artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:41 pm

UA in the earlier days of the 787 had a number of electrical problems with the aircraft that forced diversions (I think the big deal one was into MSY). Not classified as a fire per say, but certainly electrical issues. This could still be a big issue or nothing
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:41 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 196):
Interesting to see such firm statements already at this stage. I doubt your conclusion here. I think the source of the fire could very well be further down in the fuselage and that it has spread upwards. I think this is battery related and I think we can be pretty sure based on the history of this type of plane that this is not crew negligence or sabotage. If there is a common thread when it comes to 787 problems it is the electrical system.

Then where is the fire damage from a fire that spreads from a lower compartment where the battery is to the crown of the aircraft on top? If the fire spread upwards from the lower compartment there would be a completely chared aircraft like OZ214 at SFO.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5946
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:41 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 196):
I think this is battery related and I think we can be pretty sure based on the history of this type of plane that this is not crew negligence or sabotage.

As has been stated by Scott Hamilton and others, the batteries are nowhere near this location. I suggest that you check yourself before being so confident.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:42 pm

Quoting OA260 (Reply 195):

In that picture, it looks like the skin of the 787 is made of some sort of venting material in that area — it looks like the grate on a furnace cover. I wonder what the actual material there looks like unpainted.
International Homo of Mystery
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:43 pm

Quoting moo (Reply 155):
What about damage to stringers and frames? How easily is all that repairable or replaceable?
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 171):

No idea how fast a CFRP fuselage can be repaired. Anyone?

Adding a titanium box around the aft crew rest compartment will probably be just enough to restore structural strength...   
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 23757
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:44 pm

Sky News presenter referring to it now as a B767 .  
 
User avatar
Btblue
Posts: 696
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:57 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:45 pm

Sky reporter '767-8 Dreamliner'... Then goes on about the problems with the '767'. Honestly, it's written on the side of the plane.

Amateurs.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4897
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:46 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 203):

Looks like the vertical and horizontal inner structure (the extra structure protecting skin from scorching in specific areas) rather than surface features.
 
User avatar
Navigator
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 2:31 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:47 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 202):
Quoting Navigator (Reply 196):
I think this is battery related and I think we can be pretty sure based on the history of this type of plane that this is not crew negligence or sabotage.

As has been stated by Scott Hamilton and others, the batteries are nowhere near this location. I suggest that you check yourself before being so confident.

I think it has spread upwards from the electronics bay. And Im not confident at all. I just think the other suggested causes seemed unlikely.

Remember this is an internal fire and you need to examine the inside to see if I am wrong or not. Fire can also spred through the air conditioning system but originate from batteries or other electrical parts.

Pure guesses at this stage.

[Edited 2013-07-12 10:49:23]

[Edited 2013-07-12 10:54:01]
747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
 
ely747
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:28 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:47 pm

Gosh even the media can't get it right. Steven Douglass of Sky news just repeted on a live broadcast "767 Dreamliner" ....

[Edited 2013-07-12 10:50:18]
 
shufflemoomin
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:04 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:47 pm

I know everyone is saying it could just be coincidental that this involved a 787, but how often to aircraft catch fire, especially when shut down and unattended..?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 12180
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:47 pm

No mention of alcohol in the thread yet ?

Quoting Navigator (Reply 132):
I think it would be even worse if it is not a battery issue.

I disagree. An unrelated mishap is better than a battery fire that would prove utter incompetence. A battery fire would also be very bad for the FAA.

The A380 had some electric fires, not leading to such images but not benign either, and they were brushed off as teething issues, the public never heard of it.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
tonystan
Posts: 1685
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:39 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:48 pm

Problems solved, nothing to worry about, it's not the Dreamliner but just the 767......Sky News have said so!
My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
 
BruceSmith
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 10:35 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:49 pm

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 184):
Again, scroll down to the bottom of the page:

Except this chap posted a new thread titled Another 787 Battery Problem: ANA 7/12 which was subsequently deleted after it was noted that the ANA incident was the January one. Suspect he got confused because the new addition to the ANA article popped it up on AVHerald's front page.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2042
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:49 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 202):
As has been stated by Scott Hamilton and others, the batteries are nowhere near this location. I suggest that you check yourself before being so confident.

Wellllll the A380 has Li-on batteries associated with emergency lighting so we imagine the 787 does too, in the crown above a door seems to be about the right location for batteries of this type.
BV
 
BP1
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:39 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:51 pm

If the fire on the JAL 787 at BOS was not determined immediately, do we think the flames would have gone through the floor to the seats and then the ceiling? It will be interesting to know when this fire was determined versus when the JAL fire was determined and the response time. If the plane was on the hard stand, how would the fire of been seen unless the fire brigade saw smoke from the plane. That could mean something was simmering for a while. And let us not point the finger at Boeing, or anyone else yet, it could be anything at this point. But again, how was the fire reported and how was the fire reported in Boston. Interesting to know the amount of time each fire had to burn. If the Ethopian fire burned for hours without notice it could be the battery again, but then again, how soon was Boston determined??
"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:51 pm

Not only is it a 767 according to sky news but BA is the only UK carrier to order them. This is pretty bad stuff. Not unlike the media coverage for the OZ crash. Sad really.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
Navigator
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 2:31 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:51 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 212):
The A380 had some electric fires, not leading to such images but not benign either, and they were brushed off as teething issues, the public never heard of it.

But the A380 did not have anything near the troubled history of the Dreamliner. Remember all those construction issues, manufacturing issues etc. There is no comparison with the A380 or any other jet than perhaps the DC-10.
747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
 
PanAm1971
Posts: 444
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:28 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 189):
Yet, what electric device could draw power, with the plane switched off.

Exactly the right question. This is either battery issues or a ground maint issue.
 
kaitak
Posts: 9764
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:53 pm

Here's a question that comes to mind: the 787 was at a remote position - were there people working on it at the time?

If the doors had been shut and it was just sitting there, waiting to be towed over for the overnight departure to ADD, could the fire have taken hold and done very considerable damage before being noticed?

I'd be interested in finding out how it was actually detected.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:53 pm

The door looks ok below the aft damaged section if this fire originated down below, wouldn't there have been scorching or smoke marks on the door? Will be interesting to see what this issue is.
Where ever you go, there you are.
 
SASDC8
Posts: 530
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 10:01 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:53 pm

As far as I can see, this could be another serious problem for Boeing because it happens while there are no one in the aircraft while it is parked at a long time parking position. It might very well turn out to be new electrical problem, or it could have started by a FOB in the crew rest area.

If the latter is the case why did it not trigger the automatic fire supression system, or does the 787 not have those fitted?

[Edited 2013-07-12 10:56:34]
2-3-2 is NOT a premium configuration
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:54 pm

Quoting BruceSmith (Reply 215):
Suspect he got confused because the new addition to the ANA article popped it up on AVHerald's front page.

In the end, though, he linked us to avherald's report on today's incident, not January's incident as everyone was claiming. Sort of like how a broken clock is accurate twice a day.  
International Homo of Mystery
 
ImperialAero
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:56 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 205):
Here we have an as yet completely unexplained fire and every one is already concluding it's the battery, can only be the battery, its a 787 you shouldn't expect anything else, etc.
Quoting garpd (Reply 205):
If this were any other plane (from any manufacturer), anyone coming to the conclusions posted above would be shot down in flames.

In some regards you're correct, it could be one of a dozen causes, as all suggested above, but with the history of battery fire problems, with Boeing implementing a 'mitigation measure' (not a fix) for those problems without understanding the root cause, I think it's very reasonable for people to suggest that this might be a cause. The fact that this is a fire at the back of the aircraft, away from the engines, brakes, wing tanks or fueling areas means that there are few likely sources left apart from the APU or battery...the one with the history of catching fire...

I don't think anyone on here is 'insecure' or 'trolling' but suggesting quite reasonably that historical evidence be taken into account when speculating about breaking events...that's kinda what the website is for, no?
ICURFC - Who Is Sylvia?
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5946
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:56 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 219):
But the A380 did not have anything near the troubled history of the Dreamliner. Remember all those construction issues, manufacturing issues etc. There is no comparison with the A380 or any other jet than perhaps the DC-10.

Are you thinking of the same A380 that I am? That is a grossly oversimplified view of the A380. We shouldn't get into an extended debate about it, but to suggest that there is no comparison is simply delusional.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:57 pm

Wow. I'm definitely avoiding this aircraft for a few years. Sad that there are so many glitches with this 'craft.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:57 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 219):
But the A380 did not have anything near the troubled history of the Dreamliner. Remember all those construction issues, manufacturing issues etc

You have a short memory of Airbus issues. Are are your posts deliberately disingenuous?

The A380 had a whole raft of issues. From bits not fitting to wiring loom issues to wing rib cracks.

Accounting for all the new technology and inevitable snarl ups that brings I thing the 787 and A380 programs are about on par with each other.

[Edited 2013-07-12 11:00:41]
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
goosebayguy
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:12 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:00 pm

I do hope Boeing had a team designing an 'OLD' battery system just in case there were further issues? Airbus must be very pleased that they took the decision to use old technology on the 350 right now.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:00 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 229):
You have a short memory of Airbus issues.

The A380 did have issues, but on a scale of 1 to 10, they were perhaps a 4 or a 5 while the 787 is perilously close to a 10.
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2042
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:02 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 229):
Accounting for all the new technology and inevitable snarl ups that brings I thing the 787 and A380 programs are about on par with each other.

I don't remember a mandated grounding of any large passenger aircraft since the DC-10, so no.
BV
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 5769
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:02 pm

I actually wonder, nobody has mentioned this, however, could the IFE system be a possibility here? Don't know if any IFE equipment would be stored there, however, it is possible.
Yes, I wear Fairy Tale Pink IZOD shirts. I am a real man.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5946
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:03 pm

Quoting sankaps (Reply 231):
The A380 did have issues, but on a scale of 1 to 10, they were perhaps a 4 or a 5 while the 787 is perilously close to a 10.

This is time interfering with your perspective. What you are not taking into account is financial impact. The A380 is much worse there.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:03 pm

Quoting ImperialAero (Reply 226):
suggesting quite reasonably that historical evidence be taken into account when speculating about breaking events...that's kinda what the website is for, no?

If it were merely the suggestion, that would be fine But many here are posting it as fact, the cause, the only explanation.
They are not suggesting.

I agree, with the history the program has, it's very suspicious. But I'm keeping an open mind.

[Edited 2013-07-12 11:08:22]
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
tonystan
Posts: 1685
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:39 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:03 pm

Oh dear! Sky news have finally confirmed that it was indeed a 787!!! Looks like the 767 that caught fire was merely in the reporters mind!!!!
My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
 
canoecarrier
Posts: 2573
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:20 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:04 pm

Quoting SASDC8 (Reply 197):
Neather catering or cleaning would be working on the Aircraft at a hard stand.

Not sure how it works at LHR, but its not uncommon to have your cleaning staff do a more comprehensive cleaning while the aircraft is overnighting at a hard stand where I have worked.
The beatings will continue until morale improves
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:07 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 232):
I don't remember a mandated grounding of any large passenger aircraft since the DC-10, so no.

Did the 787 kill anyone? No
Was the issue with the DC-10 a design flaw with the aircraft? Yes
Was the 787 issue a design flaw with the aircraft? No

You don't crucify an aircraft type when a particular model of engine hanging off its wings causes issues.
Why is it acceptable to crucify the 787 for a battery?
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:07 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 234):
This is time interfering with your perspective. What you are not taking into account is financial impact. The A380 is much worse there.

I don't see how that is the case, or why it is relevant. Care to elaborate?
 
mm320cap
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:07 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 196):
Interesting to see such firm statements already at this stage. I doubt your conclusion here. I think the source of the fire could very well be further down in the fuselage and that it has spread upwards. I think this is battery related and I think we can be pretty sure based on the history of this type of plane that this is not crew negligence or sabotage. If there is a common thread when it comes to 787 problems it is the electrical system.

I think the fire has spread from the aft electronics bay and upwards.

And you're basing this on.... what, exactly?

You can see straight through the door and there doesn't immediately appear to be any fire damage to the galley area right behind the aft left door. For a first to start BELOW that area and be bad enough to burn through the upper skin, it would be surprising if the area that is visible in the photo wasn't totally burned.
 
timpdx
Posts: 682
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:09 pm

Looking at the diagram of the 787 that GCPET posted, could the fire have travelled up the stairs leading to the crew rest, from the APU area below? Otherwise, I really hope that this is a crewmember leaving a smoldering cigarette in his/her bedding.
Flown 2018: LAX, ARN, DXB, ALA, TAS, UCG, ASB, MYP, GYD, TBS, KUT, BER, TLS, SVO, CCF, DUB, LGW, MEX, BUR, PDX, ORD, SLC, SNA
Upcoming 2018: STL, MIA, BZE, IAH, BHM, LHR, DFW, PHX
 
wjcandee
Posts: 8262
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:09 pm

Quoting BP1 (Reply 217):
do we think the flames would have gone through the floor to the seats and then the ceiling

No we do not.

It would have burned itself out inside the containment box. There would have been smoke. And later a crispy battery in a box. That's it.

What's funny is how we criticize the media for poor reporting, but then this thread gets polluted with the most idiotic, uninformed drivel from our very own members. "I predict a grounding!!" "This is a fire so it must be the battery." Ugh.

This kind of commentary is worse than the media, because YOU GUYS are supposed to have some understanding of the business.
 
GDB
Posts: 13277
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:09 pm

Quoting btblue (Reply 206):
Sky reporter '767-8 Dreamliner'... Then goes on about the problems with the '767'. Honestly, it's written on the side of the plane.

Amateurs.

Ah Sky, home to the journalistic titan that is Kay Burley - put her name in You-Tube and wince.

I would question that there are a horde of 'airbus fans' gloating over this, many members here work for airlines, many of which have the 787 as a part of their future. A very important part with high hopes for it to do what Boeing have been boasting about for nearly a decade.
My own employer took delivery of our first one recently and also our first A380.
The 787 we should have had in 2010, even before the incidents this year many of us were pissed off about this.

Right now I'd imagine that our bosses, like us, in the wake of what has happened at LHR, are hoping for the best, that it might not be an integral problem with this aircraft but are fearing the worst.
And who can really deny that we all have good reason to fear, the 3 year delay, the fires and groundings, now this.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 12180
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:10 pm

Quoting Navigator (Reply 219):
But the A380 did not have anything near the troubled history of the Dreamliner. Remember all those construction issues, manufacturing issues etc. There is no comparison with the A380 or any other jet than perhaps the DC-10.

That was my point really. If this is unrelated and a one-off/easily fixable then only because of previous incidents will it be memorable, not a condemnation of the 787. However if it's battery related, all bets are off.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Navigator
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2001 2:31 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:10 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 229):
Quoting Navigator (Reply 219):
But the A380 did not have anything near the troubled history of the Dreamliner. Remember all those construction issues, manufacturing issues etc

You have a short memory of Airbus issues. Are are your posts deliberately disingenuous?

If you followed the Dreamliner and the A380 projects you see what I mean. One had more trouble than the other in its design process. There is no reason debating this here nor reason to be rude in your comments. Lets leave it at this pls
747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
 
NDiesel
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:58 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:10 pm

Quoting garpd (Reply 236):
You don't crucify an aircraft type when a particular model of engine hanging off its wings causes issues.
Why is it acceptable to crucify the 787 for a battery?

Well if it's integrated into the aircraft, it's a part of it.
Delta MD-11 JFK-CDG - Upon sunrise I fell in love with aviation
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10596
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:11 pm

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 27):
London Fire Brigade have just tweeted they are on their way to assist. Hope the fire in contained! Worrying that the airport crews can't handle this alone, unless the London fire brigade are going to take over so that the airport crews can provide cover for the runways and allow them to open again?

This is standard procedure. Assistance from other emergency services during a major incident is documented in something called the mutual aid agreement, so once the major incident plan is triggered external emergency services respond automatically.

Often it transpires that the major incident is dealt with and doesn't progress to being major, fortunately such as this one. But it is still good training/experience to carry out the full exercise and analyse how it went and how it can be improved.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2216
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:11 pm

Its absurd for anyone to reach any conclusions at this point. A fire which burned from the avionics bay up through the a/c to the top would almost certainly leave some smoke damage though in the av bay or cargo area (see JL incident at BOS).

This seems to be something different. What it is will be looked into fast given regulator's sensitivities to this a/c.

The fact there is a Boeing team in residence at LHR is a good thing as well.
 
sankaps
Posts: 1692
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:51 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:11 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 240):
I would question that there are a horde of 'airbus fans' gloating over this

I don't see any gloating. Taking a less than optimistic view of the situation, especially given the 787s history with battery meltdowns / fires and electrical issues / short circuits, does not equate to gloating.

[Edited 2013-07-12 11:13:15]
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:13 pm

One other possiblity that remains is that the flight crew didn't completely power down the aircraft before they left the flight deck.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2509
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:14 pm

Quoting NDiesel (Reply 243):
Well if it's integrated into the aircraft, it's a part of it.

The engines are integrated to. Part of the aircraft. It won't fly with out them. The engine is designed around the aircraft and to a certain point the aircraft is designed around the engine. The engines are part of the critical flight systems.
You couldn't get more integrated.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
moderators
Moderator
Posts: 362
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:33 am

RE: ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow

Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:14 pm

Hello All,

Part 2 has been created in order to further the conversation. The thread can be found here ET 787 On Fire At Heathrow Part 2 (by moderators Jul 12 2013 in Civil Aviation) .

All posts made after the lock will be removed for housekeeping purposes only.

Regards,

The Moderator Crew
Please use [email protected] to contact us.

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