Announcement

Collapse

The GaijinPot Forum Is Closed

Please join us on our new Facebook Group.
See more
See less

Top

Collapse

Booing Boeing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Damn, I know this shouldn't surprise me, but watching the TV news coverage of the Boeing problems and how it's the batteries at fault, I'm must amazed at how they've managed thus far to not mention that the battery manufacturer is GS Yuasa Corporation, a Japanese company (whose shares have slid on the Nikkei).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
      Damn, I know this shouldn't surprise me, but watching the TV news coverage of the Boeing problems and how it's the batteries at fault, I'm must amazed at how they've managed thus far to not mention that the battery manufacturer is GS Yuasa Corporation, a Japanese company (whose shares have slid on the Nikkei).
      Yes. Of course, it doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the batteries. They could be easily be perfectly within their specifications but a design flaw might be overstressing them. In that case Yuasa shares might well be a good buy - Boeing not so good.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
        Yes. Of course, it doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the batteries. They could be easily be perfectly within their specifications but a design flaw might be overstressing them. In that case Yuasa shares might well be a good buy - Boeing not so good.
        Sure. Ultimately, Boeing is responsible for the safety of parts supplied by outside suppliers. But absolutely no mention of Yuasa when discussing the batteries on TV (I was just watching a show now). This could be a major blow to a Japanese company, yet no need to mention this as a detail. Seems like the J-media is trying to keep this from the general public until they absolutely can't ignore it anymore. Like you said, maybe the fault is entirely Boeing's--we'll see. However, my prediction: there is a design flaw in the batteries and this will turn into some degree of finger pointing between Boeing and Yuasa regarding fault. And, of course, the J-media will rally around Yuasa.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
          Sure. Ultimately, Boeing is responsible for the safety of parts supplied by outside suppliers. But absolutely no mention of Yuasa when discussing the batteries on TV (I was just watching a show now). This could be a major blow to a Japanese company, yet no need to mention this as a detail. Seems like the J-media is trying to keep this from the general public until they absolutely can't ignore it anymore. Like you said, maybe the fault is entirely Boeing's--we'll see. However, my prediction: there is a design flaw in the batteries and this will turn into some degree of finger pointing between Boeing and Yuasa regarding fault. And, of course, the J-media will rally around Yuasa.
          Yep. I'm just wondering how to make a little for myself out of it . If Yuasa's batteries are found to be entirely within specifications then buying their shares now will be an earner. Boeing is more difficult to judge. Even if they are not at fault, it will still damage the company but not as much as if it is a design fault symptomatic of a product rushed into mass production too quickly. If they have to do a recall that will really hurt as well as stoking doubts about what else may be lurking. Let the price really fall and then buy on the (pretty good) bet that it is in fact just teething troubles and it is still a very very good plane that will find a huge market.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Brown Cow View Post
            Yep. I'm just wondering how to make a little for myself out of it . If Yuasa's batteries are found to be entirely within specifications then buying their shares now will be an earner. Boeing is more difficult to judge. Even if they are not at fault, it will still damage the company but not as much as if it is a design fault symptomatic of a product rushed into mass production too quickly. If they have to do a recall that will really hurt as well as stoking doubts about what else may be lurking. Let the price really fall and then buy on the (pretty good) bet that it is in fact just teething troubles and it is still a very very good plane that will find a huge market.
            Haha, I was thinking the same thing. Both companies are strong and will quickly recover barring any major event.

            How low can they go?

            http://stocks.finance.yahoo.co.jp/st...de=6674.T&d=1m

            http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:BA


            Yuasa seems affordable.




            Correction: shares have slid on the Tokyo Stock Exchange--Nikkei is an index (like the Dow).

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
              Haha, I was thinking the same thing. Both companies are strong and will quickly recover barring any major event.

              How low can they go?

              http://stocks.finance.yahoo.co.jp/st...de=6674.T&d=1m

              http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:BA


              Yuasa seems affordable.




              Correction: shares have slid on the Tokyo Stock Exchange--Nikkei is an index (like the Dow).
              Good points made above.
              Kudos to Japan Today for a fine article today that pointed out that Japanese firms make about 1/3 of these aircrafts.
              But, I wonder if these parts are really "Made in Japan" as companies here tend to make things abroad in their subsidaries from time to time.

              Check out the JT story though:

              http://www.japantoday.com/category/b...nese-suppliers

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
                Haha, I was thinking the same thing. Both companies are strong and will quickly recover barring any major event.
                How low can they go?
                http://stocks.finance.yahoo.co.jp/st...de=6674.T&d=1m
                http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:BA
                Yuasa seems affordable.
                Correction: shares have slid on the Tokyo Stock Exchange--Nikkei is an index (like the Dow).
                There was an interesting quote in a Japan Today story:

                “It is impossible to predict at this point how long it will take, in days or weeks, because we must study the system and GS Yuasa is not the only player involved,” a company spokeswoman told AFP.

                So, does anyone know if GS Yuasa outsources their manufacturing to other countries?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Since we are talking battery – it seems that Boeing chose a battery solution (mix of chemicals) that is unstable – but which provides a higher output/weight ratio than a more stable mix. Car manufacturers moved from the unstable mix after fires….

                  Read it here…

                  http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/17/tech...Top+Stories%29

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by TJrandom View Post
                    Since we are talking battery – it seems that Boeing chose a battery solution (mix of chemicals) that is unstable – but which provides a higher output/weight ratio than a more stable mix. Car manufacturers moved from the unstable mix after fires….

                    Read it here…

                    http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/17/tech...Top+Stories%29

                    Sounds like they chose the wrong company to supply them. But Yuasa will blame the wiring--and they might be correct.

                    Finally, they've mentioned the battery maker as the Japanese company Yuasa on TV. But boy are they bending over backwards to explain how there are other variables involved (which is true). I wonder if these TV programs are extremely paranoid about getting sued by companies for possibly portraying a product in a bad light.
                    Last edited by Hijinx; 2013-01-18, 09:21 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by TJrandom View Post
                      Since we are talking battery – it seems that Boeing chose a battery solution (mix of chemicals) that is unstable – but which provides a higher output/weight ratio than a more stable mix. Car manufacturers moved from the unstable mix after fires….

                      Read it here…

                      http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/17/tech...Top+Stories%29
                      One would think that a megagiant company like Boeing would know all about such glitches...or am I being naive?
                      Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
                      Sounds like they chose the wrong company to supply them. But Yuasa will blame the wiring--and they might be correct.

                      Finally, they've mentioned the battery maker as the Japanese company Yuasa on TV. But boy are they bending over backwards to explain how there are other variables involved (which is true). I wonder if these TV programs are extremely paranoid about getting sued by companies for possibly portraying a product in a bad light.
                      Sadly, I think the tv sponser hold much more power over the content of news and such.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        God is punishing ANA and JAL for being so far up the Yanks' arses they wouldn't know what an Airbus was if it bit them on the 'nads.

                        Fly Peach.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by pjb View Post
                          God is punishing ANA and JAL for being so far up the Yanks' arses they wouldn't know what an Airbus was if it bit them on the 'nads.

                          Fly Peach.
                          Japanese don't believe in god

                          I wouldn't mind taking Momoiro Clover for a ride!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Old Style View Post
                            Japanese don't believe in god ...
                            Most of the ones that I know do believe in god - well, gods - of the rocks, of the spring, of the ocean, of the house, of the ... well, you name it - there will be a god for it. I suspect that the god that is punishing Boeing, ANA and JAL - is the god of batteries, but it could be the god of airplanes, or the god of economies, or, or, or...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              All aircraft have issues when realeased at first. It is normal. There are always problems that were not expected. When I did training, the company I trained with got a bunch of jabiru aircraft. The very first one I flew got a cylinder head crack as I was going in for a landing, needless to say that an aircraft with one engine drops like a brick when the engine stops. That same week 3 others experienced major problems. Rather than a fuel leak which you can detect, they suffered fuel starvation due to vapor lock in the fuel lines when the air temp is close to about 40. Those were big issues when they were released and much bigger issues than what people are so worried about with the boeings. But the jabs are sorted now it appears. I will never touch one personally, but many swear by them. I do prefer airbus over boeing, however, it is not like the A380 had such a smooth sail to start off with.

                              If the aircraft is in service and approved by the dept. of aviation, it is deemed to have satisfied safety requirements. Don't stress too much about those things. They happen all the time even with older models that are trusted. It is just that it won't create such a hype. The 787 is new, it is delayed, it is costing many people tons of money and the media just feeds on that don't they.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by ericson View Post
                                All aircraft have issues when realeased at first. It is normal. There are always problems that were not expected. When I did training, the company I trained with got a bunch of jabiru aircraft. The very first one I flew got a cylinder head crack as I was going in for a landing, needless to say that an aircraft with one engine drops like a brick when the engine stops. That same week 3 others experienced major problems. Rather than a fuel leak which you can detect, they suffered fuel starvation due to vapor lock in the fuel lines when the air temp is close to about 40. Those were big issues when they were released and much bigger issues than what people are so worried about with the boeings. But the jabs are sorted now it appears. I will never touch one personally, but many swear by them. I do prefer airbus over boeing, however, it is not like the A380 had such a smooth sail to start off with.

                                If the aircraft is in service and approved by the dept. of aviation, it is deemed to have satisfied safety requirements. Don't stress too much about those things. They happen all the time even with older models that are trusted. It is just that it won't create such a hype. The 787 is new, it is delayed, it is costing many people tons of money and the media just feeds on that don't they.
                                Most people are aware that new technology and such may have bugs and/or flaws.
                                But, most people tend to worry a whole lot more when they're way up in the air and things go "snap, crackle and pop"!!
                                Actually, by the time people hear "snap, crackle..." the next step would be "poop"!

                                By the way, if you really do fly, you're waaaaay cool.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X