Efficiency should not be the objective of its own

The fire on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner at London Heathrow Airport reignited concerns on the airworthiness of the new plane with lengthened records of troubles, and contrary to its nickname, it is starting to look more like a nightmare.

Dreamliner features heaps of innovative state of art technologies originally intended for a more futuristic airplane to fly just barely under Mach 1 called the Sonic Cruiser. I think those technologies were too much for the not-so-exiting purpose, fuel-efficiency.

Every housewife knows well that any flashy new features claiming that they will save time and money in household should not be taken as their face values. They often end up higher costs, longer efforts and lower utilisations than the time-tested ordinary ways with wise, sure and simple inventions. Dreamliner may have fallen the same pitfall.

Also, there is a problem about the motivation of engineers. If engineers are tasked with solving problems with newly introduced technologies, which objective is more motivating, to create the fastest commercial jetliner, or to create the most economical jetliner? The answer would be evident.

Of course, to create something very economical is a noble purpose. However, it is not enough to motivate a person just because the work supposed to do is a good thing. Every school teacher must admit it. Also, when you are told to do make a plane or an automotive more economical, do you suppose you would be lavishly paid for it?

Efficiency should not be the objective of its own. As a human nature, it just does not work. In this sense, it is not efficient at all. It should always be linked to something much more motivational for the people to do the job.