Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
smolt
Posts: 276
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 12:11 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:05 am

The link above which PHX787 gave us
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/ne...-OYT1T00225.htm?from=rss&ref=rssad

also tells that ATC controller observed thin white smoke short above nose gear, called "electric room" after landing.

JAL 007 is now on final ILS course at NARITA.
 
multimark
Posts: 474
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:53 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:06 am

Quoting CYLW (Reply 48):
I don't think any crew would order an emergency evacuation based on a smell. Emergency evacs are dangerous in their own right. Injuries are common on these types of evacuations.

There must have been more than just a smell of smoke and a battery indication.

Isn't there also a substantial cost to repacking all the slides?
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:09 am

Quoting smolt (Reply 151):
The link above which PHX787 gave us
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/ne...-OYT1T00225.htm?from=rss&ref=rssad

also tells that ATC controller observed thin white smoke short above nose gear, called "electric room" after landing.

JAL 007 is now on final ILS course at NARITA.

Short finals and touchdown now. It's eerie almost seeing it grounded like this. Is my translation ok? Haha
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:13 am

Quoting multimark (Reply 152):
Isn't there also a substantial cost to repacking all the slides?

Yes, although I'm not aware that anybody ever considers that in the process of doing an evacuation...if you need to evacuate, you evacuate. If you think you might need to evacuate, you evacuate. Good action by the crew.

Various sources are reporting ANA and JAL are grounding for inspections...do we know what they're inspecting? That would be rather telling that they know what they're looking for.

Tom.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6360
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:17 am

Quoting multimark (Reply 152):
Isn't there also a substantial cost to repacking all the slides?

So? It's more expensive to recover dead bodies, if it were that kind of situation.

The captain wasn't thinking of the inconvenience of repacking the slides. He apparently felt that an emergency evacuation was warranted and had the right the make the judgement call.

Remember, the crew smelled burning smells, apparently had some EICAS messages and did not have a clear picture as to the extent of the smoke source. It's easy for you to turn on the TV news and play "arm chair quarterback" and decide he didn't need to order an evacuation down the slides. It's a totally different situation for the crew during an incident who is responsible for the people sitting behind them..

Remember Air Canada 797? Everyone was alive when they stopped on the runway at CVG. More than half died during the evacuation when the fire flashed through the cabin. Seconds meant life or death. Thankfully, it was not the kind of situation in this incident, but apparently the Captain felt an emergency evacuation was appropriate based the information he had - and didn't have.
 
Markhkg
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:13 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:18 am

Video of the 787 Evacuation (TBS News - In Japanese)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yty-zd1rDnc
Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
 
mingocr83
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:06 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:20 am

7 incidents in 8 days...not normal. I feel sorry for Boeing at this point. One thing that all these planes have in common is that they needed a ton of rework at Everett, could this be the culprit?

For the 787 personnel on the forums, how is the battery installed on the 787...where are the electrical bays?
A380, A321, A320, A319, 757-200, 737-800WL, 737-700WL, E190
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:21 am

Quoting Markhkg (Reply 156):

Thank you for this video. About :25 into the video you can see the smoke that smolt referenced.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
pilotanthony
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:52 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:21 am

is Boeing going to release any statement? or ANA? anybody? lol
Anthony Paraschou
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:25 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
Up until today, it was having a better history than the 777 or 767, which keep getting held up as model EIS's because of a combination of ignorance and rose-coloured glasses.

Not by me. You're putting words in my mouth.

But I don't recall any electrical arcing or fires on board early 767's or 777's, nor do I recall major airlines grounding them even for a few days, though maybe I am just looking back with "rose colored glasses". If I had been here during those types of events on early 767's and 777's, I'd be saying the exact same things.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
User avatar
pilotanthony
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:52 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:28 am

cant have been that serious is everybody is standing around the plane after evacuation, and not running.....
Anthony Paraschou
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:30 am

Quoting pilotanthony (Reply 159):
is Boeing going to release any statement? or ANA? anybody? lol


ANA held a news conference with them being reportedly excessively apologetic. "Bowing deeply" according to fox.


Guys it's late in Arizona and I am gonna have to get up early.   

I'll have to catch up tomorrow and I'll translate the updated article. I'm hitting the hay for tonight. Keep me updated.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

ANA B787 Emergency Landing and Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:32 am

Quoting mingocr83 (Reply 157):
One thing that all these planes have in common is that they needed a ton of rework at Everett, could this be the culprit?

It's possible. Has anyone correlated the incidents to line numbers? Lower line numbers have more rework. That would have some positive aspects...it would mean the incidents aren't design problems and are contained to a relatively small block.

Quoting mingocr83 (Reply 157):
For the 787 personnel on the forums, how is the battery installed on the 787...where are the electrical bays?

The forward EE bay is below the flight deck, the normal position on most aircraft. The main battery is in the forward EE bay. The aft EE bay is immediately aft of the main landing gear wheel well (the forward end of the aft cargo bay). For most layouts, it's below about the middle of economy class.

There are emergency batteries over the doors, in portions of the ceiling, and in a couple of spots in the flight deck. These are much smaller batteries to power dedicated emergency systems in special circumstances and, for the vast majority of an aircraft's life, never do anything.

Quoting pilotanthony (Reply 159):
is Boeing going to release any statement? or ANA? anybody? lol

I would assume so. I can't see how they can't.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 160):
Not by me. You're putting words in my mouth.

Sorry, I worded that poorly. I did not mean to imply that you, specifically, were overselling the 767 or 777 EIS. There are several posters who have said that Boeing is slipping because the 787 EIS "should be more like the 767 or 777" when, in fact, those were just as bad if not worse (so far).

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 160):
But I don't recall any electrical arcing or fires on board early 767's or 777's

I don't recall any arcing. I recall fires, engine surges, generator failures, a litany of very-hard-to-troubleshoot electrical gremlins (the 777 in particular used an all new ARINC communication bus).

Tom.
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:33 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 158):
About :25 into the video you can see the smoke that smolt referenced.

I can't tell where that smoke is coming from - it appears to be coming from the ground? Is it actually smoke and not steam?

Quoting pilotanthony (Reply 161):
cant have been that serious is everybody is standing around the plane after evacuation, and not running.....

Well, what do you expect them to do? Where do you expect them to run?

a) There is an active runway on one side

b) There are fire engines all around getting ready to move

c) The other sides are bordered by grass... and more taxiway.

It seems to me that the passengers are waiting for the f/a's to tell them what to do, and at one point you see one f/a running and other people then start following her. But she looks like she's running the way Japanese people at work always run, not out of fear. Once they're off the plane, I'm not sure why you'd think they'd keep running - they got a safe distance away, they're not going to die from smoke inhalation 100 feet away from the plane. Nobody has suggested there were bombs going off on the plane, or fuel tanks on fire.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
NorthstarBoy
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:53 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:36 am

I can't help but wonder:

A. If the 787 is going to be the modern day equivalent of the Comet, totally revolutionary, but with unforseen problems that are going to require some kind of massive redesign before re-entry into service is permitted.

B. If any of these problems could have been solved by creating a full scale mockup ala the 707/727/737/747.

I also cant help but wonder why any of these problems weren't caught during the test program, isnt' that why they have the test program, to find, document, and fix any possible bug that could develop over the equivalent of a 30 year service life?

It seems like maybe someone in the engineering department was asleep at the wheel or else these batteries weren't properly quality controlled before being installed into the airplane. IMO this problem should have been discovered and fixed long before the airplanes ever entered commercial service.
Yes, I'd like to see airbus go under so Boeing can have their customers!
 
flightsimer
Posts: 1075
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:37 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 144):
What multiple engine failures? On what multiple carriers?
I'm sure that the A380 has experienced IFSD's just like every other aircraft. I'm equally sure there have been absolutely zero "multiple" shutdowns....


I guess i worded it in a way that could lead to misunderstanding... I did not mean multiple engine shut downs on one flight.

What I meant was there were multiple cases of which engines were shut down during a flight. If I remember correctly, both Singapore and/or Emirates have experienced multiple cases of shutdowns with one or both of the carriers having to replace whole engines on certain cases.

As for the wing cracks, like I said above, we don't know what would have happened had they not been found. All we know is that they are not considered a major issue at the very moment. And if they are "perfectly safe" as you say, then Airbus wouldn't be making a fix to correct it and they would not require inspections on them either.

Again, your assuming that the smell came from the battery area. We still don't know for sure where it came from. Just because we know a battery warning was given, doesn't mean it had anything to do with the battery.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
Wrong way...it was allowed because of the *777* evac tests. The 787 has the same aisles and doors but less seats, so if you can get a 777 out (which was proved by evac test) then you can get a 787 out.

Thanks for the correction. Do you know, will they be able to do this with the -9 and presumably the -10 as well?

I do remember the article said 767 though, so it must have been an error back then.

Edit: i found these two articles, the one, which i remember only lists the 767 but the other lists both as being used
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...reamliner-evacuation-trial-345176/
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...d-evacuation-demonstration-211920/

[Edited 2013-01-15 23:38:40]
Commercial / Airline Pilot
 
CM
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 4:17 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:40 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 158):
Thank you for this video. About :25 into the video you can see the smoke that smolt referenced

The smoke in the video appears to be coming from the forward outflow valve. The cabin (at least the aft cabin) appeared in the video to be entirely smoke free. To me, the indicates something in the forward part of the airplane (fwd cabin or fwd equipment bay). Incidentally, the 787's main battery (which is identical to the APU battery) is located in the forward equipment bay.
 
mingocr83
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:06 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:43 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 163):
It's possible. Has anyone correlated the incidents to line numbers? Lower line numbers have more rework. That would have some positive aspects...it would mean the incidents aren't design problems and are contained to a relatively small block.

That is my point, if all the incidents can be correlated to the Line number it could narrow down the problems and provide a quicker solution being a small block.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 163):
The forward EE bay is below the flight deck, the normal position on most aircraft. The main battery is in the forward EE bay. The aft EE bay is immediately aft of the main landing gear wheel well (the forward end of the aft cargo bay). For most layouts, it's below about the middle of economy class.

There are emergency batteries over the doors, in portions of the ceiling, and in a couple of spots in the flight deck. These are much smaller batteries to power dedicated emergency systems in special circumstances and, for the vast majority of an aircraft's life, never do anything.

Thanks for the info Tom! Appreciate the explanation!
A380, A321, A320, A319, 757-200, 737-800WL, 737-700WL, E190
 
airlinebuilder
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 1:37 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:44 am

this is what we call total haste that made a whole lot of waste just to win their share of the market since Airbus has grown to be a formidable giant and Boeing the was once grand and institution now reached a point to be being a subterranean existence.

Lately Boeing has been consistent to losing the race except for 2012 which i believe is a fluke.....just being honest guys!
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:47 am

Quoting rsmith6621a (Reply 15):
Maybe ANA doesn't know how to maintain this aircraft... seems only ANA is having the bulk of the problems.

Surely one of the most uninformed statements on this entire sorry series of episodes.

Quoting F9animal (Reply 32):
Guys! This is totally normal. Its a new airplane. Things like this happen. Probably another arc or battery containment. Nothing big.

This is sarcasm, correct? Or a troll?

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 45):
Again, this happens and life goes on, usually rather quickly.

757 fleet grounded at AA for inspection. MD80 fleet grounded at AA for inspection. MD80 fleet grounded at AS for inspection. A380 fleet grounded at SQ, QF for inspection.

I'm sure there were many more, it's just those I recall of the top of my head. Pretty sure airlines have had to ground the 747 a few times for inspection.

Sure, but for what kinds of issues, over what period of time, and with how many airframes in service?

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 57):
Over-reaction out of fear is not unknown to pilots. Over-reaction/mis-reading the situation is a main cause of pilot error.

At this point, all the hype has everyone freaked out.

The minimization of the issues and shifting of "blame" to anyone or anything while strenuously defending the aircraft is getting to be really tiring.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 61):
When the 380 suffered those engine problems they were briefly grounded too.

Only the 380s with RR engines were grounded for inspection. It had nothing to do with the intrinsic design and systems of the A380 itself, just with onw of the engine providers (no problems with the other).

Quoting kanban (Reply 81):
Hey an A333 had smoke in the cabin today.. in Tokyo no less.. where's the hysteria?

Sure, we would be hysterical too if 20 different A330s had smoke in the cabin today (given they have almost 1000 frames in service compared to less than 50 787s).

Quoting Lufthansa411 (Reply 89):
When the 787 has 925+ frames produced and has proven itself a safe and reliable aircraft overall then we can start wondering why there is so much hype regarding these incidents. In the mean time, I think it is appropriate to question things.

Exactly!

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 97):
Didn't an A330 have a crash during testing too?

Yes, when the crew over-rode the safety systems and took the aircraft beyond design limits when demonstrating a one-engine roll at low altitude.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 96):
This minimization (some of it from seasoned posters on this forum who I usually respect very much) is really tiresome. The vast majority of 787's in service were just grounded by their airlines, which is a very rare event for an airline that will lose money by grounding these aircraft.

Exactly!

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 127):
And we can also say that the 777 has had 2 hull loss accidents and the A330 has had 4 with one being while it was still in testing. The 787 has had ZERO, which must mean its the safer plane right?

With all due respect, the statement above shows a very tenuous understanding of the field of statistics.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
f we don't know what the problem is, how do we know they're not just teething?

Sure they are teething problems as in problems associated with a new aircraft, but these do not appear to be minor or routine teething problems, these appear to be very serious teething problems. Not problems that can be minimized by dismissing them to be the usual teeting problems.
 
User avatar
pilotanthony
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:52 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:49 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 164):
Well, what do you expect them to do? Where do you expect them to run?

a) There is an active runway on one side

b) There are fire engines all around getting ready to move

c) The other sides are bordered by grass... and more taxiway.

1. The active runway is behind the aircraft
2. The active runway was closed, making it no longer ACTIVE
3. Run to the grass as long as you are away from danger, who knows if theres a fire or not in there, safety always must come first in aviation, obviously there was no major issue since nobody was told to move well CLEAR of the aircraft.

here's the video of the aircraft after evacuation.... http://news.sky.com/story/1038642/bo...mliners-grounded-by-japan-airlines
Anthony Paraschou
 
apodino
Posts: 4020
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:02 am

Not saying that the 787 doesn't have its issues...but I see a lot of these types of problems on the CRJ on a daily basis, and yet there is no media outcry over the CRJ is there?
 
flood
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:05 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:05 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
Depending on how long these voluntary groundings last, I suspect it might finally push 787 dispatch reliability below those aircraft at equivalent points in service.

That makes no sense to me. If ANA were to voluntarily ground the fleet for 10 days, surely that wouldn't be counted as a 500+ flight cancellation hit due to MX. I don't see how this incident affects DR at all. If anything, it will affect their flight completion rate (by a mere 1).

[Edited 2013-01-15 23:19:40]
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:10 am

One more thing before I hit the sack for tonight: aircraft in question which landed in Takamatsu is JA804A.


Takamatsu's IAT code is TAK and ISCO code RJOT.

The airfield offers one runway, 08/26, which is 2,500 meters, or 8,202 feet.

[Edited 2013-01-15 23:18:22]
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
cbphoto
Posts: 1264
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:23 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:15 am

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 165):
I can't help but wonder:

A. If the 787 is going to be the modern day equivalent of the Comet, totally revolutionary, but with unforseen problems that are going to require some kind of massive redesign before re-entry into service is permitted.

B. If any of these problems could have been solved by creating a full scale mockup ala the 707/727/737/747.

I also cant help but wonder why any of these problems weren't caught during the test program, isnt' that why they have the test program, to find, document, and fix any possible bug that could develop over the equivalent of a 30 year service life?

It seems like maybe someone in the engineering department was asleep at the wheel or else these batteries weren't properly quality controlled before being installed into the airplane. IMO this problem should have been discovered and fixed long before the airplanes ever entered commercial service.

First things first, comparing the Comet to the 787 is extremely inaccurate. The Comet had numerous in flight break ups, which resulted in a string of crashes and deaths. The issues with the 787 are no where near the scale of the Comet.

Again, with computers and technology we have today, a full scale mockup would be just a waste of resources. With the computers alone, engineers can run many more tests and get quicker results, rather then building a full scale model.

We still don't know what is wrong with the aircraft, whether its an issue with the electrical system on the 787, or just a bad batch of batteries manufactured by a third party vendor. Before we accuse engineers of sleeping on the job, or quality assurance people of not showing up to work, lets figure out what is wrong with the aircraft!
ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:25 am

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 175):
We still don't know what is wrong with the aircraft, whether its an issue with the electrical system on the 787, or just a bad batch of batteries manufactured by a third party vendor. Before we accuse engineers of sleeping on the job, or quality assurance people of not showing up to work, lets figure out what is wrong with the aircraft!

The first step of which is to acknowledge there may indeed be something or things wrong with the aircraft (ie it not just dismiss as routine teething problems anymore), which in itself seems like a huge deal for some of us to come to terms with.
 
User avatar
PITingres
Posts: 1325
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:33 am

Quoting sankaps (Reply 176):
The first step of which is to acknowledge there may indeed be something or things wrong with the aircraft (ie it not just dismiss as routine teething problems anymore)

Certainly there may be something systemically wrong with the aircraft. The point is, that unless you KNOW what the problems are, you DON'T KNOW if they are or are not routine teething problems. That's not an apologist position, that's just logic. Neither the hand-wringers nor the optimists have any factual basis for their statements at this point, which makes this entire thread very annoying to be honest.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
peterjohns
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 11:49 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:45 am

Now we know if anything goes wrong, especially in the aeronautical world, someone usually has pictures or even a film of it.
But if you are told that "we have to land again due to a minor technical problem involving a little smoke- and err- don´t be surprised, we are going to use these chutes for disembarking today" which translates into english "get the f*.. out- we´re ablaze!" then somebody has the nerve to get his Camcorder out and film the whole thing... Wow!! These japanese must have nerves of steel or... no, let´s hope for this possibility  
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:50 am

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 164):
I can't tell where that smoke is coming from - it appears to be coming from the ground? Is it actually smoke and not steam?

Considering they've probably braked rather hard to get the plane to stop as soon as possible, could it just be coming from the brakes?
 
User avatar
vegas005
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:25 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:53 am

Fortunate enough to have flown it, but was not really impressed by it. I was flamed last week when I said I won't fly it again until it is fixed. What do you think now...smoke is nothing to joke about and this needs to be fixed. Boeing quality control is horrible and so far we have battery fires, batteries smoking, fuel leaks (multiple times), brake issues, windows cracking, toilets not working, oxygen masks inop, computer issues and the list goes on and on.

As a side note, I listened to and watched the Qatar first takeoff in a 787 from Zurich on Monday, and the Tower was all over them because the microphone/antenna was not transmitting properly. Not a biggie, but just add that to the list of issues.....

Hoping they get everything sorted quickly and get a solid reputation going!
 
bluesky73
Posts: 518
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:36 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:54 am

I know there are bigger priorities to fix issues but bet ANA paint those 787 titles out over next few months. My wife that knows nothing about planes said this morning "is that another problem with the 787"?

Hope Boeing sort teething issues soon and get the confidence of airlines and passengers. Unfortunately 24hournews will repeat this all today and lead to exaggerated hysteria.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:59 am

Quoting PITingres (Reply 177):
Certainly there may be something systemically wrong with the aircraft. The point is, that unless you KNOW what the problems are, you DON'T KNOW if they are or are not routine teething problems. That's not an apologist position, that's just logic. Neither the hand-wringers nor the optimists have any factual basis for their statements at this point, which makes this entire thread very annoying to be honest.

Agreed.

Most of the hand-wringers are not saying there is definitively something wrong with the aircraft, but are saying these incidents cannot just be dismissed as routine teething (which is usually synonymous with minor) problems by the optimists or minimizers of whatever we term we want to use, using false comparisons to "an A330 also had smoke in the cabin today" to minimize the issue. These problems need to be investigated thoroughly and that is what it appears tha FAA, Boeing, and the airlines are headed towards doing.

I am also stunned by those who suggest the ANA pilots over-reacted. After SR 111, and after the DHL 747 fire and crash in DXB, which themselves were after the Saudia L1011 fire and the British Airtours 737 fires in the 1980s, there are those who still think there is room for over-reaction when there is smoke in the cabin???
 
StickShaker
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:12 am

Just appeared on CNN:

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/01/...e-biggest-lemon-in-history/?iid=EL

Not the type of headlines Boeing would want.


In terms of recent incidents on the 787 I think that Murphy's Law has raised its head again.


Regards,
StickShaker
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8314
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:19 am

Quoting a300 (Reply 70):
I did notice a higher cabin air humidity than the more conventional types.

- I'm impressed you noticed this after such short flights, I've flown the 787 on the FRA-HND and HND-FRA sectors, never noticed the difference.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
ordwaw
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 9:55 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:20 am

Quoting StickShaker (Reply 183):
Just appeared on CNN:

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/01/...e-biggest-lemon-in-history/?iid=EL

Not the type of headlines Boeing would want.

Why is CNN publishing articles with such crazy titles?
The headline pretty much suggests 787 is a lemon, and many people just remember headlines. Then, the first sentence of the article reads ... "Far from it. In fact, many of the concerns over the new aircraft are vastly overstated." And then it goes to suggest most problems are minor and it is the media that has blown everything out of proportions.
 
User avatar
a36001
Posts: 366
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:47 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:35 am

I imagine Air India will have a field day with this! Bet they demand Boeing take all their fleet back for refund plus compensation!   Sorry but I am not a fan of Air India and their behaviour over the 787 has been borderline childish, IMO  
 
n729pa
Posts: 1198
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:16 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:42 am

I love planes regardless of who makes them, but there are some one-eyed Airbus and Boeing fans on this site, and whilst some were quick to kick Airbus and the A380 not that long ago, the shoe is as they say on the other foot now. So let this be a lesson to anyone that thinks that one brand is superior to the other, and boy there are some that get hot under the collar over it.

I like a great many of you can't wait to fly on a 787, but all this news in the past few weeks is indeed not good...not good for Boeing and more importantly not good for the aviation industry when times are hard enough.

I'm not an engineer, but are Boeing rushing some of these aircraft out after all the delays etc? I would never say they are cutting corners in quality control, but perhaps checks haven't been a good as they should have been under pressure to meet targets or avoid further delay penalties. In which case they need to get a grip on that PBQ.

Some of these aircraft were sat around for months (as many pictures on this site will testify), but should that make a difference? It would still have to be checked over before delivery and upon removal from storage.

Given that there have been several different issues, we can't say it's for example a faulty batch of batteries, because it doesn't explain the fuel leaks and brake problems. Hence my question about the final checks before delivery above. There is something wrong, more than just teething problems and if I was an operator of the 787 today, I too would be considering grounding them just as ANA and JAL have. Before the airlinersnet armchair CEOs jump on that remark, think about how you would answer the media if one of your 787s was lost with all on board because you choose to put your head in the sand. ANA and JAL have no choice this has to be done, in the same way Qantas did with the A380, because the risks are too high and you can't gamble with the lives of your passengers/crew (and those on the ground) and after a string of incidents it would be foolhardy not to heed those warnings.

On a positive note, Boeing haven't just forgotten how to make planes or fundamentally made a bad one, it's just they need to get to grips with all of these issues as fast as possible, which I'm sure they will. In the meantime I hope all other 787 flights remain safe and nothing more happens.
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 983
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:50 am

As long as no fatal crash occurs the 787 should be able to survive relatively unscratched. A fatal crash and all bets are off.
However this epidemic of issues with Japanese 787 isn't good in a market with a collective psyche as the Japanese. the grounding today might be warranted from a safety standpoint but might also be a necessity to keep the confidence in the plane by the flying public and the large corporates that fly.

The closest resemblance to this for me is the Q400.
For Q400 the early models were clearly lemons. The plane kept on having issues, being called xmas tree by the early customers because of their warning signals going off so often. Small and annoying incidents that got pretty bad press locally kept on happening. SK in particular struggled and the Swedish media didnt like the plane one bit after to many minor incidents and one major (Kalmar).
Then came 2 major SK incidents that were filmed and shown for days on the local newschannels. Two similar accidents where the landing gear collapsed. No one knew why it happened. Most Canadians posters blamed SK, most European posters blamed Bombardier. Few cared about facts and it became a symbol of national pride or perceived such. Several months later the definite answer came, it was a manufacturing error with the plane, and Bombardier fixed it. In one of the major incidents the SK pilots could have handled the situation better too.
However for SK that report came to late, they had a third accident, one most probably caused by a mechanic. This one was obviously not related to the Q400 but that didn't matter, the flying public in Scandinavia had enough and wouldn't accept any SK Q400 anymore. SK had to ground the plane and get rid of it.
Ground well functioning planes where the cause of the issue had been found and addressed because the customer base demanded it and they couldn't afford to go against public perception.

In a collective society like in Asia its a higher likelihood that a similar scenario can occur. Boeing is probably well aware of it.

I would like to know and gain some understanding to what has happened here. So far no one seems to have an idea and its yet again rhetoric between pro and anti 787 people. Pointless, its a plane, a machine not a puppy.

There must be some reason why JAL grounded the 787 too?
Is it because of public pressure or because there is something worrying with the plane. I guess we shall see tomorrow when thet will decide whether to fly again or ground the 787 longer than a day.
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
 
ordwaw
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 9:55 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:57 am

With regard to the "teething" problems ... Is it just me, but I have not heard of any for LA and ET? Other than seeing the opposite, a concurrent thread dedicated to ET and their great satisfaction with the Dreamliner.
 
keuleatr72
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:30 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:00 am

Quoting ordwaw (Reply 189):
With regard to the "teething" problems ... Is it just me, but I have not heard of any for LA and ET? Other than seeing the opposite, a concurrent thread dedicated to ET and their great satisfaction with the Dreamliner.

LA had some reliability issues. No word from ET though.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-on-787-reliability-issues-380664/
In Putins´ Russia Waldo finds you...
 
brushpilot
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:28 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:11 am

It's just a bad day for the 787 CHRISTINELINER...  
 
GBOAD
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:05 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:19 am

Looking on the bright side, that was a sweet-looking slide deployment on the RH side of the aircraft. Looks like Dr 4L didn't deploy, though, which will raise questions....
 
LH526
Posts: 1990
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2000 2:23 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:22 am

One ANA B787 is currently stored at FRA (Golf positions)
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:24 am

Quoting CM (Reply 167):

Hello CM
You can see some fluid under the belly where the smoke is
What can it be ?
Is there a fire protection in this forward electronic bay ?
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2597
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:26 am

Quoting ordwaw (Reply 185):
Quoting StickShaker (Reply 183):
Just appeared on CNN:

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/01/...e-biggest-lemon-in-history/?iid=EL

Not the type of headlines Boeing would want.

Why is CNN publishing articles with such crazy titles?
The headline pretty much suggests 787 is a lemon, and many people just remember headlines.

Boeing's lawyers must agree with you. CNN has taken down the headline!
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
User avatar
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:29 am

Quoting F9animal (Reply 32):
Guys! This is totally normal. Its a new airplane.

No.
This is NOT normal.
Not with the same issue affecting three different airframes operating with three different carriers.

Sorry.
Proudly avoiding 737 MAX since 18.11.2020.
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 983
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:32 am

192 responses and only a few that are actually informative. This thread just proves why the mass media that we accuse of being full of it actually exist. They found their followers even on this website. I thought A.net folks would know more about aviation than the uneducated average Joe, especially since we all claim we are super duper aviation enthusiasts. I would just let people in the know do their jobs and figure out the issues. I didn't expect this much hysteria here. The most amuzing ones are those that in essence read "we demand responses from Boeing".



[Edited 2013-01-16 01:40:21]
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 983
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:34 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 196):
No.
This is NOT normal.
Not with the same issue affecting three different airframes operating with three different carriers.

Sorry.

Check his other posts, he has a slow day and is trying to be sarcastic.
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
SKAirbus
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 9:55 am

Whoever said, "if it ain't Boeing, it ain't going" is an idiot...

The 787 is starting to become the Marilyn Monroe of the skies... Looks pretty but has some serious issues!
Base: BRU
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: ANA B787 Emergency Landing And Fleet Grounding

Wed Jan 16, 2013 10:04 am

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 165):
I also cant help but wonder why any of these problems weren't caught during the test program, isnt' that why they have the test program, to find, document, and fix any possible bug that could develop over the equivalent of a 30 year service life?

The point of a test program is, among other things, to find problems. However, no test program in the history of aviation has (or probably ever will) find all the problems. This is why even extremely established types that have been in production for decades still have AD's and Service Bulletins issued against them. All the OEM's are extremely good at accelerated aging and getting confidence, to a very high degree, that their designs won't kill anybody. However, not matter how good they are, there is no test that will simulate in-service operation with full fidelity other than in-service operation. The object of testing, in practical terms, isn't to make sure the aircraft is perfect at EIS, but to make sure it's prefect enough that any issues that do drop up are purely economic (dispatch reliability, part replacement, etc.) and not safety threats. Economic performance is something that will continue to be addressed from the first day until several decades after the last frame is delivered.

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 166):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
Wrong way...it was allowed because of the *777* evac tests. The 787 has the same aisles and doors but less seats, so if you can get a 777 out (which was proved by evac test) then you can get a 787 out.

Thanks for the correction. Do you know, will they be able to do this with the -9 and presumably the -10 as well?

I believe so. Even the -10 doesn't have the passenger capacity of the 777-300ER.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 170):
Sure they are teething problems as in problems associated with a new aircraft, but these do not appear to be minor or routine teething problems, these appear to be very serious teething problems.

I think there's a misunderstanding about what "teething problems" are. There is no assumption that they'll all be minor (although that's obviously preferred). "Teething problems" just means, basically, "problems because the airplane is new" as opposed to "problems due to normal operation". All types, from all OEM's, undergo teething problems. Some are minor, some are major. I would agree that these are serious teething problems. Serious (and minor) teething problems are expected. The whole point of the excercise is to 1) make sure that even the serious problems don't hurt anybody and 2) fix the serious ones before the minor ones.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 170):
Not problems that can be minimized by dismissing them to be the usual teeting problems.

Calling something a teething problem isn't minimization. Most types have at least one or two major issues that show up soon after EIS. Nobody should be minimizing (most of) the recent issues as minor...they're important and will be investigated and corrected as such. The main point behind comments like "teething issues" is to distinguish those issues from issues like, as was brought up earlier, Comet...fundamental design flaws. *All* aircraft have problems...this continues through their entire life. Much of the effort of supporting aircraft is identifying and correcting issues that crop up while they're still economic and fixing them before they become safety issues. It's expected that aircraft will identify such issues at a high rate when they're new and at a lower (but never zero) rate as they age. There are usually spikes around the first major maintenance check intervals as well.

Quoting flood (Reply 173):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 150):
Depending on how long these voluntary groundings last, I suspect it might finally push 787 dispatch reliability below those aircraft at equivalent points in service.

That makes no sense to me. If ANA were to voluntarily ground the fleet for 10 days, surely that wouldn't be counted as a 500+ flight cancellation hit due to MX. I don't see how this incident affects DR at all.

Good point...I'm not sure how they intend to account for a voluntary grounding.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 175):
Again, with computers and technology we have today, a full scale mockup would be just a waste of resources.

Not necessarily...one of the challenges that has come up with highly integrated aircraft with high fidelity hardware-in-the-loop simulation is that it gets very hard to tell errors that are actually in the design apart from errors as a result of the simulation. This problem is getting worse, not better, with computers and technology. As a result, there's something of a push to go back towards full scale systems mockups (nobody really needs full scale structure or installation mockups anymore thanks to CAD/CAM).

Quoting sankaps (Reply 176):
The first step of which is to acknowledge there may indeed be something or things wrong with the aircraft (ie it not just dismiss as routine teething problems anymore), which in itself seems like a huge deal for some of us to come to terms with.

Anyone who claims there's nothing wrong with the aircraft is lying. I guarantee there is something wrong with the aircraft...just as I guarantee there are things wrong with the 737, A320, 777, A380, etc. that we don't know about yet. Aircraft aren't designed to break. When they break, it means something has gone wrong. However, engineeings know stuff goes wrong and they design for it. The fundamental question for any EIS (or any problem) is, "Is this thing that's going wrong something I designed for, or something I didn't?".

Quoting vegas005 (Reply 180):
Boeing quality control is horrible and so far we have battery fires, batteries smoking, fuel leaks (multiple times), brake issues, windows cracking, toilets not working, oxygen masks inop, computer issues and the list goes on and on.

This kind of lumping is what's contributing to the hysteria in the press right now. Some issues are major, some are minor. Counting number of incidents isn't very helpful. Breaking down the list above:
Battery fire(s?): very not good, but also designed for...major question here is why the battery failed.
Battery smoking: also very not good, but also designed for...at the moment, lots of conflicting data, but even assuming the worst the question is also why the battery failed and (depending on location) did the smoke containment do its job.
Fuel leaks: Last report I saw was that the same leak happened twice on the same aircraft...that's much more likely to be the same problem not resolved, rather than two independant leaks, but it's pretty clearly nothing related to batteries so it's a different issue (and minor in impact, though very annoying).
Brake issues: This is probably the goofiest of all the reports...LRU's have MTBF's and they fail. In this case, an LRU failed, reported itself as failed (as designed to do), and was replaced. This happens thousands of time a day all over the globe on all types.
Window cracking: Very similar to the brake event...windows crack on all types. Absent additional data, as yet unreported (and hence probably not present given the level of current scrutiny), this is normal aircraft operation.
Oxygen masks inop: I don't know enough to comment on this one but, since the airline at least knew about it, they BITE system did its job and told the crew what was inop so they could deactiavte the seats. A reliability and economic hit, to be sure, but not a safety one.
Computers issues: I don't know what this one refers to.

I'm pretty sure I'm lumped into the list of some people of "Boeing defenders". My point here is not that these issues aren't important...they're important. But some are much more significant than others. Some may be, quite literally, normal operation. Some are absolutely odd and may or may not represent problems with the design (as opposed to problems with quality, installaiton, or just terrible luck). To determine what's what takes disciplined investigation of each event, which is what's happening.

Quoting sankaps (Reply 182):
These problems need to be investigated thoroughly and that is what it appears tha FAA, Boeing, and the airlines are headed towards doing.

Exactly. The processes are running normally, as one would expect.

Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 194):
You can see some fluid under the belly where the smoke is
What can it be ?
Is there a fire protection in this forward electronic bay ?

EE bays are normally protected through containment, isolation, and flammability control (i.e. very limited fuel). So they're heavily protected by design and material selection. This is different than the cargo bays, where you can't control the contents to nearly the same degree, so suppression is used.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 196):
Quoting F9animal (Reply 32):
Guys! This is totally normal. Its a new airplane.

No.
This is NOT normal.

F9animal was being sarcastic. He's been posting similar comments in most threads for a few days to (incorrectly) mock those he perceives as claiming that this is all normal.

Tom.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos