3 ms·
1+) The 787 was three BHAGs[1] in terms of... a) Fuel economy: drove the primarily composite structure (causing much angst during development), drove using the
by gvb 14y ago
1+) The 787 was three BHAGs[1] in terms of...
a) Fuel economy: drove the primarily composite structure (causing much angst during development), drove using the lighter weight lithium batteries which is the current issue, etc. A 20% fuel improvement is incredibly ambitious goal (I say is because last I heard they were still falling short, although still remarkable at ~15%(?)).
b) Cost (sharing): drove the huge number of outside contractors, all or most of whom invested a substantial amount of their own money in the pieces parts that they designed and built for the 787.
c) Schedule. Total miss. The schedule was predicated on no major problems... in hindsight the (a) and (b) BHAGs guaranteed the schedule miss.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Hairy_Audacious_Goal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Hairy_Audacious_Goal
- yread 14y agoANA said in a statement that their 787s are 21% more fuel efficient per seat than a 767