Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FAA Approves Boeing 787 Battery System Changes  
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24339 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Since FAA Grounds B787: Part 14 (by LipeGIG Mar 23 2013 in Civil Aviation) is approaching 300 posts, which is usually when the thread is closed and a new one opened and because the FAA will shortly lift the grounding, I figure we can start a new thread.

The FAA has approved the battery system design changes developed by Boeing for the 787. The FAA will publish next week the final directive that will allow UA to resume operations of the 787. It is expected other regulatory agencies will follow shortly to allow the 787 to resume services worldwide.


http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14554

151 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1447 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24350 times:

About friggin' time!!


If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11670 posts, RR: 33
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24315 times:

And perhaps the most important thing: the FAA decides to keep the 787 3-hour ETOPS approval.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5599 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24318 times:

How soon will they return to flight? How long will it take the fixes to be put in place. And can the plane fly without the fix (i.e. in order to go get the fix) or is it fix it in place then fly it?

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineCALTECH From Poland, joined May 2007, 2237 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24246 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 3):
How soon will they return to flight? How long will it take the fixes to be put in place. And can the plane fly without the fix (i.e. in order to go get the fix) or is it fix it in place then fly it?

Fix it then fly.



UNITED We Stand
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24200 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):
And perhaps the most important thing: the FAA decides to keep the 787 3-hour ETOPS approval.

Is that confirmed?



Quoting tugger (Reply 3):
How soon will they return to flight?

As early as next week for UA, once the FAA publishes the final directive, though the planes will need to be modified before they will be allowed to fly.

Other regulatory agencies will be working on their own timelines. Ethiopia may lift it today since Ethiopian Airlines was loading 787 flight schedules for tomorrow. However, I would guess that the FAA will require foreign operators of the 787 flying them within the US to have the fix. Boeing has a team in Addis Adaba working on the planes, but I believe it will be a few weeks before they are all completed.

Japan's Transport Ministry have said they intend to allow NH and JL to resume operations "quickly", though they will require both operators to introduce new safety measures, including remote monitoring of battery data such as voltage. They also call for more frequent battery inspections, from the present rate of about once every two years.

[Edited 2013-04-19 12:19:45]

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11670 posts, RR: 33
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24199 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 3):
How soon will they return to flight? How long will it take the fixes to be put in place. And can the plane fly without the fix (i.e. in order to go get the fix) or is it fix it in place then fly it?

It will take mechanics 4 to 5 days per airplane to install the new battery. Boeing is sending teams to their customers to assist with the replacement of the batteries.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11670 posts, RR: 33
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24116 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Is that confirmed?

Dominic Gates, an aerospace reporter for the Seattle Times, confirms this on Twitter.

Quote:
FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency hasn’t changed the Dreamliner’s ETOPS (“extended operations”) certification, which means the 787 will have continued approval to fly up to three hours away from the nearest airport.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2386 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 24117 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Is that confirmed?


It seems so. Saw a tweet from Dominic Gates which says so.



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 23571 times:

Long-awaited, excellent news. I wonder how many AOG teams they've assigned to do the rework. At 4-5 days per plane, that would take 3-4 weeks for 10 teams to get through all 50 planes, then there are the planes sitting at the factory which need the mod as well.


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 23277 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 9):

Long-awaited, excellent news. I wonder how many AOG teams they've assigned to do the rework. At 4-5 days per plane, that would take 3-4 weeks for 10 teams to get through all 50 planes, then there are the planes sitting at the factory which need the mod as well.

I would assume that Boeing has not been sitting around twiddling their fingers waiting for the FAA Approval. Presumably they had an indication that this fix woudl be approved and probably have a few aircraft done already waiting on the approval. at the very least they have a lot of prep work down already that would cut that 5 day time down to a day.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19699 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 23221 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 10):
Presumably they had an indication that this fix woudl be approved and probably have a few aircraft done already waiting on the approval.

That would be very silly of them. It would be far more expensive to have to undo the fix if approval wound up being denied than to just wait a few more days and wait for approval.

I really hope this is the last major issue that the 787 has. If there is one more on this scale, it might be a program killer.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 23001 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 10):
Presumably they had an indication that this fix woudl be approved and probably have a few aircraft done already waiting on the approval.

That would be very silly of them. It would be far more expensive to have to undo the fix if approval wound up being denied than to just wait a few more days and wait for approval.

I really hope this is the last major issue that the 787 has. If there is one more on this scale, it might be a program killer

Boeing submitted only one fix. That fix was finalized after input from the FAA. Today's announcement is simply a public pronouncement. Boeing had a fix and tested the fix and deployed teams around the world with the parts to implement the fix.

It is likely some a/c will already be done. Expect to see aircraft on revenue flights next week with the fix in-place.

[Edited 2013-04-19 15:18:48]

User currently offlinemptpa From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 22926 times:

I believe Boeing AOG teams had been a'at work' at least since last week. Seems like ET is one of them as they are trying to get the flights started in the coming days. I would also fathom a guess and say NH and JL has a few teams in place in Japan from Boeing as the first ones. So like sonomaflyer above states, I believe Boeing had this info from FAA a while back, and they have been quietly building up the changes, which makes sense.

Now hopefully, there was a team in ORD and/or IAH to get the UAL and LOT birds up and away. I believe no one can fly them out till the FAA AD is registered in the Federal Registrar, right?


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22810 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mptpa (Reply 13):
Now hopefully, there was a team in ORD and/or IAH to get the UAL and LOT birds up and away. I believe no one can fly them out till the FAA AD is registered in the Federal Registrar, right?

I don't see them trying to get approval from all of the countries overflown on a ferry flight for LOT (for example) to fly the a/c back to WAW to do the fix. They'll likely fix that a/c in ORD then either ferry back or do a revenue flight back from ORD with a crew deadheading out from WAW.


User currently offline7BOEING7 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 1592 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 22537 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 10):
Presumably they had an indication that this fix woudl be approved and probably have a few aircraft done already waiting on the approval. at the very least they have a lot of prep work down already that would cut that 5 day time down to a day.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
That would be very silly of them. It would be far more expensive to have to undo the fix if approval wound up being denied than to just wait a few more days and wait for approval.

Boeing has been communicating with the FAA daily since the grounding began. Even though the grounding was only lifted today they had a complete understanding of what modifications the FAA would require when the final paperwork comes out in the days ahead. As well as LOT ZA272 (86) that was used as the test airplane, ANA ZA512 (83) was modified and completed a FCF yesterday paving the way for a C-1 (as soon as all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed) and GUN ZA380 (34) was modified and scheduled for a B-1 yesterday but hasn't made it airborne yet.

While the AOG teams are modifying airplanes in the field there have also been teams made up of manufacturing people making those modifications at KPAE. I'm sure we'll see 2 or even 3 B-1's/FCF's a week over the next several weeks at KPAE.


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7150 posts, RR: 57
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 22498 times:

Excellent news. I had feared that the fleet would not be up and flying before the summer peak, but now it seems that the Boeing AOG team can get the entire operation fleet up and running before the June peak.


The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 22071 times:

I wonder how many of the a/c that are still in Everett have had some work done already.

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21578 times:

Well let the fixes and deliveries begin! And the flights too! I've been itching to see them in action again in HND


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 onlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 349 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21365 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
That would be very silly of them. It would be far more expensive to have to undo the fix if approval wound up being denied than to just wait a few more days and wait for approval.

First, the chance of the modification being rejected is highly unlikely. Second, it cost both Boeing and the airlines a lot for the grounding of 787 every single day. Therefore, the risk (and the cost) of re-do the fix will outweight the cost of waiting for a few more days.


User currently offlineRobK From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3947 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21312 times:

So, how long until the next one catches fire then, given that the root cause still has not been established...   

(awaits    and pun not intended)


User currently offlineYYZAMS From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 228 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21201 times:

I think I will let it fly around for a year or 2 before I go out of my way to fly on a 787....just my 2 cents (oops..I mean 5 cents since we no longer have the penny)

User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10025 posts, RR: 96
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21137 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
The FAA has approved the battery system design changes developed by Boeing for the 787
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):
And perhaps the most important thing: the FAA decides to keep the 787 3-hour ETOPS approval.

Excellent news on both counts. Well done to all who have been involved in getting the 787 flying again   

Rgds


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1719 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 20999 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 22):
Well done to all who have been involved in getting the 787 flying again

Yes, and let's hope we'll regain two of our valued contributors… who have precisely been involved in that work.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21529 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 20471 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
That would be very silly of them. It would be far more expensive to have to undo the fix if approval wound up being denied than to just wait a few more days and wait for approval.

True, but this is fixing something that can't be proved to be fixed or broken to begin with, so the approved fix is mostly a feel good move to make everyone think that something has been done to turn a "dangerous" plane into a "safe" plane.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 sweair : 50 in service+ about 35 waiting for the fix and pre delivery process, this year could still be a great 787 delivery year, the first 787-9 is soon load
26 Post contains links KarelXWB : It seems like this is not the case:
27 Post contains images airmagnac : I certainly hope so...but one of the two profiles is not active anymore, and the profile info of the other one indicates that he seems to have been s
28 RobK : Well that's very reassuring for me as pax. Being over the middle of the Pacific at 39k and 3 hours from the nearest suitable airfield whilst having a
29 Post contains images KarelXWB : The containment box should prevent any fire from spreading. The box is also sealed off, no air can go in, so a fire should extinguish itself (and ther
30 ikramerica : Yes, but no catastrophic event was imminent on the NH plane, the electrolyte in the battery is non-toxic, and the redesign was to further prevent some
31 Stitch : And what caught fire on JL8's battery was the plastic wiring on the cells, not the cells themselves. This wiring has been replaced with a grade that h
32 airmagnac : Looking at it rationnally : An airplane is flying through air so cold and with so little density as to kill any living being instantly, it's flying s
33 Post contains images B6JFKH81 : 4 to 5 DAYS per plane?? Okay, so being someone on the technical side of the industry I have a few questions about that: > How many batteries per a
34 Stitch : Two. There is new wiring within the battery pack and I expect the wiring of the external connectors will be upgraded, as well. There will probably be
35 carbon787 : this is one of the most 'makes sense' statement I have yet read in these threads since the start of the grounding!!
36 KarelXWB : It's not just a simple swap, space in the avionics bay is limited and you have to do some rewiring too. Mechanics must also drill a small hole in the
37 airmagnac : Completely agreed, there apparently was no immediate danger in either case. But what may seem ridiculous to you is just proper saftey policies : - yo
38 PITingres : The ground has been well covered, so I'll simply add that although I've not seen anything publicized along these lines, I'd be astonished if the fix
39 B6JFKH81 : Thanks for the extra info guys, the time now makes more sense.
40 PW100 : That is not entirely correct. Allow me to explain. As I wrote in another 787 thread, it is perfectly legal to do all kind of work on an airliner befo
41 ikramerica : Actually, its completely unprecedented. There is no historical reason that the 787 was grounded in this fashion, yet the 777 was not after the BA cra
42 Revelation : Earlier in the discussions I said I would have no issue with flying the unmodified 787, but also said I am glad the FAA took action because the publi
43 kalvado : Well, maybe because there is obviously no political reason? Unlike the cases you mentioned, 787 demonstrated a PATTERN of failures. In case of A380,
44 Post contains links art : It's very good to hear that the 787 will soon be back in service. Boeing had a banner ad at the top of one of the pages on a.net (perhaps it's still t
45 airmagnac : In all of these cases, and in the cases of all the ADs issued over the years for all aircraft, the main cause(s) was (were) quickly narrowed down, ev
46 XT6Wagon : Better not fly then. EVERY battery technology in use on aircraft has the potential to cause fires, and they don't have containment systems in many ca
47 Post contains images Stitch : The only "raging inferno" caused by a battery on a commercial airliner you will ever encounter is going to be one in the overhead bin or under the sea
48 Post contains links PHX787 : http://www.japantoday.com/smartphone...-up-to-200-boeing-787-test-flights NH conducting 100-200 test flights throughout May and will resume service in
49 twiga : Exactly - I couldn't agree more. Below I tried a post with a similar theme but this keeps coming back. "I think it all comes down to not trusting the
50 neutrino : Fully agree. To some of these overly paranoid folks, even the train, bus, car or bicycle for that matter could be susceptible to catastrophic mechani
51 Post contains links neutrino : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...batteries/articleshow/19672921.cms ...and the batteries system replacement/modification at JAL & ANA have b
52 neutrino : Meanwhile, at Air India, another Boeing team has joined a previous one already there. They will work on at least two aircraft at a time, with first co
53 bikerthai : AOG teams works 24 hours on 12 hrs shifts. But somethings just can not be sped up. Reason: 1) Working space is limitted. You can probably only get on
54 kanban : not to mention deburr and FOD removal
55 sonomaflyer : Its unclear what you are asking about. I don't know of anything other than the battery in the 787 to overheat. To date, we haven't seen any other har
56 Post contains images twiga : Now just as many of us are all getting comfortably smug about the resolution to the battery issues you decide to upset the apple cart. At this rate y
57 Post contains links bikerthai : Nothing to worry about. The TR and Power converter I was talking about are the boxes that takes the AC power from the engines and convert them to DC
58 Post contains images KELPkid : Ahem, may I also remind you that there are two raging infernos already going (one on each wing?) However, as the design of the turbofan engines is fa
59 Post contains links hkcanadaexpat : A nice pic in the attached article of what appears to be JA-808A getting the battery fix at Okayama airport where it got stranded when ANA decided to
60 Post contains images lightsaber : I love all the Goblins coming out of the closet! There are too many energy sources on an airplane to discuss in this thread! And if you had ever seen
61 KarelXWB : The EASA today approved the battery design change.
62 Post contains links Stitch : I've been following the NTSB Boeing 787 Battery Investigative Hearing today and it has been very informative on a variety of subjects. The hearings re
63 Post contains links Stitch : I watched the entire proceedings and learned a great deal, but here is a summary of today's NTSB panel. Please note that Mr. Trimble has a typo in the
64 Revelation : Thanks for the interesting link. Mike Sinnett says the nail test was too conservative and the heat test wasn't conservative enough (even though the c
65 Post contains images Stitch : To be fair, he's not a battery engineer. Boeing worked with GS Yuasa to determine what tests were appropriate because GS Yuasa had the expertise. GE
66 JoeCanuck : I've become very optimistic about this fix. I have no doubt that with the scrutiny of the problem, these mods will prevent any chance of an accident d
67 nimool : apparently QTR 787 left LHR!
68 Post contains links PHX787 : Correct! He's on the move! Parked B787s, Where Are They? (by azncsa4qf744er Apr 11 2013 in Civil Aviation)
69 bikerthai : I think you got it backward. ""What we've since found out is that the nail penetration test, while it was believed at the time to be representative o
70 JoeCanuck : The problem with that test is it doesn't give you a realistic failure sequence. The nail at least gives you a reaction to a dead short and overchargi
71 na : I took a photo of AIs dustcovered 787 fleet a few days ago, 4 of them in a row accompanied by a stored and equally dusty 777.
72 twiga : Good question. I know little about batteries but here are my thoughts. Like anything thats manufactured there is likely some variation in how much ma
73 Post contains links tugger : Just read this and found it an interesting tidbit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...-acd6-11e2-9493-2ff3bf26c4b4_story Tugg
74 twiga : Sorry correction. I ment max charge 'amount' (voltage) and min charge 'amount' (voltage).
75 twiga : I have also been pondering these questions, because they also relate to, how do you compute safety at the overall airplane level of 1: 10^7 (1:100 mi
76 rwessel : Your math here has some issues. 1:5**7 is neither 1:50000000 nor is (1:5**7)**2 1:10**7.
77 PHX787 : Looks like NH could begin test flights next week.
78 Post contains links blrsea : Wow, the cost of the fix is estimated at $465,000 per plane! Isn't that pretty high for a containment box and new improved battery? I remember someone
79 twiga : Thanks you are right - there is also an issue with 2) so will correct it as well. Just not used to working with so many dam zeros. Here are the corre
80 Post contains links PHX787 : Looks like japan gave the green light. Flights from NH therefore can commence at anytime really. Keep an eye on flightaware. http://www.japantoday.com
81 rwessel : (2b) 1:10**2 is 1:100, not 1:1000 (2c) 1:10**7 is correct if (2b) is 1:10**3 (3a) (3b) 1:10**3 is 1:1000, not 1:10000 (3c) 1:10**7 is neither (1:10**
82 twiga : It does seem awfully expensive. I saw somewhere it was $16,000 per battery. So with upgraded battery, say $30,000 and containment box with accessorie
83 twiga : Thanks again rwessel - will redo all 3 tables and finally get it right. Sorry for the inconvenience. Now lets assume (a) is the first level/ layer of
84 Post contains images NAV20 : There are quite extensive changes to the re-charging systems as well, plus wiring modifications, twiga; followed by exhaustive testing. And Boeing wi
85 gators312 : How will this fix go for planes to be assembled or that are on the line now? I assume at some point it will be incorporated into the line work rather
86 Post contains links NYC777 : The FAA has published the amended AD for the 787 in today's Federal Register making the battery modification official: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_a
87 Post contains links Stitch : Following the FAA and EASA, the JTSB has approved NH and JL resuming 787 revenue flights.
88 Post contains links sankaps : It has approved it conditional on additional checks and tests: http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel...set-to-resume-787-flights/2115241/ "Japan is re
89 Post contains images twiga : As you gathered I was just being silly. Boeing probably had to double or more their normal AOG teams and as you say they came off their production li
90 bikerthai : On the other thread Stitch posted a link to the actual AD. The AD has the $400K+ strickly for parts!!!! Labor was estimated at about $9K. Total mod i
91 Post contains links tortugamon : According to the former Chairman of the NTSB, that still may not be enough. The Times had an interesting opinion piece by James Hall today. He mentio
92 Post contains links NAV20 : Pretty good BBC story here which sheds some light on the scale of effort - and cost, and manpower - that has been necessary to deal with the problem u
93 PHX787 : NH and JL frames left at HND have moved to the eastern parking bay at the s.eastern portion of HND. All of them have airstairs attached to them and we
94 Post contains links denverdanny : I don't know. I found this statement to be somewhat disturbing: "Even if we never know root cause, the enclosure keeps the airplane safe, it eliminate
95 Stitch : We've seen the consequences of failure - the battery vents liquified electrolyte and the plastics inside and outside the box catch fire. The new plas
96 NAV20 : Oddly enough, denverdanny, the Titanic probably 'proves the reverse case' in many ways. She was one of the first ships built with watertight bulkhead
97 par13del : The solutions being implemented has nothing to do with the root cause, it is to prevent any damage to the a/c from any failure of the battery whether
98 Post contains links Revelation : Thanks for the interesting link. The one you posted now just shows an interview with Randy Tinseth. The following now shows the containment: http://w
99 denverdanny : But... what if it's a symptom of another problem? Since they seem to be admitting they don't know the exact problem, then have they sufficiently addr
100 PITingres : Not meaning to pile on, but ... this sort of thing is perhaps a lot more common in engineering than non-engineers realize. It has happened any number
101 kanban : Here's the latest Av Herald summation and some new diagrams from the Japanese investigation. The basic problem with finding some root causes is the ev
102 Revelation : Just watched an engineer commit a fix that said "if X fails, retry three times". Asked him why three was the chosen value and he said "well, once isn
103 Stitch : Yes. With the new containment and venting system, no matter how or why it happens, should all eight cells in the battery enter thermal runaway and ve
104 Revelation : And IMHO so is the trust the public has in Boeing, at least to some degree, and for some period of time. IMHO this is to some degree at risk, since e
105 tortugamon : If something goes wrong with the battery again I am reasonably confident that it will happen while the plane is on the ground as the batteries are no
106 Post contains links kanban : here's the link I forgot to post http://avherald.com/h?article=45c377c5&opt=0
107 Post contains links 7BOEING7 : Good website for ANA battery and other information: http://www.ana.co.jp/wws/japan/e/local/common/share/boeing787info/
108 Post contains images twiga : Let me have a try at answering your question(s). I don't know how up to date you are on all thats been going on so its a bit of a summary. We seem to
109 rcair1 : Many times when you go to the doctor - they do not know what the "root cause" is - they treat the symptoms and you get better. This is what Boeing di
110 Post contains images PHX787 : For those who care: NH is operating a "symbolic" test flight today (a day earlier than what was previously announced, i'm assuming for the golden week
111 cornutt : I don't think that's a good analogy. In the Comet case they didn't have any idea what happened -- one minute the plane was flying, and the next minut
112 NAV20 : There's another possibility - that there was no actual 'root cause,' that (as with most malfunctions/accidents) there was in fact a combination of ci
113 twiga : I agree - with root cause its either (a) one item or (b) combination of items. The NTSB and everyone is fixated on (a) and for obvious reasons its th
114 DashTrash : Ask UPS. They lost a 747-400 and a DC-8 to these things. They aren't the only aircraft that have been lost. We've been trying to get them out of the
115 moriarty : Guess Boeing has quite a challenge restoring confidence in the plane. I've seen several ad-banners on various sites from Boeing with a link to the pre
116 JoeCanuck : Boeing and the FAA have prevented a battery fire from bringing down a 787...which is not the same as preventing a battery fire from starting...(though
117 XT6Wagon : These ads are aimed at investors, not at anyone else in the industry.
118 rcair1 : Large shipments of Li and LiIon batteries in cargo - potentially not safely packed - are a far different problem than 2 batteries designed and certif
119 PW100 : You can't be serious in comparing thousands of pounds (in weight) of Li-ion batteries, densely packed on a pallet, possibly with dozens of pallets, i
120 DashTrash : When I see "airline pilot" under your occupation, your opinions will hold a little more water. I say this fully understanding you may be well educate
121 Post contains images PW100 : Ah well. OK. I see. No use in further discussion then. I wonder why you bothered putting you view here in the first place.
122 tugger : Why on earth would that be the case AT ALL in situations like this? That just seems silly. Tugg
123 Post contains images rcair1 : Eeeyup - pretty much torpedoed any further posts from me... - well not really, but certainly in response to this item.
124 PW100 : Sorry about that. We can't all be sitting in the front office . . .
125 tortugamon : As your occupation says furloughed pilot does that mean you are suspended from commenting too? Just kidding DashTrash. If pilots' opinions were the o
126 Post contains images lightsaber : I suspect that will be the long term answer. Implemented as a quiet 'battery life extension' program. I can see what that could concern some. But the
127 nomadd22 : Most of the life shortening problems I've found in lithium batteries stem from cramming that last 10% of the charge in. That's when the voltage and h
128 JoeCanuck : It's easy enough to drop the charging cutoff threshold by a half a volt or so, as long as the batteries stay in the voltage range of the equipment th
129 bikerthai : Now can you convince my wife that discharging the IPad to 1% or waiting tooth brush to stop running before you recharge will shorten the life expecta
130 rcair1 : PW100 - I probably should have included DashTrash's quote instead of yours. I was agreeing with you!
131 JoeCanuck : Most Li-ion battery powered devices have built in voltage control. They automatically stop charging when the maximum voltage is reached and power cut
132 Post contains links Viscount724 : Link to the Boeing service bulletin covering the 787 modifications. The parts kit alone costs about $285,000. http://www.regulations.gov/contentSt...o
133 zeke : From a pure maths point of view, the probability of a specific event is actually zero. The reason being the aircraft as a system is a continuous rand
134 twiga : Since you don't trust the engineers and scientists and I guess that includes me, please check post #133 from a respected occupation other than the fo
135 twiga : The purpose for posting this in the first place was to gain some small understanding in how these metrics for safety might work. I qualified myself t
136 Post contains links Alpage : When I said 1 month ago that the 787 fix was a band aid I was almost crucified here, "How dare you say this and that"..." How could you..is not band a
137 par13del : I cannot acces the article, but based on your post are you saying that the battery fix is a bandaid to a number of out-standing problems with the 787
138 817Dreamliiner : Well, did the battery catch fire like before? If it didnt, then I dont see how you cant relate it to the fix...
139 KarelXWB : As I understand it, the electrical panel has nothing to do with the battery.
140 Post contains images lightsaber : But how deep the cycling is also effects wear. Both problems solved. Plus the charging is slower (less heat). All parts of what cause a Li battery fa
141 Post contains links 7BOEING7 : From Reuters: "Engineers found discoloration on a connection on an electrical panel following a flight from Tokyo's Haneda Airport to Sapporo on Japa
142 Alpage : "the electrical panel has nothing to do with the battery". Sounds really weird.
143 sankaps : So according to you, if a light bulb fails in your car, or a dashboard meter malfunctions, or the radio goes on the blink, or wiring in your dashboar
144 Post contains images PITingres : Only if you insist on visualizing the EE bay as a single large glowing ball of light. Seriously? The battery is its own box, not even mounted on the
145 Post contains images PITingres : Let's suppose that I have problems with my basement door, which is wood. The latch doesn't engage reliably because the door or jamb has sagged. I fina
146 Post contains images bikerthai : It is so funny to me that all this talk about failed battery has overtaken the skepticism about a composite airframe (in a crash) as the bane of the 7
147 lightsaber : What danger? Have you ever seen what happens when aluminum catches fire? It is far more energetic a fuel than CFRP. Remember the Sheffield. Once alum
148 Post contains images Stitch : He was being facetious, sir.
149 Post contains images KarelXWB : Here is a picture showing the new battery exhaust:
150 Post contains images bikerthai : Yep, they didn't have a smiley for smart a$$. bt
151 lightsaber : Touche' Lightsaber
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...
Boeing 787 Test Flight March 25! posted Mon Mar 25 2013 11:48:32 by Fiedman
Ryanair CEO: Boeing 787 Problems 'Regulatory Crap' posted Tue Mar 19 2013 10:52:45 by billreid
UA 787 Aircraft / Schedule Changes posted Thu Jan 17 2013 11:44:46 by fun2fly
Qatar Airways Boeing 787 Grounded posted Thu Dec 13 2012 05:47:38 by Valorien
NY Times: Test-Flying The Boeing 787 Dreamliner posted Fri Nov 30 2012 14:51:24 by planemannyc
BBC Visits Boeing 787 - TV Documentary posted Wed Nov 21 2012 00:04:14 by factsonly
United's Boeing 787 Arriving Narita posted Sun Oct 28 2012 23:00:51 by amwest2united
Tailored Arrivals Video Of Boeing 787 Dreamliner posted Wed Oct 24 2012 23:46:35 by propilot83
Boeing 787 Sounding Like Prop? posted Mon Oct 1 2012 10:46:04 by AirlineReporter
Boeing 787 Ferry Flights To Kftw Paint Shop posted Wed Sep 26 2012 17:18:26 by gdg9