Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Makes Public Apology for 787 Problems  
User currently offlinetioloko100 From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 119 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 23435 times:

In very industry reputation comes first and as the saying goes "aint Boeing; aint Going". Boeing has been able to overcome its turbulent time and apologise for the inconveniences caused by the battery issues of the Dreamliner.
Once again Boeing makes it up to its customers.

http://flyingactive.com/content/131-...pologies-over-dreamliner-woes.html

66 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7089 posts, RR: 57
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 23313 times:

Quoting tioloko100 (Thread starter):
Once again Boeing makes it up to its customers.

In the litigious world we now live in, if only life were that easy. This error will cost Boeing dearly as it has cost the airlines dearly.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlinefalkerker From Seychelles, joined Apr 2012, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 23263 times:

They won't get off the hook with a "we're sorry" and newspaper ad gimmick. The airlines paid for frames they could not use for over three months, that is a LOT of liability. Even if insurance companies pay the airlines, I don't know how much this issue will impact sales, only time will tell. What I am almost sure is it will take a lot more from boeing than a hollow excuse.

User currently offlinetioloko100 From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 23180 times:

Its is expected as often new products come with glitches and as time goes by it will be over and by using the reliability bathtub curve one can easily understand issues like this.

http://www.weibull.com/hotwire/issue22/hottopics22.htm


User currently offlinetioloko100 From Australia, joined Jul 2012, 119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 23152 times:

Quoting falkerker (Reply 2):
They won't get off the hook with a "we're sorry" and newspaper ad gimmick.

No one is perfect, Boeing remains the strong brand in the industry and if we cant show understanding to the situation then who can we spare?


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6870 posts, RR: 63
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 23010 times:

Quoting tioloko100 (Thread starter):
Once again Boeing makes it up to its customers.

That seems an odd thing to say. You mean, Boeing has to do this kind of thing on a regular basis?

But I think some of you are missing the point.

These ads aren't an apology to "the industry"or to all Boeing's customers. They are very specifically aimed at reassuring customers in one particular market. I lived in Japan during the introduction of the 787 (and flew on it whenever I could). You couldn't move at airports and elsewhere for posters, banners and models of 787s.

"First to Fly!"

Both airlines (but especially ANA) made a huge song and dance about it. ANA of course had '787' painted in enormous letters on the sides of their planes.

So what must have been a frustration for Ethiopian, Qatar and others with a couple of planes in service was a disaster for the two Japanese carriers. There was ample evidence from the arrival of the first planes that customers were actively seeking them out. (I was.) Now how many Japanese will think about it and say, "787? Er, maybe not this time..."

My guess is that ANA and JAL demanded something like this from Boeing.

And, of course, there is a deep tradition of apologising in Japan. And doing so very publicly. And Boeing do owe ANA and JAL apologies. Yes, they owe United,Air India, LOT and others apologies too but they'll no doubt do that in other, culturally appropriate ways.

These ads must be seen in a very specific cultural context.


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7089 posts, RR: 57
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 22851 times:

And the vote for fanboi of the day goes to....

Quoting tioloko100 (Reply 4):
if we cant show understanding to the situation then who can we spare?

Oh, I can show understanding, but I didn't invest billions to buy these aircraft. Then again, if I bought a car that broke down on the first day of use I couldn't use for four months, and had to rent a car at the last moment from Avis I would be seriously pissed and an advert wouldn't stop me making a claim.




The 787 is a great aircraft, built by a great company that lost its way on a very complicated project by trying too many new processes and procurement practices.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5204 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 22569 times:

Quoting tioloko100 (Reply 3):
Its is expected as often new products come with glitches

Well... personally I'd say that it is "expected" that "new products" are fit for purpose, which the 787 battery wasn't.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 6):
I can show understanding, but I didn't invest billions to buy these aircraft

  



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6142 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 22460 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tioloko100 (Thread starter):
Boeing has been able to overcome its turbulent time and apologise for the inconveniences caused by the battery issues of the Dreamliner.
Once again Boeing makes it up to its customers.
Quoting tioloko100 (Reply 3):
Its is expected as often new products come with glitches and as time goes by it will be over and by using the reliability bathtub curve one can easily understand issues like this.
Quoting tioloko100 (Reply 4):
No one is perfect, Boeing remains the strong brand in the industry

Hmmm. Strange thread and phrases. Reads like a cheap public relations stunt by someone planted. Trolling?



MGGS
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5410 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22282 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 8):
Hmmm. Strange thread and phrases. Reads like a cheap public relations stunt by someone planted. Trolling?

I don't see why. Of all the problems with the 787, this is one that airlines have been least critical of...at least publicly. Everybody knows that batteries are outsourced and the companies involved with the batteries were well experienced and reputable.

Boeing chose the chemistry based on consultation with these companies and tested the batteries extensively before they got certified. As it turns out, there were failure modes not thought of or tested for and the batteries failed in some such ways.

As it is, Boeing has a fix certified in a relatively short period of time, has received no public complaints from customers or certifying agencies about the solution and is no doubt working with the airlines on compensation.

Airliners have recovered from much more severe problems than this battery issue; there were no fatalities or even serious injuries, no airframes were lost, the solution seems to satisfy all who need satisfying and the grounding was relatively short lived.

So while those comments might be perceived as 'cheap public relations', they are also fairly realistic.



What the...?
User currently offlinetwiga From Canada, joined Mar 2013, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22224 times:

Here is a quote from the AD posted in reply #3

"If any trouble such as heating emerges, new casing and exhaust systems will prevent any impact on the safety of flights and passengers and allow the plane to complete a safe flight to its destination," it said.

Note they don't plan to "divert" for another battery incident - it says "safe flight to its destination".

So in the future if there is a battery incident the pax and press won't know - it will just be business as usual and a maintenance issue.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1812 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22052 times:

An apology is only useful if you are sincere about it. Anyway we westerners have forgotten about apology when we mess up, not at least banks and all rats in finance..

User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7089 posts, RR: 57
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 22033 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 9):
this is one that airlines have been least critical of...at least publicly.

Because if the airlines jumped up and down about the aircraft, future passenger confidence would be further dented. A delay is different, as safety is not questioned.

I can only imagine the anger behind closed doors.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 9):
Everybody knows that batteries are outsourced

If an outsourced check-in agent for Delta is makes me miss my flight due to incompetence, who do I complain to?

Quoting PM (Reply 5):
Now how many Japanese will think about it and say, "787? Er, maybe not this time..."

Even if only 1 in one hundred switches to a competitor for six months, the impact is large. Hence the airlines being quiet in their anger - not wanting to flame consumer anger. Even the Indians, who have demanded delays because of everything have said very little. They cannot kill their golden goose.

Quoting falkerker (Reply 2):
Even if insurance companies pay the airlines

All that does is increase next years insurance bill.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5410 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 21922 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 12):

Because if the airlines jumped up and down about the aircraft, future passenger confidence would be further dented. A delay is different, as safety is not questioned.

I can only imagine the anger behind closed doors.

Airlines haven't been particularly shy about criticizing Boeing or the 787 loudly and in public before...I don't see why this issue would be the straw that makes them nervous about scaring off the public.

Airlines have ordered something else without worrying about public perception, if they are unsatisfied with a product. AA orders from Airbus and Boeing and not a single passenger will care that they are no longer an all Boeing airline. If ANA decided to order 350's instead of 787's, not a passenger will care...or even notice.


Quoting BestWestern (Reply 12):
If an outsourced check-in agent for Delta is makes me miss my flight due to incompetence, who do I complain to?

Nobody said Boeing shouldn't take care of it, (which they did)...but nobody is naive to think that Boeing actually manufactured the batteries either.



What the...?
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 21718 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 12):
Even if only 1 in one hundred switches to a competitor for six months, the impact is large.

'One' is only one per cent, BestWestern.  

Tell you what - years back, as an 'enthusiast,' I often used to ask friends and acquaintances who'd recently been on a trip what aeroplane they'd flown on. As far as I recall, very few of them knew. They tended to have favoured airlines, not favoured aeroplanes. The only slight exception in those days was the 747, which of course was revolutionary in its time, as a huge 'double-decker.' Probably the A380 still gets some sort of reaction nowadays.

Most people still probably book their flights on 'time rather than type' - ones where the departure and arrival times suit their needs best. And, of course, the price of the ticket...........

So, hopefully, there won't be any huge boycotts of 787s.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineRobK From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3946 posts, RR: 18
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 21662 times:

I note that Boeing says : ""If any trouble such as heating emerges, new casing and exhaust systems will prevent any impact on the safety of flights and passengers and allow the plane to complete a safe flight to its destination," it said." But wait.. *IF* Boeing has fixed the issues then surely they'd be confident to state this and that no such issues will occur again in the future, right? As a potential passenger I don't want to hear about what will happen when your plane catches fire again, I want to hear you tell me that you've fixed the issues and there's no way they'll happen again... which you are not doing.

(awaits comments from the usual suspects about using buses and trains)


User currently offline707lvr From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 582 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 21610 times:

This is something you have to do. Corporations aren't people, but they have to act like them sometimes. Yeah, it will be shockingly expensive, but there is a ****load of cash flow waiting outdoors at Paine Field right now.

User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7089 posts, RR: 57
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 21288 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 13):
Airlines haven't been particularly shy about criticizing Boeing or the 787 loudly and in public before...I don't see why this issue would be the straw that makes them nervous about scaring off the public.

Because this issue was caused by a safety scare. If our friend in Doha jumps up and down too much, he will frighten people off his aircraft.

Prior to this is was due to delays, not safety.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 14):
'One' is only one per cent, BestWestern.

wow, really? And the profit margin of an airline is how much - three to five?

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 14):
So, hopefully, there won't be any huge boycotts of 787s.

I don't see any boycotts occurring.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineMHG From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 777 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 21166 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 11):
An apology is only useful if you are sincere about it. Anyway we westerners have forgotten about apology when we mess up, not at least banks and all rats in finance..

This apology is dedicated especially to the japanese public.

In Japan it is expected and common practice that companies/individuals who "fail" apologize for their shortcomings.
This does not have an effect on solving the financial issue but is simply "proper behaviour" towards the public - and is generally accepted.
This apology gives Boeing the possibility to restore its credibility in the general public (including airline executives !)

Boeing is still subject to liability as before but the negotiations will be possible in a much better talk environment.



I miss the sound of rolls royce darts and speys
User currently offlineraffik From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 1716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 21040 times:

Boeing should apologise- it has caused a massive inconvenience to its customers and affected passengers the world over. It's not good business practise not to. I understand that the airliners were grounded as it was in the best interests of safety but why weren't any of these faults picked up before the aircraft went into mainline service?

Anyway, I suspect it won't affect business too much for them as otherwise it is a very good aircraft but apologising is really the least they could do.



Happy -go- lucky kinda guy!
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8879 posts, RR: 75
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 20854 times:

Quoting MHG (Reply 18):
This apology is dedicated especially to the japanese public.

In Japan it is expected and common practice that companies/individuals who "fail" apologize for their shortcomings.

I would agree, this in normal Japanese culture, the reason it seems strange to many is they are not aware of this culture.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineASA From Bangladesh, joined Dec 2010, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 20587 times:

Quoting 707lvr (Reply 16):
Corporations aren't people, but they have to act like them sometimes.

Corporations are people, my friend!!!

even if the 47% doesn't believe so 



sorry ... couldn't help it! :P
mods, please delete.

[Edited 2013-05-01 01:58:27]

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5410 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 20169 times:

Quoting RobK (Reply 15):
I want to hear you tell me that you've fixed the issues and there's no way they'll happen again... which you are not doing.

Nothing in the world is 100% safe so you might be waiting a while for that.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 17):
Because this issue was caused by a safety scare. If our friend in Doha jumps up and down too much, he will frighten people off his aircraft.

Prior to this is was due to delays, not safety.

Actually, the delays were as safety oriented as reliability or supply oriented. Bad fasteners, improperly coated fasteners in the fuel tanks, brake software, side of body wing join, the 'is CFRP safe to use on an airliner' talk...all are quite related to safety, and there was no shortage of public dressing down for Boeing then.

It's not exactly a secret that the planes were grounded or why. Since every news organization on the planet headlined the battery fires at some point, most people are probably aware of the issue...regardless if any airline exec mentioned it or not.



What the...?
User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7089 posts, RR: 57
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 19970 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 22):
Actually, the delays were as safety oriented as reliability or supply oriented. Bad fasteners, improperly coated fasteners in the fuel tanks, brake software, side of body wing join, the 'is CFRP safe to use on an airliner' talk...all are quite related to safety, and there was no shortage of public dressing down for Boeing then.

Come off it -

The airlines can jump up and down and demand compensation because of delays...... Just like AI did - not one mention of safety concerns....

When an aircraft fleet is grounded because of a, let's call it a snafu, airlines are more cautious, because now they cant jump up and down and say 'you delivered me a dangerous aircraft' as that is manna to the media. So the airlines are now cautious, and demands are done behind closed doors.

You have already seen airlines state they will be demanding compensation, but nothing like the usual wrath of our friends in Doha, or the scheming antics of our friends in Mumbai - all too afraid to mention the safety card.

I have full confidence in Boeing producing a safe aircraft. The 787 will be a profitable aircraft for most airlines that buy it. However the groundings will cost Boeing a lot more than a few newspaper adverts.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5410 posts, RR: 30
Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 19685 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 23):
You have already seen airlines state they will be demanding compensation, but nothing like the usual wrath of our friends in Doha, or the scheming antics of our friends in Mumbai - all too afraid to mention the safety card.

Until Al Baker or anyone else comes out and admits why they do or don't say anything, any perspective any one of us has is conjecture and guesswork...including mine.

Ultimately, it really doesn't matter in the long run.



What the...?
25 PHX787 : Boeing took out a huge page ad in the papers today to formally apologize. Also I remember my friend saying at an investors or board meeting (he said
26 skipness1E : The people who matter are not interested in Boeing saying sorry, words are the cheapest form of currency in business. My concern is what you do rather
27 BestWestern : From a legal perspective, it is a very fine line as to when, or even if, corporations should apologize. The act of apology can demonstrate a legal re
28 wingman : I guess the last two posters didn't read MHG's, PHX 787's, or Zeke's posts about apologizing in Japanese culture. Either that or they just don't care
29 Post contains images readytotaxi : Boeing is not the only one to get it wrong first time out.
30 PHX787 : Exactly. All of this. People may not give a damn in other countries, but in Japan, when someone is heavily inconvenienced (or even slightly) it becom
31 MaverickM11 : It's been a textbook case of gross mismanagement that will be discussed in case studies for years to come.
32 JAAlbert : As costly as the 787 groundings were to the airlines and manufacturer, I wonder if the battery failure/grounding happening in the 1st Qtr was more for
33 cyeg66 : Well said. And without any doubt, the Japanese flying public has been the most inconvenienced by the grounding of the planes. Personally, with the am
34 skipness1E : Have they a proper project management procedure in place to prevent this sort of disconnet happening on the B777-X project? Do they know what the pro
35 frmrcapcadet : Has anybody noticed that many Japanese likely see the 787 as a Japanese plane? Which is a reasonable view.
36 BestWestern : I fully understand the power of apology in Japan. Just read other threads where I have commented on this. My original comments were specifically arou
37 PHX787 : It's sometimes promoted as such, and many news reports often include at the end how much percentage the 787 has from Japan.
38 PanAm1971 : Aviation inherently has risk. To move forwards in aviation you must take risk. The airlines know that. The public knows that. The manufacturers certai
39 Post contains images NAV20 : As far as I know, 'Er yes,' skipness1E. As far as I know so far, it resulted from inadequate insulation between the battery cells; plus microscopic m
40 Post contains images ER757 : I'm going to venture a guess here and say "yes." I have to believe they learned some very hard lessons from the 787 project and will take those lesso
41 Skyguy : Hit the nail right on the head! When Boeing introduced the 747 into service in 1969/70, it was a radical aircraft at it's time for it's sheer size an
42 SEA : This apology wasn't to satisfy airliners.netters. It's a cultural thing. In Japan it is extremely common for corporations to publicly apologize after
43 FlyCaledonian : Also intesresting how relatively few airlines are being vocal in publically citicising Boeing, yet the company still made this public apology.
44 hivue : The press will find out. Count on it. Boeing wouuld have to be really stupid to claim that no 787 battery overheat will ever occur again.
45 AA777 : I think this is more of a PR formality. I doubt Boeing has any delusions that this issue has and will cost them... Assuming there are no more major i
46 PITingres : But immediately above you quote them as doing just exactly that: Which certainly sounds to me like "no way it will happen again" albeit using differe
47 Post contains images glideslope : This is only directed toward Asian Carriers. An apology has far deeper meaning in all of Asia than in the West. Even though ANA, CSN and JAL were kick
48 glideslope : How are your Batteries? Seem a little warm, eh?
49 Post contains images UA735WL : Boeing would also be really stupid if they went around telling their customers that they expect the battery problem to surface again in the future. B
50 DTW2HYD : Let me get this right, Japanese will not(it took lot of arm twisting) apologize even if millions of cars had unintended acceleration problem, but wan
51 glideslope : You are young. Someday you will understand.
52 gr8circle : You seem to follow the news very selectively.....I distinctly recall Toyota's top brass making a public apology for all those "acceleration" incident
53 DTW2HYD : I don't want to go off topic defending my post, but I clearly stated "(it took lot of arm twisting)". It took a congressional subpoena for Toyota chi
54 Post contains images twiga : Couldn't agree with you more. As I posted before there are so many that think, fruit grows around the trunk of a fruit tree, and not up in the branch
55 Post contains images a36001 : The general public have the attention span of a fly, so I don't expect any negative reaction to the 787 to last very long. We humans are a fickle bunc
56 Schweigend : I'm glad that in Japanese society apologies are still expected, even from corporations. This late one from Boeing is welcome. Not many of the affecte
57 PHX787 : Ummmmmmm they did.....the news reports here in japan were full of them.
58 tioloko100 : Thats good thinking, its rare to find someone these days that think positively towards issues like that these days.
59 fcogafa : Does that mean that Boeing can sue the battery companies?!
60 hivue : Even if there was heat and smoke the press probably wouldn't be able to figure it out. But they'll be told. Any airline that has a 787 battery burn u
61 twiga : They might find out sometime but it could be months later. Its not in the airlines best interest to tell anyone - they don't want to make their passe
62 PHX787 : That is a possibility actually. I'm sure the legal departments of both Yuasa and B are going through things right now.
63 hivue : If the event occurs after the 787 battery issue is past its sell-by date as news, then yes. a36001 notes in post 55 the attention span of the general
64 HAWK21M : All Depends on how effective this battery fix is........
65 bikerthai : What is Boeing trying to do with the apologies? I can not truly say. But it have been impressed upon us ever since the Douglas merger that "Boeing" is
66 PHX787 : Read above at my posts regarding the purpose.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
We Will Go After Boeing For Millions LOT CEO Says posted Wed Apr 24 2013 04:35:31 by OA260
Pan Am's Boeing 720B Fleet posted Mon Apr 22 2013 18:42:56 by doulasc
787 Battery Fix For Aircraft On Boeing Flight Line? posted Mon Apr 22 2013 05:12:12 by liverpoola380
PanAm And Boeing posted Sun Apr 21 2013 15:22:52 by TWA772LR
Logo Question Boac Boeing 707 posted Sat Apr 20 2013 14:28:30 by boacvc10
Why Did Boeing End The B 717 Production? posted Fri Apr 19 2013 22:08:03 by United Airline
FAA Approves Boeing 787 Battery System Changes posted Fri Apr 19 2013 12:07:32 by Stitch
Boeing Cuts 747 Production 12.5% On Lower Demand posted Fri Apr 19 2013 07:05:26 by clickhappy
Boeing And Airbus Overwhelmed By Too Many Orders? posted Thu Apr 18 2013 10:28:06 by Gonzalo
Why Doesn't Boeing Or Airbus Make A Regional Jet? posted Wed Apr 17 2013 02:09:08 by DeltaXNA