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

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#211

Post by msandford » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 1:38 PM UTC

smackay wrote: post #185

Confusion wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Thus decisively proving the parent's point. Boeing might have the most talented engineers in the world, but if management ignores them then all their degrees and seriousness doesn't mean jack.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#212

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 1:39 PM UTC

smackay wrote: post #185

Confusion wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Feynman was on the accident investigation committee, and was critical to exposing crucial facts and making sure they made it into the report. Feynman even wrote an additional report to add to the committee's work. http://www.ralentz.com/old/space/feynman-report.html

Bolsjoy's ordeal is now in the curriculum of many engineering ethics courses.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#213

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 1:41 PM UTC

yread wrote: post #155

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 think that talking about the battery pack being inherently unsafe is completely off-topic here. GS Yuasa manufactures batteries for 60 satellites and they haven't had a single failure there http://www.gsyuasa-lp.com/content/gs-yuasa-lithium-ion-batte... In aviation people usually very thoroughly figure out what went wrong and why and only then suggest fixes. And the fixes are designed by the people who have access…

GS Yuasa manufactures batteries for 60 satellites and they haven't had a single failure there

I wouldn't expect fire to be a common failure mode in outer space.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#214

Post by antiterra » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:04 PM UTC

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #200

ecaron wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When Ralph Nader does this sort of thing he is lauded, I don't think Musk's criticisms should be viewed in any different light. Just as a point of fact, Ralph Nader was hardly universally lauded when he entered the arena of public critiques: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed#Criticisms

Translation: the auto industry tried to attack Nader's reputation after he embarrassed them with his devastating report on the Corvair.

If you count an automotive journalist whose face was significantly damaged in a rollover accident[1] "the auto industry," sure. And maybe you do, his magazine ran ads from auto companies, but it's a pretty cold dismissal on your part. Possibly an incorrect one as well-- considering that he refused to back down from statements that angered various automotive corporations at the cost of ad revenue.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_E._Davis

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#215

Post by madaxe » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:22 PM 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…

Bingo - the engineers may have said one thing, and the project manager/board of arbitrary decisions may have said "my cousin makes batteries" or "fewer cells will mean easier part replacement".

Engineering is only part of making an engineered product.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#216

Post by notahacker » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:23 PM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #193

zb wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It doesn't appear to be in this linked article, but Musk has indicated that he is already in contact with Boeing's lead engineer in this area. I think even by the strictest interpretation of official engineering ethics Musk is doing everything right so far.

We don't know how much access he's had to relevant design documents: it's clear he has had some contact with Boeing (but not how much) and it's clear he has pretty substantial domain knowledge, but I don't think anyone here is in a position to assess whether he genuinely does have enough information at his disposal to have correctly diagnosed the problem.

Launching the whole debate with a Twitter comment announcing he could fix it wasn't smart, irrespective of ethics, because he's inevitably going to be accused of a publicity stunt there. Giving a more detailed explanation of where he thinks the problem might lie to the industry press after discussions with Boeing is rather different, and I don't see any ethical obligation for him not to do that.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#217

Post by RyanMcGreal » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:28 PM UTC

antiterra wrote: post #214

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translation: the auto industry tried to attack Nader's reputation after he embarrassed them with his devastating report on the Corvair.

If you count an automotive journalist whose face was significantly damaged in a rollover accident[1] "the auto industry," sure. And maybe you do, his magazine ran ads from auto companies, but it's a pretty cold dismissal on your part. Possibly an incorrect one as well-- considering that he refused to back down from statements that angered various automotive corporations at the cost of ad revenue. [1] http://en.wikipe…

The only reference to this that I can find is an article from just a few years ago in which Davis argues that Nader's focus on the Corvair had the effect of delaying the auto industry shift to more aerodynamic cars with front-wheel drives.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#218

Post by dade_ » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:35 PM UTC

I think Elon is justified for taking a public stance to protect his own interests. As his companies develop products with the same battery technology, it is likely that the hazards of the Boeing battery design could become associated to the entire battery technology. This would be disastrous for his organizations. I consider this a pre-emptive defensive move against technically ignorant public and media. Boeing has a strong reputation and will surely weather this mess just fine by identifying corrective action and doing the right thing.

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#219

Post by robomartin » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:50 PM UTC

icelancer wrote: post #133

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…

>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. This kind of walled garden horseshit is what ensures no transparency in government contracts.

Just wowndering. Are you the kind of person who would consider convicting someone without looking at the evidence?

Re: Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

#220

Post by notahacker » Wed, Jan 30, 2013, 2:53 PM UTC

josefresco wrote: post #195

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #27

This a month and a half after Boeing/Lockheed was derisive about Musk publicly: http://go.bloomberg.com/political-capital/2012-12-18/musk-vs...

Wow, a $70 billion market dominated by essentially only two major players. Sounds like a market ripe for disruption.

If you have the ability to put together a team that can raise a few hundred million in venture capital to go after a few big government contracts, then maybe. There's a reason why some markets are dominated by essentially two major players.

Not sure where the $70 billion valuation comes from either, but if you add together the market capitalization of Boeing, Lockheed Martin and SpaceX you're still under $100 billion. Boeing and Lockheed Martin also make other stuff.