Wes Bucey
Prophet of Profit
Having dealt with Boeing as a customer on occasion in the past for parts to go into the 777, I recognize that the execution of their quality plan is often at odds with the content and intent of the plan.
Even so, I was more than mildly surprised when the FAA grounded ALL 787 Dreamliners this week.
One of the trade magazines to which I subscribe, Design News, carried an article concerning this event
([FONT=Arial, sans-serif]https://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=257519&print=yes[/FONT] )
Combining the information in the article with my own experience and knowledge about new product introduction, I intuit that FMEA (Failure Mode & Effects Analysis) was not rigorously performed. Here are a few meaningful excerpts from the article available in full at the link above
As a Demingite, I can be expected to lay most of the responsibility at the door of top management, but even I am stunned by the apparent disconnect and callousness of the Boeing management in dealing with this, especially in this passage from their press release
"Did the employees who work directly for Boeing and members of their supply chain actually perform what the quality documents call for or was the performance riddled with lapses and shortcuts?"
The lithium-ion battery:
A great deal of attention has been focused on the overheating and leakage of fluids of the lithium-ion batteries used in the 787 (be sure to take a good look at the photo of the battery from the JAL 787)
Added in edit: Boeing CEO statement (press release)
Even so, I was more than mildly surprised when the FAA grounded ALL 787 Dreamliners this week.
One of the trade magazines to which I subscribe, Design News, carried an article concerning this event
([FONT=Arial, sans-serif]https://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=257519&print=yes[/FONT] )
Combining the information in the article with my own experience and knowledge about new product introduction, I intuit that FMEA (Failure Mode & Effects Analysis) was not rigorously performed. Here are a few meaningful excerpts from the article available in full at the link above
Boeing appeared to be dissembling (avoiding the issue) just prior to the FAA decision when it proclaimedA succession of problems has plagued Boeing's 787 Dreamliner, but investigators are now most concerned about incidents involving overheating of lithium-ion batteries.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials grounded Boeing's high-tech Dreamliner after battery electrolytes reportedly leaked from a lithium-ion battery onboard an All Nippon Airways flight on Wednesday. The liquid reportedly traveled through an electrical room floor to the outside of the aircraft, leaving burn marks around damaged areas.
The latest incident followed on the heels of two battery-related problems encountered on Japan Airlines flights and another on a United flight earlier this month. Those incidents happened in parallel with multiple other episodes, including two fuel leaks. Since July, the 787 has also encountered a damaged cockpit window, an oil leak, and two cracked engines, according to multiple news reports.
Most quality professional folks (including me) are of the opinion there is no single direct root cause for the various "failures" which have cropped up, but I am of the opinion that management's decision to outsource the 787 components around the world without sufficient supplier evaluation and monitoring may be the underlying "root cause" of ALL the problems and failures noted to date.On its website, Boeing emphasized the safety of its new aircraft, releasing a statement saying, "The airplane has logged 50,000 hours of flight and there are more than 150 flights occurring daily. Its service is on par with the industry's best-ever introduction into service -- the Boeing 777. Like the 777, at 15 months of service, we are seeing the 787's fleet wide dispatch reliability well above 90 percent."
As a Demingite, I can be expected to lay most of the responsibility at the door of top management, but even I am stunned by the apparent disconnect and callousness of the Boeing management in dealing with this, especially in this passage from their press release
I agree the Boeing quality documents for standard practice absolutely call for "rigorous and ongoing validation," but the nagging question in MY mind isFor that reason, today we jointly announced with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) the start of a review of the 787's recent issues and critical systems. We welcome the opportunity to conduct this joint review. Our standard practice calls on us to apply rigorous and ongoing validation of our tools, processes and systems so that we can always be ensured that our products bring the highest levels of safety and reliability to our customers.
"Did the employees who work directly for Boeing and members of their supply chain actually perform what the quality documents call for or was the performance riddled with lapses and shortcuts?"
The lithium-ion battery:
A great deal of attention has been focused on the overheating and leakage of fluids of the lithium-ion batteries used in the 787 (be sure to take a good look at the photo of the battery from the JAL 787)
Just remember, as you consider this, that US TSA agents get hinked if a passenger attempts to bring a butane cigarette lighter on board an aircraft.Aviation experts said the energetic quality of lithium-ion can be a concern onboard aircraft. "One of the issues with lithium batteries is they get very hot," Freiwald said. "When they ignite, they can burn so hot that Halon 1301 won't extinguish a fire."
[snip]
Even with cooling, however, lithium-ion automotive batteries have been known to have problems on rare occasions. In 2011, a fire started in a Chevy Volt weeks after government crash testing, causing a ripple of concern. "The chemistry is edgy," Donald Sadoway of MIT wrote in an email to Design News after the incident. "The electrolyte is an organic fluid that is flammable, highly volatile at even moderately elevated temperature and in the presence of metallic lithium, which can form on the negative electrode at high charging rates."
Although it's not known whether the Dreamliner employs battery cooling systems, its batteries are smaller than those of plug-in hybrid cars. A National Transportation Board (NTSB) examination of an auxiliary power battery unit from the JAL Boeing 787 that caught fire in Boston's Logan Airport on January 7 showed that it measures 19 inches x 13 inches x 10 inches and weighs just 63 pounds. In contrast, electric vehicle batteries can weigh more than 400 pounds.
Added in edit: Boeing CEO statement (press release)
CHICAGO, Jan. 11, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) Chairman, President and CEO Jim McNerney issued the following statement today after U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and FAA Administrator Michael P. Huerta announced that the FAA and Boeing will start a review of the 787's recent issues and critical systems:
"Boeing shares the same commitment to air travel safety that Transportation Secretary LaHood and FAA Administrator Huerta spoke of this morning in Washington, D.C. We also stand 100 percent behind the integrity of the 787 and the rigorous process that led to its successful certification and entry into service. We look forward to participating in the joint review with the FAA, and we believe it will underscore our confidence, and the confidence of our customers and the traveling public, in the reliability, safety and performance of the innovative, new 787 Dreamliner."
Contact:
John Dern
Boeing Corporate Offices
312-544-2002
SOURCE Boeing
Last edited: