Some smart cookie investigative reporter should look into whether Boeing ever did a full flight test regime with the 787. It's been well documented in the media for years about the ongoing problems during the development of the 787 leading to delays, cancelled orders and huge financial impact. Hypothesis: did Boeing take major short cuts to 'standard' quality testing? Additionally, the behaviour and requirements of the batteries are well known. Has Boeing under-specified the plane in this context? Finally, if yes to these questions, what other compromises to function and safety have been made in order to cut costs? The lithium battery is unlikely to be the problem here; it's EVERYTHING else that we should be worried about ... Including problems that have not yet surfaced. I'd suggest its early days for Boeing's nightmare-liner.
Interesting to read the comments; sounds like a classic case of cutting quality corners to meet time and cost targets. I get frustrated when I discover this in my factory ... but I'm not developing or manufacturing tin cans that carry hundreds of human lives from point A to point B! Call me naive but I'd put quality (safety) pretty high on the priority list!!!!!
Furthermore ... watch the cost of a seat escalate if airlines are expected to prioritise passenger desire for a nice comfy seat in the situation of compromised safety I.e. the designated plane being unfit to fly. You guys of this opinion have your heads up the 'proverbial' if you think you're entitled to that degree of choice for free.
A draw card?! You ARE kidding. I avoid these two time bombs as much as possible. Actually, you wouldn't get me on a 787!!!!! Nobody could be surprised that that thing was grounded ... Eventually. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. I'm a mere frequent long haul flier who has read the newspaper during the development of these two and I know better than to trust them to not terminate mid-air one day. It is only a matter of time.