please...


Vendetta's picture

TSA - A jobs program ... nothing more

trav777's picture

try paying more for your ticket.

you lemmings back in coach are in there to be tortured.

CPL's picture

Plane falls if you are in coach or business class if an engine part is 'repurposed'.  Funny thing about gravity.

trav777's picture

at least I die with the pretty stewardess's phone # in my die with some fat turd slob drooling on you

sitenine's picture

You often crack me up! +1 for being Trav.

gigeze787's picture
FAA Grounds All Boeing 787 Planes Until Proven Safe  

Wednesday, 16 Jan 2013 | 6:13 PM ET

sitenine's picture

How is this a problem? Can't the POTUS just sign an executive suggestion banning 787 fires? Or maybe he could sign 23 of them, you know, just to make sure..

James-Morrison's picture

How far we have slipped with that Made In America tag.

At least it looks like a plane. 

Bunga Bunga's picture

But when proven safe, then +200  pts in the ES.

Yen Cross's picture

 Boeing-boeing-boeing-boeing = EADS must be laughing their asses off! Ok,  <-- Thankless Bastards.

CheapBastard's picture

How many arms were twisted to get this thing bought by the Japanese? Faulty battery, faulty wiring, faulty fuel tank, faulty this, faulty that....nice to think about when you're 30,000 feet in the air!

knukles's picture

A cup of warm rice can deflect a problem for only so long.

(or whatever the insulting saying is)


(ps ... wonder if the warranty is anything like GE's Fuckushittinme reactors)

Al Huxley's picture

Fuck 'em.  They're lying constantly about Fukushima, turn about's fair play.

Dugald's picture

Hey!  why not re-name it ....  Fawlty, it sings....

Flakmeister's picture

Marginal gains from exponential growth in complexity....

sitenine's picture

It's the new 'American exceptionalism'.

CheapBastard's picture

"Hecho en Estados Unidos" the sticker says.

Bunga Bunga's picture

Marginal productivity of complexity always crosses zero.

post turtle saver's picture

That's one of the dumbest fucking things I've seen you post and ranks as one of the dumbest fucking posts on this slack-jawed mongoloid board EVER. Anyone who knows anything about the airline industry will tell you that they would kill their own grandmothers to get an extra 1% efficiency out of their fleets. Boeing has built a platform that offers 20% better than anything else on the market. We're talking "Mr. Fusion" levels of improvement in fleet efficiency.

Seriously, you retards need to stick to something you know best - like fake climate "science" or accidentally losing a lifetime's worth of wealth in boating "accidents". Not a one of you knows jack shit about aerospace engineering and would serve everyone best by keeping your fucking mouths shut. You goddamn fucking idiots.

Likstane's picture

They don't seem so efficient when they're sitting on the tarmac at Narita.  Maybe you're the guy that sticks the little clamper thingnies on the new-fangled Nicad battery packs.  Probably should tape those things on a little better. 

Vendetta's picture

Obviously not a recipient of an executive management bonus in the industry.

post turtle saver's picture

My advice to you know-nothings still stands. You know nothing about this industry and you know nothing about me. If you read between the lines in all the articles involving this you'll find out a few obvious facts:

1) GS Yasua has _fucked up_ the initial lot of Lithium ion batteries that they shipped to Boeing. They're Japanese so Boeing is going to be spending the majority of their time helping those clowns figure out a way to save face.

2) Everyone else and his brother that has the Dreamliner in their fleet has a) not grounded them, and b) is in line to buy more. You simply do not walk away from a 20% efficiency advantage in your fleet over stupid stuff like this, you won't be able to compete and you'll end up out of business.

3) The safety factors in this design are absolutely phenomenal. Example: a single engine on the Dreamliner is powerful enough to keep a _fully loaded 747 in the air_. The average layman simply is in no position to pass judgement on the leaps in tech that are involved to achieve such feats. Sorry boys and girls, it's not elitist when it's true.

As for the dumbass wisecrack about bonuses, you're on Zerho Hedge... why are you jealous about how much paper fiat anyone is taking home from one day to the next? Get with the program, chuckles.

Likstane's picture

Go armor-all the tires on those old triple 7's, looks like you're gonna need 'em.

Frank N. Beans's picture

is this sorta like that electric car that has fires?

knukles's picture


lemme think about that one a while....

Zola's picture

lithium ion batteries strike again ? Tyler do you still have the video of the Fisker car igniting under water during Sandy ?

Matt's picture

Like, WTF? couldn't they use safer Lithium Ferro Phosphate batteries, or newer generation Lithium polymer batteries? You know, the ones where you can drill through them while they are charging without risk of fire or electrocution? I mean, FFS, if they have batteries that safe for hobby toys, why not for actual cars and planes?


deejo's picture

oh well.  BTFD, i suppose ?

Rainman's picture

YEESSSSS ! The answer is always YEEEESSS !

Nihilarian's picture

Who made the batteries, A123?

Papasmurf's picture

They were made by 5 4 3 2 1 Ignition

ebworthen's picture

A Japanese company, Yuasu or something like that.

I'd bet that the Boeing engineers didn't overbuild the wiring and amp draw from the batteries so they could lighten things up.

Probably a 2% tolerance versus 20%.


Bunga Bunga's picture

If they just used printer friendly batteries ....ask Ben.

Squid Vicious's picture

was there a lithium battery on TWA800?

pods's picture

Yep, that was the heat signal that the missile homed in on.


seek's picture

There was one in the missle, so after it hit, yes, there was a lithium battery on TWA800.

Squid Vicious's picture

ok I feel better now, I've been worried for 16 years about those exploding fuel tanks, especially in summer when they get really HOT

The Gooch's picture

Wait til "worlds collide" from 30,000 drones over the homeland.! Oh, wait. You won't have to.

Jack Burton's picture

It beggars belief that after so many decades of commercial jet development and so many different aircraft in service for so long, that a new commercial jet can not be engineered and brought on line with minimal problems. Are the engineers now a days not able to build on the past engineering successes and improve and adapt designs from the past? It's not like they are the first to sit down to design a new commerical aircraft. Can they not even design a battery that isn't a fire hazard.

Boeing should look into how they recruit and employ engineers. Obviosuly they have got some lemons in the work force. We see much the same with miltiary aircraft, it takes half a normal human life time for these guys to design and produce a new fighter or bomber aircraft. It was not always that way. What has changed? Are they trying to reinvent everything, or are they too stupid to build on past designs that did work?

How long before layoffs result? Commerical aircraft was one bright spot in US manufacturing. But I gather we are busy in technology transfer to China. A local, and highly rated, small aircraft designer and manufacturer was bought by a Chinese compnay a few years back. Once the technology is transfered to China, and they open their own manufacturing facility, it's a sure bet ours will close. Labor costs too high they will say, though nobody at the plant is getting rich on those wages I can tell you! It is a race to the bottom, the US staff would have to go to $2.00 an hour top wage to even be in the ball park.

rtalcott's picture

I think it's more the managers and not the engineers....


SR-71 went from design to flying in maybe 24 months...Kelly Johnson knew how to manage to get things done.



  • 28 December 1962: Lockheed signs contract to build six SR-71 aircraft.
  • 25 July 1964: President Johnson makes public announcement of SR-71.
  • 29 October 1964: SR-71 prototype (AF Ser. No. 61-7950) delivered to Air Force Plant 42 at Palmdale, CA.