Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FAA Grounds 787 Part 2  
User currently offlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4401 posts, RR: 6
Posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28610 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

The last thread is over 260 replies, so please continue the discussion here.

Previous thread: FAA Grounds 787 (by brons2 Jan 16 2013 in Civil Aviation)


Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
203 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3550 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

posted this just before cut off
Yuasa makes these batteries for many land surface operations, trains, trucks, etc. and seem to have no problems. Possibly could the problem be related to the pressure differentials when flying... ie water boils at a lower temperature at elevation, so could the organic fluid in these batteries "boil" at altitude and leave the anodes/cathodes bare and in contact?


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28581 times:

Let me attempt to recap and correct me if I am wrong:

The 787 is grounded worldwide indefinitely due to battery issues which brought ANA ship 804 in TAK and lit JL ship 829 on fire in BOS. Anyone know if the MOT has probed Yuasa yet? There was some word going around my circles about it.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinebellancacf From United States of America, joined May 2011, 152 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28528 times:

Repeating myself, here, but the question got lost in the flood.

Is there continuous, realtime monitoring of the temperatures in the Li-ion batteries?

Are these batteries designed like bricks, that is, one big block (which is a terrible shape to try to dissipate heat out of) or are they designed with intermal channels for coolant circulation?

And, um, if not, why not?

Thanks.


User currently offlinedcann40 From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28474 times:

LOT issued a statement earlier this morning re EASA and the 787. See 4th paragraph.

LOT Polish Airlines Voluntarily Grounds Dreamliner Flights

Quote:
CHICAGO—Following a move by the Federal Aviation Administration, which ordered an immediate halt to Boeing Dreamliner flights by U.S. airlines, LOT Polish Airlines announced it was cancelling its inaugural Dreamliner flight from Chicago’s O’Hare Airport to Warsaw on Wednesday. LOT is the only European airline operating the new high-tech aircraft....



User currently offlinecapri From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 449 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 28504 times:

Quoting bellancacf (Reply 3):

here is one battery of 787

http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/01/n...t-boeing-787-battery/#.UPg9Tydnj0c


User currently offlineBlueShamu330s From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 2932 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28332 times:

The 787 "worldwide grounding for safety issues" was the 2nd story on the BBC's main 6pm news.

Must make very unpleasant viewing, not only for Boeing, but British Airways and Thomson also, especially when a BALPA spokesman, by default a spokesman for aircrew, warned these battery issues could cause, his exact words, "a crash."

Rgds



So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
User currently offlineairmagnac From Germany, joined Apr 2012, 311 posts, RR: 43
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28316 times:

Picking up from the first thread :

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 236):
I'm in agreement with a few others here which believe the battery fires to be a symptom of a problematic electrical system rather than being the problem themselves.

Operative word : "believe"
to believe : to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/believe

We're not dealing with what you, or I, or any poster on this thread believes. Safety means dealing with cold hard reality, also named the laws of nature. It means objectively assessing how those laws apply to the specific situation being studied, and how that application could become deadly.

That means we need in this case
- confirmed, trustworthy information about what happened in Boston and Japan,
- confirmed, trustworthy information about the design of the battery cells, the pack, the battery system (pack + controller + containement + connectors) and the electrical system of the 787,
- confirmed, trustworthy information about the test results of these various systems, and
- confirmed, trustworthy information about the underlying technologies


From that you can
1) assess which information you still need, but is still missing (the "known unknowns")
2) assess the various failure possibilities of each component, sub-system and system, and assess the impacts on the aircraft as a whole, taking into account fact that you have incomplete information.
3) assess the possible solutions to prevent or mitigate the identified impacts. Solutions which are not just "do nothing" or "ground every aircraft", but also everything in between : inspections, switch parts or replace them, special operating procedures, avoid using the risky component(s), slightly change the installation, etc...


It's called objective reasoning and decision-making, and it's certainly what the FAA did to decide to ground the fleet (with the help of established quantified criteria, as CM described)
Until you can provide the confirmed, trustworthy information, and the analysis that shows the 787 electrical system is dangerous (= points 1) and 2) above), then your belief is as worthy as my belief that this was all caused by klingon spaceships launching photon torpedoes, which just poped into my head after I watched the trailer for the next Star Trek.


Meanwhile, restricting the discussion to a-net and speaking for myself, I consider that in the past year CM has sufficiently established his credentials, and in these threads has sufficiently quallified his statements, so that I can judge his posts as globally trustworthy (although I do sometimes check the info for myself when I can). And I welcome his enlightening insights in this otherwise sad mess. So thanks man ! from an Airbus system engineer.



One "oh shit" can erase a thousand "attaboys".
User currently offlinespacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3629 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28026 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
Anyone know if the MOT has probed Yuasa yet? There was some word going around my circles about it.

"Probed" them for what? What have they done wrong? What is anyone alleging they've done wrong?

First they need to figure out what the problem is, so any probe of suppliers is premature at best. If the batteries are working as designed (and there is so far no reason to think they aren't), then there is no reason to drag the battery supplier's name through the mud.

In other words, if I have a battery and I send some ridiculous current through it for an extended period and it blows up, do I turn around and probe the battery maker? We first need to know what's actually going on here.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineIBOAviator From Canada, joined Sep 2010, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 28041 times:

Hi all,

This is a true shame to see. The B787 is critical to the future of Boeing, even though they're doing very well with the 777 and 737. It is the public confidence that hurts them here, not so much the airplane being grounded for how ever long it will be grounded.

Quoting jreuschl (Reply 51):
Sounds like the batteries are terrible. I'm shocked this didn't come up during testing though.

You'd think during flight test, the batteries would be put under extra stress?
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 53):
But why wasn't that demonstrated during certification?

I am going to get flamed for this but I am going to look at the FDA for just a minute. From the outside, a reasonably 'good' governing body but a closer look unfolds a ton of corruption. It is very safe to assume that Boeing did battery battery testing to the capacity of putting it through "unusual" tests so it can be assured to function in the regular flying world. What's not to say that Boeing engineers did the testing but didn't deal with any problems they found... fear of preventing the aircraft from entering service and prolonging it's delivery EVEN more when it was already hugely delayed will definately plays on engineers' minds... I am not knocking any one engineer but consider that sometimes people glance over certain things (that maybe are not easily discoverable in the regular world or maybe their best guess that the problem will not arise in the regular world and remaining undiscoverable) to produce the final result and make management happy. I imagine the management was hasty to get this already hugely delayed airplane rolled out into service.

Quoting todareisinger (Reply 49):
It is truly frightening to see how a GREAT company can be so miserably managed.

   Pressure from management to get an airplane out into service is kinda a big player on an engineers mind... The FDA approves drugs for use by the American public that have been not been properly tested, etc, for the sake of getting them out there and keeping drug companies happy (for obvious reasons).

Boeing engineers (thinking of safety of course) also need to keep their job and 'make happy' their management. Maybe not reporting certain "extreme" failed testing results on the battery system, etc that they might say are not ever likely to surface in the real world just might be a little more "better" (but really not) than delaying the airplane even more. I imagine that the FAA would probe to see who and what kind of testing was done? Audit the battery testing? I would hope so...

Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 56):
Woow, talk of an over-reaction? The FAA didn't say this airliner will never fly again. I for one don't know what the issue is and I don;t think anyone on scare.net....I mean A.net knows but I can tell you it's not the end of the world for the 787 and I wouldn't be surprised to see them back up in a week.

Like I said above, it is public confidence in the airplane that matters and for that matter public confidence in Boeing. The regular travelling public are sometimes misinformed and do not know that the grounding of an airplane isn't the end of the world. All they are going to see is that the 787 has been grounded... stay away from that plane. People will even go as far as to say "stay away from that airline [operating the 787]" That of course applies to the average, uneducated traveller. Obviously frequent flyers, experienced flyers will think a little bit differently.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 68):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
It's down a few bucks. On a stock which trades in the 70s, that's not a nose dive. That's a market correction based on news. Boeing isn't falling apart at the seams.

Perfect time to buy....have you seen the backlogs of 777s and 737s

   Yes, exactly! Many people here are exaggerating some sort of nosedive which is hardly the case. But again, public confidence in aviation is huge, even if the stock is doing well.

My thoughts...

Regards,
IBO



Keep Calm and Go Around!
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30981 posts, RR: 86
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27920 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting IBOAviator (Reply 9):
What's not to say that Boeing engineers did the testing but didn't deal with any problems they found... fear of preventing the aircraft from entering service and prolonging it's delivery EVEN more when it was already hugely delayed will definately plays on engineers' minds...

What benefit does Boeing have in putting into service an airframe they know is unsafe?

Beyond the civil liability if there was an accident, if said accident resulted in a fatality, those engineers and managers would be subject to criminal charges up to and including murder.


User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20639 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27885 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
There was some word going around my circles about it.

What do your "circles" say about your earlier claim of a "nose dive" in Boeing's stock? I note it's up today about 1% at the moment.

(And who are in these "circles" you keep referring to? Industry professionals? Inquiring minds would like to know.)



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineIBOAviator From Canada, joined Sep 2010, 120 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27651 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
Quoting IBOAviator (Reply 9):
What's not to say that Boeing engineers did the testing but didn't deal with any problems they found... fear of preventing the aircraft from entering service and prolonging it's delivery EVEN more when it was already hugely delayed will definately plays on engineers' minds...

What benefit does Boeing have in putting into service an airframe they know is unsafe?

Beyond the civil liability if there was an accident, if said accident resulted in a fatality, those engineers and managers would be subject to criminal charges up to and including murder.

Here is how I see it. The benefit is that they get the airplane into service without causing anymore huge delays. What if it was thought that any potential "failed" extreme battery testing results were very unlikely to surface in the real flying world? If it could be justified (to the extent of the person signing off on it), then those results become "extraneous" and are likely to never appear unless the airplane is put through such extreme circumstances which the POH would already prohibit.

I am NOT saying the above claim is by any means the case but rather an idea to consider. Boeing is a great American company but sometimes management creates pressures that cannot be turned away.

There are many examples where "products" are released to the public without proper testing and as long as there is no evidence of those tests ever being run (and thus results never being ignored or discovered) then it's a different ball game. No one person is to blame.

I am NOT an aircraft engineer and do not work for an aircraft manufacturing company so I do not know how they are regulated/do not know the internal workings of Boeing. This is merely an idea, a possible situation to consider.

Regards,
IBO

[edit] grammatical error x 2


[Edited 2013-01-17 10:54:10]

[Edited 2013-01-17 10:56:13]


Keep Calm and Go Around!
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1572 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27595 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):

What benefit does Boeing have in putting into service an airframe they know is unsafe?

knowing something is unsafe and not knowing if something is safe are very different things, I would wager that Boeing (or relevant responsible company) would much more likely be 'guilty' (for want of a better word) of the latter.

Fred


User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2998 posts, RR: 27
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27543 times:

Quoting IBOAviator (Reply 13):

Read CM's description of the testing/certification processes on the first thread. OCA is all over them.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6651 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27548 times:

Lithium Ion batteries need careful management, with electronics and software. Even the ones in phones and the like.

So what I would like to know is if this is done by the plane itself (some circuits near the battery in the bay), or if it is part of the battery itself.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30981 posts, RR: 86
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27469 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 14):
knowing something is unsafe and not knowing if something is safe are very different things, I would wager that Boeing (or relevant responsible company) would much more likely be 'guilty' (for want of a better word) of the latter.

I am in agreement with that statement. And if Boeing and the FAA do identify the battery situation as an "unknown unknown" that cropped up, it will likely lead to more stringent future certification criteria.

However, IBOAviator put forward the theoretical possibility that Boeing may have known something on the 787 was unsafe and shipped it anyway with the hope that this unsafe condition would never occur in order to start booking revenue through deliveries. In such a theoretical scenario, Boeing and it's employees would be putting themselves at considerable personal risk.



Quoting Aesma (Reply 17):
So what I would like to know is if this is done by the plane itself (some circuits near the battery in the bay), or if it is part of the battery itself.

I believe both the charging system and the battery itself have management functionality.

[Edited 2013-01-17 11:07:02]

User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27387 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A simple heightened inspection program won't cut it in this case. Once they go through the process airmagnac described above, they will have an action plan. That plan will be shared with all stakeholders and the FAA.

The FAA will need to approve the plan and see how its implemented and once completed, whether the incidents can be replicated. If not, they have the needed solution and the change can be pushed out to the airlines (Boeing will likely oversee the work or do it directly). It's not a quick fix and will take time.


User currently offlinefrmrcapcadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 27386 times:

Per other posts and today's Seattle Times article on lithium batteries (I supplied a link to near the end of the original thread) really is not just a battery, at least in the sense that might have been true 50 years ago. The battery, its cooling system, wiring and equally important software and packaging comprises the basic unit.


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 27358 times:

Quoting bellancacf (Reply 3):
Is there continuous, realtime monitoring of the temperatures in the Li-ion batteries?

Are these batteries designed like bricks, that is, one big block (which is a terrible shape to try to dissipate heat out of) or are they designed with intermal channels for coolant circulation?

And, um, if not, why not?

Answered in order:

Yes, the Main and APU batteries both have active temperature monitoring.

The batteries contain a number of individual Li-ion cells, electrically ganged together to produce ~29V. This is very similar to the basic architecture of Ni-Cd batteries on other aircraft. There is no cooling provision in the 787 battery architecture. Actively cooling the batteries would certainly be possible and active air-cooling is common in Ni-Cd batteries on some other aircraft (777 batteries have an integral fan), but this would not have helped in the case of the two battery incidents on the 787. Thermal runaway in a Li-ion battery is not typically brought on by high operating temperatures (although it could be). There are much more common causes of thermal runaway such as internal defects and problems with managing the state of charge. Once the battery begins a thermal runaway, no amount of cooling will help; the process is exothermic and is self sustained until the energy source (lithium) is depleted.

Quoting airmagnac (Reply 7):
I consider that in the past year CM has sufficiently established his credentials, and in these threads has sufficiently quallified his statements, so that I can judge his posts as globally trustworthy (although I do sometimes check the info for myself when I can). And I welcome his enlightening insights in this otherwise sad mess. So thanks man ! from an Airbus system engineer.

Truly appreciated. Thank you.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 27283 times:

Very bulky but will the answer for the future be fuel cells? Create current on the fly? But what fuel would be safe for aviation?

User currently offlinedfambro From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 327 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 27827 times:

Quoting IBOAviator (Reply 9):
I am going to get flamed for this but I am going to look at the FDA for just a minute. From the outside, a reasonably 'good' governing body but a closer look unfolds a ton of corruption.

Unless you've got something to back that up, you deserved to get flamed.

Quoting IBOAviator (Reply 9):
Pressure from management to get an airplane out into service is kinda a big player on an engineers mind... The FDA approves drugs for use by the American public that have been not been properly tested, etc, for the sake of getting them out there and keeping drug companies happy (for obvious reasons).

Obviously you don't work in the pharma or biotech industy. Are you aware of the data standards, review processes, and approval rates? Or the multi-hundred million dollar illegal marketing fines they've been handing out. The FDA is slow, conservative, and a pain in the butt to work with, but corrupt they aren't.

Things can go wrong, in aviation and in pharma, but that doesn't mean there is a conspiracy to subvert proper regulation.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1823 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 27655 times:

http://www.hes.sg/products.html

Seems like there is some products available but not for airliners..Should be a safer path?!


User currently offlineZB052 From UK - England, joined Jan 2013, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 28033 times:

Can I also second those who have commend posters like Stich, CM, Astuteman & Winged Migrator. You can tell that, from reading their posts, that they 'know their onions' to coin a phrase. For those of us in the industry, but not close to the '87 program, your posts provide a shining light amongst the conspiracy theories, drivel and you-know-what waving that pervades this place from time to time.


Oh, and *FIRST POST* (Have lurked here for close to a decade - finally decided to register!)

Yay!

Looking forward to contributing my knowledge to the forum! Especially from a 757/767 and A320 series standpoint

[Edited 2013-01-17 11:27:36]

User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 27714 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ZB052 (Reply 27):
Looking forward to contributing my knowledge to the forum! Especially from a 757/767 and A320 series standpoint

Glad to see you joining the posting community!

For the person that advanced the idea of moving to fuel cell technology - this would require a certification process and likely changes to at least the software managing the power charging/distribution system. It would ground the 787 for well over a year.

The media has unfortunately published all sorts of "information," much of it contradictory and often wrong. We must do that which is most difficult for humans, be patient and let the stakeholders sort through the problem and come up with a solution that is safe and satisfies the FAA and the airlines. I'm sure we'd all love to see it happen overnight with the re-writing of a couple lines of code or the switching of a single part but that doesn't appear to be in the offing.


25 Post contains links xaapb : Is this accurate? http://es.flightaware.com/live/aircrafttype/B788 Looks like there are 787s flying out there, 2 of them United from DEN and ORD to IA
26 Post contains images Stitch : Looking forward to learning from your knowledge.
27 kanban : the entire chain needs to be audited ,, so what they would look for are manufacturing processes, testing data, and quality control, then looking at s
28 SonomaFlyer : Flightaware is slow to pick up a/c substitutions. Check flightradar24 instead or with the airline website. UA 1510 from ORD to IAH has a 739 sub'd to
29 lightsaber : First, excellent point of view. Even if this can be solved by rewriting new software code, that code must be qualified. It takes days just for the mi
30 BrouAviation : Both are 737's according to FlightRadar24.
31 PassedV1 : I am not an engineer, I am a mere pilot, and before the last week I had (and still have) very little understanding of the nuiances between the variou
32 ZB052 : Indeed - hence why I believe that this may take a bit longer than a few days to get a handle on the 'catalyst' to the issue. Faulty manufacturing, du
33 xaapb : Thanks for the info guys. Kind Regards
34 Aesma : Thanks, I will look into that. You could use a small cracking system and have the primary fuel as jetA, however I'm not sure the thing would be safer
35 Shenzhen : The industry (meaning Thales/Boeing/Airlines/FAA) will come up with an interim solution to allow the airplanes to comply with the AD, like testing the
36 gigneil : A fuel cell APU was originally default plan, then an optional plan, then eliminated as a choice for this airplane, I believe. NS
37 kanban : Bloomberg is reporting that both batteries came from the same production lot according to unnamed sources.. so take it with a large grain of salt. Am
38 IBOAviator : I do have evidence to back these claims... evidence that is publicly shared, not hidden to industry specific individuals... yes, I do not work in Pha
39 Post contains images lightsaber : There was post in the last thread about making all APU starts from ground or engine power. Well... what about the case when engines stop due to flying
40 SonomaFlyer : Passedv1, you raise legitimate questions about the process to select Li On batteries as opposed to standard NiCad ones. Unfortunately, to revert to Ni
41 Shenzhen : You can bet the numbers are being crunched and risk assesments are being put together for multiple "possible" solutions to the batteries overheating.
42 RickNRoll : Even if the batteries are fixed and there is no battery event again, the FAA says the current venting system has to be redone. The liquid that was sp
43 Stitch : Those are two of the reasons. As I recall from the previous discussions, the power they supply is also more stable and they will hold a charge longer
44 AeroWesty : Interesting point. Could you expand upon that? It's not something I've seen discussed at all.
45 bellancacf : to capri @ reply 5: That's _IT_?!!? That's PUNY! If you made it twice as large, it _still_ would be small. (Man oh man. Someone went with this technol
46 mham001 : If you look at the picture of the burnt battery, you can make out the main bus bars between cells. The aviation cells Yuasa advertises are 10ah and 6
47 glideslope : I believe Yuasa sub contracts the 787 Battery for production in France. Forgot the name of the French Co that makes them.
48 Post contains images IBOAviator : The FAA would have to see that the batteries can function at altitude and that the systems supporting the operation of these batteries are operationa
49 Post contains links texl1649 : Thales makes the auxiliary control circuit I have read, but I don't think Saft Groupe SA actually makes the battery in the 787. http://in.reuters.com
50 Post contains links Wisdom : It's unlikely. Remember what the B787 is great for... it has barely any pressure differentials, since it maintains a very low cabin altitude of 5000f
51 chuchoteur : Another major aspect of Lithium ion batteries is that they do no suffer from memory effect. The performance and charge remains constant, it doesn't d
52 PHX787 : One of my contacts has an email to Yuasa but he's not certified to use it, and clearly neither am I...anyone here have any sort of journalism clearan
53 CALTECH : Supposedly provide more power and at a stable level of power discharge. X 2 batteries which saves almost 500 lbs in weight. that is substantial, espe
54 phxa340 : You and your "contacts" .... I wish I had some.
55 RickNRoll : From the FAA press release The battery failures resulted in release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage, and smoke on two Model 787 airplanes. The
56 SonomaFlyer : Thanks for the info Wisdom. The heated gooey paste mentioned by CALTECH is presumably the electrolytes mentioned in the FAA order. While flammable, it
57 Post contains images PHX787 : Go find some I met all mine through being in japan for an extended period of time, being involved at ASU, and meeting friends of friends through Face
58 RickNRoll : That's not the point. The point is, the FAA doesn't want it there, at all. Even if the fault is traced to a bad batch of batteries, they are telling
59 SonomaFlyer : I agree that's what the FAA wants. We'd have to see the special conditions on the certification of the electrical system to see what the containment
60 RickNRoll : At a guess, this was not covered adequately. Now that we have had the battery failures, the FAA is revising it's requirements.
61 CALTECH : Meant 'no chance' because it is not a liquid. If it is thought that I do not know that the battery and it's electrolyte paste spewed over the compart
62 Aesma : Something that can flow is a liquid. Even glass is a liquid if you wait long enough, since it will flow.
63 Shenzhen : Here is the actual text from the AD..... AD Requirements This AD requires modification of the battery system, or other actions, in accordance with a
64 RickNRoll : I suppose it is ambiguous, but to me they are concerned abou tht fact that a battery failure resulted in the release of electrolytes. Planes have all
65 DocLightning : IIRC, the maximum cabin altitude aboard the 787 is something like 6,000 feet, right? Now, DEN is at 5,400 feet. So if Yuasa actually designed a batte
66 Stitch : It strikes me that this would be one of the more unlikely causes, for otherwise I would expect we would have seen it happen much more frequently cons
67 Post contains images PHX787 : This. Yuasa needs to provide proof that there is no negligence or other issues which I personally believe they can do. However, this probe is going t
68 Shenzhen : The batteries would have been tested to meet both certification and Boeing requirements. For the FAA requirements, one of their representatives would
69 DocLightning : You could say that of any potential cause, I suppose. Why did this not happen until five days ago...and then twice in three days? The aircraft were d
70 bellancacf : Anybody need a funny coincidence? Some years ago I sat near a bunch of Boeing reps on a flight and talked with one of them about their new plane. They
71 CM : Bellancacf, All of the questions you continue to ask were answered in post #22. [Edited 2013-01-17 16:12:55]
72 RickNRoll : Hi CM. Apart from working out why the batteries failed, which could well be a bad batch, does the FAA require a change in the containment/venting/rele
73 Stitch : Assuming the same issue occurred on both airframes, I would look to the batteries themselves. We can assume the JL bird had a recent battery since it
74 bellancacf : to CM @ 77 and 22 -- Ack! Sorry! Went out on an errand and whizzed right by that when I came back. So the Li goes exothermic and you can't stop it fro
75 iahmark : Well, here’s an idea…. maybe the batteries are underrated for the current drain/usage/needs of the plane; in other words we know Li ion produces g
76 Stitch : I would hope Boeing knows the draw the electrical system on the 787 requires and scaled battery capacity as necessary. In fact, I would think they wo
77 SonomaFlyer : Electrical load requirements are part of the design and certification process; Boeing knows exactly how much electricity is required to run the syste
78 prebennorholm : These batteries are sure made to tolerate a cabin decompression at FL450. We can just forget about any altitude related thing having caused this mess
79 DocLightning : I very much hope that is the issue. If it's down to a defective batch of batteries, that will be very easy to fix and the aircraft might be in the ai
80 Post contains images CM : No worries, when a thread moves this fast, it gets impossible to keep up with it. The active NTSB investigation and FAA inquiry really limit what I c
81 Shenzhen : Every airplane delivered comes with an electrical load analysis, witch provides the loads on each and every buss. Airlines need this information, as
82 rcair1 : Well said. It may very well "cut it" if the problem is determined to be related to something that can be inspected. However, I would expect that it w
83 Shenzhen : NTSB Investigation UPDates - Quantity - 2 NTSB provides investigative update on Boeing 787 fire incident in Boston January 08 WASHINGTON - The Nationa
84 Post contains links USAirALB : Unfortunately I have little knowledge when it comes to the "TechOps" sector of flying, so please excuse me if this has been discussed before, or if it
85 rcair1 : That is not a stupid question - it is one of the key questions. You may not have seen it, but the 2 a/c are of significantly different ages - the ANA
86 Post contains links aerodog : In terms of the FAA, I used to believe that...not anymore. A pip-squeak CEO from Albuquerque, Vern Raburn convinced the FAA brass in Washington that
87 RickNRoll : I don't know of any other way of preventing the electrolyte escaping form a failing battery than doing something about the containment system, which
88 sphealey : What would the lay-up procedure have been for the initial test units (ZA001, ZA002, etc)? Would the batteries have been removed before the planes wen
89 Post contains images PHX787 : Just a heads up you posted this 3 times Either way, that is a good and valid point....but The one point I wanna make is why weren't these seen previo
90 Post contains links Shenzhen : Requiring some type of shield wouldn't be unheard of. A United 777 caught fire in load center/panel and the damage was considerable. The FAA released
91 CALTECH : Again, the electrolyte is not a liquid. If it was heated enough, it might become a liquid, but we are told it is a paste. Closely guarded paste. And
92 Wisdom : Are you sure? Most li-ion batteries have liquid electrolytes. If true, that's new information for me. What kind of paste is it? Most li-ion batteries
93 CALTECH : As sure as I haven't looked inside one yet, but that is what is being said. It is a paste. The electrolyte is a non-aqueous electrolyte paste compose
94 RickNRoll : It already has a container, which seemed to stop the fire spreading in the original incident. In the second incident, it didn't stop the electrolyte
95 nm2582 : I think that a lot of the questioning of the 787's overall electrical systems and design is misguided. It seems highly unlikely that the whole thing w
96 RickNRoll : Except that the current containment of any failure has not worked to the satisfaction of the FAA. That is, even if they remedy the root cause of the
97 Post contains images lightsaber : Agreed. But I'm certain dozens of engineers are working quite a bit of overtime to figure out the details. Interesting. Do you have a link? Tschhh...
98 bonusonus : The A380 uses Li-ion batteries for its emergency lighting system. That seems like orders of magnitude less power than the 787 system which starts the
99 Post contains links RickNRoll : I have provided a few already. Here is one. http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...ogy/2020148677_787groundedxml.html Boeing Senior Vice President Mi
100 rheinwaldner : Temperature range is much more limiting than pressure (which just leads to some differences how the batterycase is mecanically loaden). Low temperatu
101 nm2582 : Sure it's less power, but it proves that the technology is not inherently incompatible with aircraft. Lithium cells large and small fail - the power
102 Post contains links RickNRoll : According to this http://www.airframer.com/aircraft_detail.html?model=A380 The high power A380 battery is still NiCad.
103 DocLightning : Off the topic of this thread, but that does happen from time to time due to a few different possible glitches. When you see something like that, the
104 PassedV1 : Did the containment work or not? That seems to be at best be disputed. Again, like I said in my original post, there is no viable alternative to havi
105 AirlineCritic : Yes. This would also seem to be one of the most difficult issues to fix. Finding the cause of irregularities - in a system which must already have be
106 LTC8K6 : That is an urban legend. Glass is an amorphous solid. It does not flow at all as a finished product.
107 Post contains links and images dynamicsguy : I've finally caught up on these threads. Not much to add which hasn't already been discussed, apart from: The special conditions are a rewrite of that
108 justloveplanes : why not lift the battery solution from the 777 for now, put in any voltage conditioners to correct the environment and go? This seems reasonable pract
109 justloveplanes : This is probably one that just needs to be included. Airlines are losing a lot more that, say, $10,000 bucks over an airframes life for a secondary c
110 RickNRoll : That one specifically was breached in the second incident, according to statements by the FAA.
111 Post contains links DTW2HYD : Appropriator Asks NASA to Help Boeing Fix Dreamliner Problems WASHINGTON, Jan. 17, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-PA), th
112 Kaiarahi : It isn't. It's currently 180 out of the box. You're mixing up aircraft certification and operator certification. Most regulatory authorities require
113 Kaiarahi : Not necessarily. The NTSB/FAA haven't yet determined if there was a major failure condition in adjacent systems, equipment or wiring.
114 RickNRoll : No, they didn't say there was. They said that the breach of the special condition I quoted made it possible. If this had been on a transpacific flight
115 jreuschl : I don't know what the source is, but the story about the 787 issues that ran on a local news station stated that the batteries may have been running a
116 Post contains links Kaiarahi : Photo of the damaged NH battery with a good battery beside it. http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.c...ES/w220/web-dreamliner-battery.JPG
117 Cubsrule : What evidence is there that the containment structure failed in such a way to cause a "potential for serious damage to nearby wiring and systems" in
118 Post contains links CALTECH : Not optional. It had to perform this function to pass certification. Urban legend, correct. Learn something everyday. But it does flow, just a lot sl
119 RickNRoll : From my link earlier. “These conditions, if not corrected, could result in damage to critical systems and structures, and the potential for fire in
120 Cubsrule : The actual results - electrolyte release, heat damage and smoke - are not necessarily serious. Were they in fact serious in either incident? It seems
121 Post contains links RickNRoll : From the seattletimes. Hot chemicals sprayed out of the battery on the 787 Dreamliner in this week’s emergency landing in Japan, leaving a gooey dar
122 Post contains images LTC8K6 : At that rate, everything flows.
123 Cubsrule : I don't think that really answers the question. Did the release cause any safety of flight issue?
124 Post contains images lightsaber : Ditto. What looks bad to a layman is often well within certified limits. That is interesting... if they are from the same batch, there will be lesson
125 RickNRoll : It caused an emergency landing, evacuation, and grounding of the 787. I would see the safety of flight issue being two things. 1) The hightened level
126 rcair1 : Except there are reports that these were new batteries, not old. Fair enough. I seem to recall a post that talks about the venting system re configur
127 Cubsrule : Smoke in the cabin is the easy way to disprove that. Smoke is often - maybe even most of the time - NOT a safety of flight issue. But it always resul
128 RickNRoll : You can nit pick, but they grounded it.
129 Stitch : They smelled it, but I don't believe there has been confirmation that they saw it. And while some may consider that "splitting hairs", the outflow va
130 Cubsrule : I don't disagree, but I don't know what that tells us beyond that FAA wants to figure out what is going on.
131 Post contains images airmagnac : There is a difference in interpretation of the requirement, that's all. I agree with reading it as : But your interpretation of it as "No corrosive f
132 NorthStarDC4M : From some of the rumors I've been seeing I wonder if Boeing has been hit with a bad batch of Li-Ion cells causing overheating or overcharging of the b
133 CO953 : As a layman, I have a question I haven't seen addressed: How toxic could "smells" from the burning electrolytes be if they get into/circulate in the
134 Post contains images Stitch : It depends on the volume. The vast majority of it should be vented via the out-flow valve. As NorthStarDC4M noted in Reply 132, the type of smoke gen
135 Post contains images CM : Systems engineering efforts in the past decade or so have dramatically increased their focus on defining verification and validation criteria. This h
136 Post contains images CO953 : When I work on my old cars, the carburetor cleaner has a low opacity, but I'm not supposed to breathe it. I sure do smell it. Makes me happy all day
137 mham001 : Without more details and knowing the physical size of the battery and the box around it, this doesn't make a lot of sense. The battery cells themselv
138 mcdu : Are you really willing to be the guinea pig to sit at 180W in the middle of the pacific and debate whether that burning smell, smoke and smoke alarm
139 Stitch : I can't see there being a hermetic seal between the two, so I would have to assume there is an acceptable limit somewhere in the FARs.
140 Cubsrule : Nope, which is why I agree completely with the grounding. But there's not yet enough information to know what danger is or isn't there. As usual, you
141 CO953 : Then maybe there a should be a hermetic seal isolating the battery compartment as a backup? I assume that these won't be the last Li-Ion batteries ev
142 Stitch : Smoke at high-opacity levels is definitely a safety-of-flight issue. And AC797 is an example of where smoke was present at high-opacity levels. So wa
143 NorthStarDC4M : Burning Li-Ion can be mildly toxic... it can release a low level of Sulphur dioxide along with carbon monoxide and ozone gas, but nothing horribly na
144 jspitfire : This is the key info I was looking for, and it would appear that you've hit the nail on the head. Explains perfectly why we're expecting a 787 in, of
145 UALWN : Landing is important... and impossible if in the middle of the Pacific on an ETOPS 180 (or 330!) flight. Hence the relevance of minimizing to negligi
146 Post contains links BEG2IAH : These are just the last two posts (of more than 20) where you keep repeating that containment in your view failed. We got it, no need to repeat. Othe
147 Stitch : Has the 787 completed the cold weather testing required by Transport Canada to certify the 787 for use by Air Canada?
148 Cubsrule : I don't know that I agree that every source of smoke has to be of "negligible risk." If the source of the smoke can be easily identified and mitigate
149 brianw999 : Precisely the reason why I chose not to fly Thomson to Orlando later this year. Now flying out on United and back on Air Canada. £400 plus saving fo
150 Post contains links SonomaFlyer : http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...-closer-look-cold-soaking-787.html Cold weather testing is part of the process for every new airliner. They als
151 DocLightning : Kept water from accumulating in the window frame. One will smell smoke at a concentration 10-100 times lower than that required to see it. So smoke d
152 kanban : I seem to recall that the airflow pattern is clean air into the passenger cabin then exits through the grills at the base of the sidewall panel into
153 UALWN : Indeed. It's the chances of smoke coming from invisible/inaccessible places that need to be minimized.
154 Post contains links Stitch : The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that the FAA didn't do most of the testing of the batteries, and certified them as safe for use based almos
155 Post contains images CM : And the expertise. This is not a slam on the FAA, but they would have to be spending hundreds of millions on R&D every year in order to develop t
156 goosebayguy : If I were Boeing right now I would be rushing installation of older tried and tested batteries until a proper more permanent solution can be found. I'
157 SonomaFlyer : I'm not sure if you've read this thread or the others on the topic but you can't just bolt another battery into the 787 and call it good. There is a
158 BEG2IAH : What do you mean by this? You think everyone at Boeing took vacation to get some relief from the stress induced by B787?
159 spacecadet : Let's settle this debate right now, which is very easy to do because all you need to do is re-read the FAA's statement: The AD is prompted by this se
160 Cubsrule : They do not. They believe, as I do, that there is a threat of a safety of flight problem. Look at the very part of the AD you quoted (with my emphasi
161 Rexus : Hi, I'm wondering what happens if the battery fails in flight. Most if not all electronic systems should work on the power produced by the generators
162 Post contains images CM : The FAA has grounded the fleet. Nuff said. It's clear you have no insight on this issue. Boeing has mobilized an absolute army to address the problem
163 Post contains links Aerowrench : Ars Technica has an excellent article regarding the chemically unstable nature of the lithium ion batteries installed on the Boeing 787 along with a v
164 bradmovie : Greetings all. As a private pilot and airplane fan, this is my first post, and I will try to make it intelligent! Question for CM: Do you know if the
165 AeroWesty : Very interesting video, thanks for posting that link. Beginning at 1:05, the video details what can happen when a battery gets overcharged—the chem
166 Post contains links CM : Yeah, I should have helped add some context to Dynamicsguy when he first asked the question. Here is the deal... The 787-8 complies with a Special Co
167 ikramerica : Why can't many people differentiate between smoke, fumes and odor? They are not the same thing, they don't operate in the same way, and they can emit
168 7BOEING7 : APU battery can't takeover for a bad Main battery in flight--it can be swapped on the ground. MAIN battery messages are only "ADVISORY" messages, the
169 rcair1 : And legalize makes it worse. BTW - in my current job, as a Ph.D. Engineer - I spend many hours a week looking at and trying to interpret patents. Oft
170 Post contains links fcogafa : Very good article on the likey cause being battery overcharging in the Guardian today http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10618899
171 frmrcapcadet : The incredibly amazing safety record of modern jet liners (and even better cars and trains) is dependent upon relatively new ways of thinking about ri
172 Aesma : Interesting that the BEA is involved, first time I hear about this. I'm guessing this has to do with the various French suppliers linked to the elect
173 AirlineCritic : To be fair, I think the argument works both ways. Just because there was odor, doesn't mean there were deadly gases or visibility-impairing smoke. An
174 DocLightning : We keep going back and forth about whether it was smoke or not. That is not the issue I am asking about. It could be smoke or any other product of co
175 7BOEING7 : When the FAA witnesses the flight tests they look for visible smoke in either the flight deck or the passenger cabin. Sometimes the amount of smoke t
176 Post contains links KC135R : Today was supposed to be my first flight on a 787, but obviously that did not happen... Someone alluded to the potential of the batteries being from t
177 Aerowrench : **Anyone who subscribes to AW&ST will be able to read an excellent couple of articles in the upcoming issue regarding the use of Li-ion batteries
178 CM : "Solved" may turn out to be a pretty subjective word in this case. From the sound of things, we may be looking at an interim solution in the very nea
179 woodsboy : Regarding the discussion on whether or not Boeing would deliver a product that it knew potentially had an unsafe system or piece of equipment and for
180 Post contains images CM : Woodsboy, meet Frmrcapcadet. There has never been any part of any modern airplane which has been designed any other way than by managing the risks su
181 Aerowrench : That would be capitalism's closest friend you are describing; compromise. I know you recognize the compromise for what it is based on your followup s
182 Post contains images prebennorholm : That is the optimistic view which is valid only after the root course is found with some very high degree of certainty. When I read the the words of
183 RickNRoll : I'm sure all manufacturers respond the same way. Manage the image, don't give any appearance of panic, work as hard and as fast as possible at resolv
184 dynamicsguy : Yes it is important, since the difference between "is" and "may" has a strong bearing on what happens next, and what actions must be taken before the
185 Post contains links PHX787 : Ooook.....the NH thread was locked....I wish it'd stay open; its easier for me to post NH and JL related 787 news there.... but nonetheless, here's th
186 zeke : I would have thought the simple interim solution would be to turn the batteries off ?
187 rwessel : Quoting a post from CM in a now locked thread (if there's a better way to quote this, I don't know it): "Quoting rwessel (Reply 245): And in the event
188 CM : You could do this for the APU batt, but the main batt is a no go item; on STBY power, the main batt powers the captain's displays during transition t
189 rwessel : It's been posted several times that the APU battery (rear EE bay, JAL/Boston) can be MEL'd, the ship's battery (front EE bay, ANA/Takamatsu) can not
190 zeke : It has been reported as being the APU battery, are the reports incorrect ?
191 Post contains links nm2582 : Interesting new article from ABC that seems to be pointing the finger to overcharge: http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/wireSto...ies-eyed-boeing-787-fires-
192 Braybuddy : There are professional people on here who work with the 787 who repeatedly told us there was nothing abnormal or out of the ordinary about what was h
193 Post contains links KarelXWB : Not really a surprise but Boeing now halted the deliveries too. http://news.sky.com/story/1040083/boeing-dreamliner-deliveries-halted
194 aerorobnz : Or use the same kind of batteries used in other aircraft??
195 Post contains links and images PHX787 : Good ol' sky news journalism for you.... "Deliveries of the 747 to airlines are stopped as an initial probe into the plane's mishaps points to overch
196 spacecadet : Read what they wrote again, carefully: These conditions, if not corrected, could result in damage to critical systems and structures, and the potenti
197 KarelXWB : I do not know sky news but the interesting part of that article is the Boeing spokesman they quoted:
198 Post contains images flyabr : Those same people may very well be working night and day right now to get the 787 back into the sky!
199 BLRAviation : Not sure about the implications. AI just flew VT-ANJ from BLR to BOM on an empty ferry. So is the grounding for passenger operations? or all operatio
200 sweair : Would a fuel cell be safer than a battery? Jet A is already the fuel in aircraft, it would not need to be charged as it will create current on the fly
201 Post contains links HAWK21M : Probably positioning flight. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/01/1...tive-on-boeing-787-dreamliner.html
202 abba : I think this issue has been discussed before here on the forum in relation to Airbus studying whether fuel cells could substitute the APU. Whether th
203 Post contains links NZ1 : Due to thread size, please continue discussion here: FAA Grounds 787 Part 3 (by NZ1 Jan 19 2013 in Civil Aviation) NZ1 Forum Moderator
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
LAN Grounds 787 Fleet posted Wed Jan 16 2013 18:00:15 by SCL767
FAA Grounds Air Tahoma posted Thu Jan 15 2009 16:50:39 by LAXintl
FAA Grounds Hawaii Mokulele Air For One Day posted Wed Oct 22 2008 19:09:06 by LAXintl
FAA Demands 787 Connectivity Security Assurances posted Sat Dec 29 2007 08:23:34 by BestWestern
787 Part Deliveries And Virtual Assembly Animation posted Mon May 21 2007 00:49:09 by IAD787
FAA Grounds Federal Fire Fighting Planes. posted Fri Apr 29 2005 03:44:36 by Aa777jr
AC Orders 777 And 787 (Part 2) posted Mon Apr 25 2005 23:12:26 by RootsAir
FAA Grounds EMB-145 Autopilot posted Fri Oct 15 1999 18:06:15 by DeltaAir
European Regulator Adopts FAA's 787 Grounding posted Thu Jan 17 2013 02:15:33 by nuckleuz
787 Production/Delivery Thread Part 13 posted Mon Jan 14 2013 13:08:53 by iowaman