Grounding of the 787 raises the questions about the aircraft maker's sourcing strategy
Image: Getty Images
Boeing invested an estimated $25 billion in developing the 787—introducing radical changes in materials and a component-sourcing strategy that was to bring efficiencies for the aircraft-maker and airlines. The grounding of the aircraft raises doubts about these decisions.
1. Critical Decision 1: Lithium-ion
The fact that lithium batteries can overheat and ignite if improperly charged or discharged, is well known. Yet, the batteries are lighter, more efficient than other options like nickel-cadmium (Ni-cad) or lead acid. They allowed the 787’s control systems to be powered by electric motors, compared to less efficient hydraulic systems.
A. Had it been tried before?
In 2011, the US aviation regulator, FAA (Federal Airworthiness Authority) forced business jet maker Cessna to replace Li-ion batteries on its new model CJ4. It was replaced by Ni-cad. However, Cessna plans to qualify Li-ion batteries for use in its new aircraft still being developed.
B. Component maker Japanese heavy engineering companies including Mitsubishi and Kawasaki have a huge stake—they’ve put up massive foundries to manufacture parts for the 787, like the wing and the fuselage. The project is likely to add significantly to Japan’s own ambitions as a large jet manufacturer. Japanese carriers JAL and ANA are big 787 customers.
(This story appears in the 22 February, 2013 issue of Forbes India. To visit our Archives, click here.)