Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe • Hacker News Board

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#181

Post by simonh » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:20 AM UTC

willvarfar wrote: post #139

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think Musk is grandstanding in hopes that consumers will demand SpaceX rockets for commercial airline travel instead of Boeing 787's? Well, duh, I'd take a ride in a rocket over another boring commercial flight any day.

I for one think it likely that Musk talks with a good grasp of the facts. But I will say on the PR angle, he does compete directly with the entrenched manufacturers in the space arena and all discredit and doubt cast would serve him well.

Youre focusing on what Elon Musk has to gain, which is very, very little. This is actual all about what he stands to lose. Tesla's business is predicated on the public accepting that cars packed with Li batteries are safe. If the public loses faith is Li batter mass power storage, Tesla is toast.

That doesn't mean Elon is either right or wrong, but it's sufficient to explain why he feels a pressing need to be involved in the debate.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#182

Post by belorn » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:22 AM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #68

While I can't dispute anything that is being said I think it is unfortunate that this is playing out the way it is. I can't dispute it because there's virtually no reliable publicly-available information on the design of this battery pack. I think it is unbecoming of an engineer or scientist, particularly of prominence, to voice such opinions without access to design data from the source. Before I could even begin to…

Information is being withheld. It's hard to expect respect while at the same time withholding critical information in the name of company secrets.

Take building designs, public accessible for any engineer to take a look. If a flaw is published like in this article, it can be verified by independent sources. If someone was hiding blueprint designs and a article like this was published, everyone would assume the architect was up to no good. The respect for the work, talent and dedication would only go as far as a courtesy phone call before publishing.

So regarding planes who's design and inner working is now days mostly regarded as company secrets, staying quiet would be worse than speaking out about a issue. Boeing should see this is an perfect time to publish their electrical and electronic diagrams, together with test data, and let independent engineers either verify the authors claims or denounce it.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#183

Post by 3amOpsGuy » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:24 AM UTC

I'm just surprised there isn't more damage from the fire! I use similar chemistry batteries (although much smaller) in RC planes (they are very energy dense for their weight).

When they are damaged (normally through charging incorrectly but in some cases through puncture / crash damage) they burn extremely rapidly and very violently for their size.

The damage in the photographs of the 787 is not on the scale i was expecting.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#184

Post by notahacker » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:28 AM UTC

wololo wrote: post #95

robomartin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very interested in what they are saying if --and only if-- they had access to Boeing and FAA design and test data. You have to remember that the FAA had to approve these subsystems as well. I don't have any first-hand experience on just how detailed (or not) this certification process might be. Once again, how could anyone say anything at all without looking at data. To make a really dumb analogy, it's like cl…

And the FAA seems pretty conservative? "Finally, the FAA changes so slowly that if this were even all possible, the adoption and certification would all take at least 50 years." --Eric Schmidt, http://longbets.org/4/

I'm not sure that erring on the side of caution is a bad thing when it comes to commercial jets, especially when "erring on the side of caution" means requiring an airline carrying large numbers of paying passengers needing to pay two qualified pilots to sit in a cockpit just in case things go wrong. I suspect most people underestimate just how many different separate electronic systems, usually developed and manufactured by independent specialists, are involved in controlling an aircraft (not to mention the new ones that would need to be developed for when things go wrong: there's a big difference between an autopilot landing an an instrument landing system and a pilot gliding his plane to a perfect stop on the Hudson River.)

Also worth pointing out that the CEO of Google (yes...I know his company tests driverless cars) isn't really more of an expert on the FAA certification process than the average person here. I think he's on the right side of the bet, but I'd also note that the avionics which assist the pilot in controlling the plane and monitoring what's going on have changed more in the last 50 years than any other aspect of commercial aircraft.

Commercial considerations are a bigger factor than certification in new aircraft programme inertia: airlines' economies of scale hugely favour existing models, and expensive radical innovation in aircraft programmes can often be improved upon at lower research cost by rivals.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#185

Post by smackay » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:37 AM UTC

Confusion wrote: post #169

robomartin wrote: post #68

While I can't dispute anything that is being said I think it is unfortunate that this is playing out the way it is. I can't dispute it because there's virtually no reliable publicly-available information on the design of this battery pack. I think it is unbecoming of an engineer or scientist, particularly of prominence, to voice such opinions without access to design data from the source. Before I could even begin to…

Boeing batteries are overheating. Tesla batteries are not overheating. There are sufficiently similar requirements on their performance and safety that any layman can conclude there is something wrong with Boeings design. The problem here is that the engineers at Boeing are not clowns. The problem here is that you think that is what is being alleged. It isn't: an enormous and old company like Boeing can have an entre…

It was an engineer, Roger Boisjoly, who repeatedly warned about the safety of the o-rings, particularly in low temperatures. The decision to launch the shuttle came from management not the engineers.

http://www.space.com/14522-roger-boisjoly-shuttle-challenger...

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#186

Post by willvarfar » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:41 AM UTC

simonh wrote: post #181

willvarfar wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I for one think it likely that Musk talks with a good grasp of the facts. But I will say on the PR angle, he does compete directly with the entrenched manufacturers in the space arena and all discredit and doubt cast would serve him well.

Youre focusing on what Elon Musk has to gain, which is very, very little. This is actual all about what he stands to lose. Tesla's business is predicated on the public accepting that cars packed with Li batteries are safe. If the public loses faith is Li batter mass power storage, Tesla is toast. That doesn't mean Elon is either right or wrong, but it's sufficient to explain why he feels a pressing need to be involve…

Oh so obvious in hindsight! +1

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#187

Post by praxeologist » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 10:54 AM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #173

robomartin wrote: post #68

While I can't dispute anything that is being said I think it is unfortunate that this is playing out the way it is. I can't dispute it because there's virtually no reliable publicly-available information on the design of this battery pack. I think it is unbecoming of an engineer or scientist, particularly of prominence, to voice such opinions without access to design data from the source. Before I could even begin to…

I'm going to disregard the bits about wings and the general engineering attitude at Boeing. It is simply not relevant. Musk has one very important justification to make the statement he did: that battery caught fire. That alone is proof positive that he is right. If the charger should fail, is it then permissible that the batteries catch fire? If not then they are fundamentally unsafe. For that reason alone this is a…

I totally agree with this and I can tell you that I have been in the same position as Musk in an analogous situation. From what my competitor was saying about their own product it was several red flags. There is no way such and such can be true unless you are doing X and Y wrong.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#188

Post by AnthonBerg » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 11:04 AM UTC

daemin wrote: post #109

djloche wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

D) take EM's offer and source the batteries / solution to a joint boeing-spacex/tesla project and proudly proclaim that they're going to the world's experts on batteries, the same people that NASA trusts - SpaceX. This provides positive press for both companies and (provided they fix the problem) resolves any long term problems that might completely destroy their business (like having multiple planes catch fire or bl…

They can't do that since Boeing are in a joint venture as direct competition to SpaceX, as stated in the article.

There may be the perception that they "can't" - and it is realistic to state this - but they actually can.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#189

Post by epo » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 11:22 AM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #179

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blah blah, appeal to authority... It's too complicated for you... etc etc. More appeals to authority, and a plea to patiently wait for word from up on high that they've figured out at last, whatever it was that they missed the first time. Some of what you said may be true, but it's also a typical thing one might say after any engineering (potential) disaster. I'm pleased that some persons with appropriate knowledge h…

I find it amusing that you are one-sidedly complaining about appeals to authority when so many comments, on both sides, in this thread boil down to "my preferred expert is better than your preferred expert".

Upvoted, to me Musk is being a publicity whore and scoring cheap hits over Boeing. I.e. his comments do not help us in advancing our understanding so can only be intended to publicise his own company's products.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#190

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 11:24 AM UTC

zb wrote: post #180

InclinedPlane wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respect? What respect is due to a design that puts people's lives in danger? Yes, respect the engineers, and make sure to criticize the design and not the engineer, but please criticize the ever loving fuck out of the design. This isn't about corporate pride here. This is about lives. My life. Your life. Your family's lives. Everyone who flies in a plane is potentially endangered by faulty aircraft designs. So please…

What respect is due to a design that puts people's lives in danger? No lives are in danger, because the planes are grounded. They will not fly again until the cause of the present issue is found and resolved. It doesn't seem entirely unreasonable to me that that puts Musk's comments in a slightly different light for some people. Note that if Musk were a (Chartered) Professional Engineer (which afaik he is not) he mig…

No lives are in danger (because the planes are grounded) but lives were in danger.

How about: If he would not speak up he would be remiss. Imagine the situation where an engineer at Boeing could be ignored but where someone of Musks standing would could not be ignored. If Musk has this knowledge and does not speak up that would be far worse than if he does.

After all, either he is wrong (which Boeing can prove, in which case Musk gets to eat some crow) or he is right (in which case his words force Boeing into more accountability, which in the case of air travel with multi-hundred-ton planes is a good thing all around).

This does not qualify as a formal review of one engineers work by another. This is simply commentary by one of the companies that has an extreme amount of knowledge about use of batteries in vehicular applications commenting on the implementation details of the structural arrangement chosen by another company for a similar (but of course still different in many way, but more critical rather than less) application. As such it is something that Boeing should - and probably does - take serious.

I highly doubt that they would take input like this and discard it either because the 'source' does not have his chartered engineers paper (the guy puts rockets into space, which I think might offset some paperwork) and makes his comments in a forum where he can't be easily ignored (which may very well be the whole point).