The Seattle Times has a piece on Boeing’s proposed solution to the 787 Dreamliner battery problems… a containment box. Sounds like the box will be meant to isolate the battery cells both physically and thermally and have gas venting so that in the event of a faulty battery gases are vented and oxygen doesn’t fuel a fire. I’d love to see more details on the fix. I think Boeing is being overly optimistic about gaining FAA approval… it won’t be quick.
Monthly Archives: February 2013
Paine Field Blog
This is a pretty cool blog written by Matt Cawby, an aviation reporter with a great vantage of Boeing Flight Line at Paine Field. Lots of cool photos of Boeing manufacturing/delivery activity. Check it out.
Dreamliner Parking Problems
The New York Times has a good read on the parking problems Boeing is experiencing with the Dreamliner. Boeing hasn’t stopped production of the 787 though they are grounded until the battery issues is resolved. At about one 787 per week these large aircraft are taking up space quickly. Yikes!
Airbus Nixes Lithium Ion
Airbus has decided to revert to tried-and-true nickel-cadmium batteries in their new A350 aircraft (currently in ground testing).
The advantage of lithium based batteries (Li-ion, Li-Po, etc.) is how much smaller and lighter you can make them for a given capacity. Smaller and lighter is great for an aircraft. If Boeing can make lithium-ion batteries work then it’ll be a huge advantage for them.
On the other hand, lithium based batteries also tend to be unstable at times. I’ve had a lithium battery swell/deform and go bad on a laptop. I’m also into RC cars and there are all sorts of horror stories with people using Li-Po batteries.
I wonder if it wouldn’t be better/quicker for Boeing to swap in a known/approved nickel-cadmium system to get the Dreamliner back in the skies. They could work out the kinks in the lithium ion system and retrofit later on. If they don’t get these planes back in the sky soon the losses are going to add up fast.
NYC Taxi Issues
Leave a reply
So many problems in this article about trying to update the taxi system in New York City.
- Livery cabs in NYC are not allowed to pick up street hail passengers. A measure to changes this outside Manhattan is bend held up in court.
- A proposed e-hail system that would allow people to use their smartphone to hail a cab is being held up in court.
- Implementing a new, more fuel efficient taxi model in NYC is also being held up in court.
- NYC is trying to accept a contract from Nissan for this more fuel efficient taxi that will give them sole source power for new cabs in NYC.
To put it simply, a bunch of competing special interests are tying up and preventing improvements to the NYC taxi system. This is all possible because of a quagmire of administrative rules and laws that NYC has enacted to regulate the taxi industry. What a mess.
I’ve never understood why the yellow taxis are predominantly Ford Crown Victorias. They are gas guzzlers. Why aren’t some of the companies using Honda Civics, Toyota Corollas, Chevy Malibus, of even smaller cars?
Why is it illegal for one group of cabs to pick up street hail passengers and illegal for another group of cabs to accept pre-arranged pickup?
What NYC seems to have is a bunch of different taxi services that have a monopoly on their respective service. When there is a desire to add value or improvement for the customers it gets mired in regulatory court battles as these monopolies try to protect their turf.
Seems like the whole business could be greatly simplified. Create a simple system of standards for the cabs and allow operators to pick the cars they want to match those standards. Let companies accept passengers in whatever form… street hail, pre arranged over the phone, regularly scheduled, smartphone app, etc. I’m sure there is a need for more regulation and rules than I’m aware… but from the article above I’m also sure there is currently far too many regulations and rules. Consumers, as well as the industry, seem to be suffering for it.
Point and Counterpoint
Tesla provides data from the in-car log of the East Coast road trip review done by the New York Times. Raises a lot of questions about the original story.
John Broder with the New York Times responds.
Hmmm…
Tesla Road Trip Disputed
Tesla is disputing the account of the New York Times’ Tesla Model S roadtrip. Tesla’s CEO Elon Musk cites the vehicles own logs and states that the Times did not follow the guidance given by Tesla.
The Times is sticking to their guns and even published an infographic with a timeline account of the trip including mileage.
For what it’s worth, I don’t really care what advice or guidance was given by Tesla. The driver carried out a fairly typical drive on the East Coast including some city driving in Manhattan. I want to see how the car handles typical use, not a prescribed highway-only proof-of-concept trip. That said, what was the author thinking by NOT plugging in the car overnight?! I’m sure he plugged in his cell phone overnight.
Tesla Road Trip
John Broder with the New York Times took the Tesla Model S for a road trip along the East Coast. It was a bit of a rocky trip.
This is a technology that is just emerging and going through a lot of development. It isn’t going to just magically replace combustion based automotive transportation. It is going to require rethinking and possibly re-engineering how we travel by car. To a degree, we have to take some of these initial growing pains in stride.
The flipside is that I expect more from a car that starts at $61,000. If this was a car priced to sell to the masses I’d be a bit more lenient.
Power storage (ie. batteries) is the limiting technology here. Until there is a significant breakthrough in battery technology it is going to be hard to replace the energy density of fossil fuels.
World’s Largest Airline
American Airlines and US Airways are merging.
787 Test Flights
A little more info on the 787 test flights being carried out.