If you keep in mind that the US doesn't really produce much
basic stuff ( which tends to be pollution intensive )
and China is riding the tiger of industrial growth they
are actually trying very hard.
Successfull at that.
.. of peeling back all the layers of subcontractors. Just like an onion. Tears and all.
Well put. I like that wording.
Thales is the system integrator
GS-Yuasa in their US subdivison makes the cells and the battery enclosure
supervisory circuits are from Canto Japan
the charger is from Securaplane USA
the APU starter is from Securaplane USA
I have doupts that Thales was the primary decider of components here.
your turn.
A case of hurt Jingoism?
Yes the batterie ( bus ) voltage is monitored and stored in the FDR.
The per cell data is stored either on the pcb in the battery enclosure
or the charger.
Going by the notice that the values are unexpectedly
not available my guess is in the battery and those pcbs are toast.
Dumb design. The enclosure looks positively american.
I've never seen something so superficially designed from japanese engineers.
yes!.
capability of fixing problems.
Though I would rate the ability to nix design problems before they endanger customers significantly higher.
Every oaf can do colorfull leaflets and produce problems while offshoring all responsibility.
What I'm curious about is whether Boeing will get them all sorted out quickly enough...in which case they will be superbly positioned to compete, having mastered the many challenges around making the 787 what it is.
You will find that Murphy has a big bucket of bugs to keep dishing out from for the Dreamliner and Boeing.
IMHO This is a product jinxed by management hubris.
I hope they get it all fixed in time, personally. The 787 is a hell of a plane. Check it out here: http://www.newairplane.com/787/
PR drivel, the only vector of exellence for Boeing these days.
too many options ( for politicks ).
Who can count beyond three
Machiavelli, paraphrased:
"soldiers can always bring you rare earth"
Political interest is also about not having to restart highly toxic rare earth mining at home with all the consequences that it brings.
But China should bear the consequences without compensation or limitation?
The US has ofloaded/ofshored significant elements of it's Carbon Footprint to China already.
The US has sufficient resources.
see:
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/rare_earths/mcs-2012-raree.pdf
Political interest actually is about getting _cheap_ access to china's resources.
Think about how nice the world would be if
the "right" million US citizens would be incarcerated ( instead of a bunch of unfortunate blacks and latinos ) ?
Always interesting to see that Americans seem to think that there is no law except US law in any country
they visit as guests.
"According to Madeline Albright, the sanctions, absolutely necessary to keep Saddam from starting ANOTHER war in the middle east, was killing 50,000 Iraqi kids per year. "
Poppycock.
Saddams first war against Iran was done with help and towards interests of the US.
For the Kuweit affair he first got approval from the US.
Madelaine Albright born as Marie Jana Korbelová was on her very own and personal Jihad.
Especially for US citizens it is naive to believe in the exhalations of their politicians.
Problem with Saddam for the US was that he was too successfull in establishing a stable state
leading its region in education, gender equality and health care that could potentially be a
threat to Israel. So it was back to the stoneage by any means.
and has been used heavily since.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APOPO
known original work:
http://www.apopo.org/cms.php?cmsid=16&lang=en
So it uses diesel type combustion to achieve diesel type efficiency ( a bit less actually ).
( And requires hefty preheating to get past the high octane rating of petrol )
Whats new?
Well the dreamliner is supposed to replace the 767 and compete against the A330
and the nook upwards.
It was sold to customers as being 20% more fuel efficient than a 767 and thus slightly
besting the basic A330 specs from around 2002.
But the current implementation is about 10% overweight ( seemingly for the forseeable future )
moving it into A330 ballpark figures ( Similar empty weight ). Improved engines with better SFC are
available for the A330 as well. One reason the A330 has sold quite well in the last 2-3 years
while dreamliner sales have tanked shortly after the initial rollout 2.5 years ago
( i.e. after it was obvious that the dreamliner was a potemkin liner )
Quite a lot of customers currently seem to stay the ride more for cashing in on penalties
than actually receiving any planes later on ( The current backlog will not be satisfied before
2020/2022)
The A350XWB on the other hand is not a direct competitor to the dreamliner.
It fits above the 787 and below/into the 777 space. Which is rather typical.
Neither Boeing nor Airbus stage new types spec by spec against a competitors
distinct type but try to hit the weak spots in between with the initialy
produced version.
The less time planning, the more time programming.
