GF,
I have to wonder if the stupid move to Chicago hasn't had its effects. Senior management, however unoriented to engineering realities they are, being 2,000 miles away cannot have helped.
Funny you should bring this up. When he was at GE Aircraft Engines, he moved his office to the far end of the complex, as far away from the action as one could get,, but close to the sales marketing folks. I don't think many of the worker bees ever saw him walk the factory floor or visit the Engineering folks, reclusive is a good word description. At Boeing, video conferencing from Chicago doesn't hack it.
BTW I read this in a financial magazine (bolding is mine),
Boeing boosts 2011 pay 34 percent to $18.4 million for CEO Jim McNerney
Boeing CEO Jim McNerney’s compensation jumped 34 percent last year as the board of the big airplane maker rewarded him for delivering the new 787 and winning a huge Air Force order for refueling tankers.
Boeing revenue rose 6.9 percent last year, to $68.74 billion
Nothing like getting rewarded for delivering 787 aircraft 3 years late to your airline customers.
PEI_3721,
With hindsight, these events suggest a failure of risk management.
It isn't hindsight at all, it's like the risk management wasn't in the deck of cards, starting with the fuselage mating and fastener problems leading to the three year delay in delivery.
t.g.r.,
Yes, it looks like they are redesigning the battery itelf. And it sounds to me that the redesign targets mostly the goal to prevent fire/smoke at all costs
Probably is the only thing they can do in the short run if the FAA approves. I don't know why they don't stick the thing in a sturdy sealed, heat resistant box filled with argon or nitrogen, e.g., no fire and no smoke without oxygen.