Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > TravelBuzz
Reload this Page >

Are you comfortable flying the 787?

Are you comfortable flying the 787?

Old Jan 25, 13, 9:01 am
  #91  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
i just read a report that the printed circuit boards are "burned" so badly, they cannot be reconstructed. no such comment on the ntsb statement of 1/23.

for the latest comments: as and of jan 23. this is not tabloid tv news. this is the official comment from post 381

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...s-787s-20.html

killing a pc board by burning takes a serious fire. most for aerospace apps are fabric impregnated with a resin. almost takes a gas fired torch to destroy them.

i wonder if part of this event was outside the box.
slawecki is offline  
Old Jan 26, 13, 8:46 am
  #92  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
this is tabloid news, but the best pics i have seen(of both the chickies and the batteries and boxes.)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

the commentary is totally idiotic. not even worthy of a murdock publication.

if that photo indicates the method used for examination, that plane will never fly. i cannot see any pc boards on that table. they were described as the size of a laptop. i see nothing that big, and it would not go in that box. if that box "spewed molten electrolytes" that is really scarry. i do not think stuff in the vicinity of that box is set up to withstand molten fire.

rj175's look better and better.
slawecki is offline  
Old Jan 27, 13, 1:39 pm
  #93  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: BOS and ...
Programs: UA 2MM, DL 500k, WoH 1M, HH Gold, Rad. Gold, CP Gold, Miracle Fruit-su Club
Posts: 9,931
Originally Posted by slawecki View Post
i wonder if part of this event was outside the box.
Moreover, possibly involving multiple systems, or one system's effect on another, and/or a downrange phenomenon? A downrange cascade effect? Something that doesn't present before hours of operation. Such may not be picked up in the testing of discrete systems in distant suppliers' labs, even when the discrete problem that burned one down is believed solved. And compound risk calculation might never get to it, or not before the whole system has run many cycles -- e.g., the beta.

A friend was involved in the space shuttle's development, and says it was mainly for such reasons - compound risk - that the Air Force declined to take it under its wing when that prospect was in play. They didn't want the responsibility for a modern-day Hindenburg or Titanic or Vasa.
Firewind is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 2:20 am
  #94  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: BOS and ...
Programs: UA 2MM, DL 500k, WoH 1M, HH Gold, Rad. Gold, CP Gold, Miracle Fruit-su Club
Posts: 9,931
1/27 (AP) article from Tokyo

1/27 (AP) article from Tokyo...

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/art...er-4227890.php
Firewind is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 5:56 am
  #95  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 523
Are we taking bets on how much longer the 787 fleet will be grounded?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57...ors_picks=true

After all of the hullabaloo about the lithium ion batteries in the Dreamliner, do all y'all think they'll get stricter about lithium batteries in checked bags? I know that they're not being charged while sitting in a suitcase as seems to be the issue on the 787. However, currently it seems to be the honor system.

Last edited by Flubber2012; Jan 28, 13 at 7:28 am
Flubber2012 is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 8:05 am
  #96  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by Flubber2012 View Post
Are we taking bets on how much longer the 787 fleet will be grounded?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57...ors_picks=true

After all of the hullabaloo about the lithium ion batteries in the Dreamliner, do all y'all think they'll get stricter about lithium batteries in checked bags? I know that they're not being charged while sitting in a suitcase as seems to be the issue on the 787. However, currently it seems to be the honor system.
and the lithium batteries in your cell phone, your computer, your flashlight, your watch, your walkman, and your hearing aid. there are 1.5B$us a year sold of li batteries.
slawecki is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 9:12 am
  #97  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: BOS and ...
Programs: UA 2MM, DL 500k, WoH 1M, HH Gold, Rad. Gold, CP Gold, Miracle Fruit-su Club
Posts: 9,931
The news today, including the AP article, is that the Japanese investigators have moved on from the batteries. I'm not really clear if they have explicitly ruled them out as being even a part of the problem - or if it's the just the news taking it to that conclusion - or if they're just finished looking at them.
Firewind is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 10:00 am
  #98  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: New York and Vienna
Programs: PA WorldPass Platinum, AA, DL, LH. GHA Black, SPG and HHonors Gold
Posts: 3,836
Originally Posted by Firewind View Post
The news today, including the AP article, is that the Japanese investigators have moved on from the batteries. I'm not really clear if they have explicitly ruled them out as being even a part of the problem - or if it's the just the news taking it to that conclusion - or if they're just finished looking at them.
Not exactly... this was just one small part of a larger investigation.

See last paragraph:

Japanese Regulators End Dreamliner Battery Maker Investigation with No Finding

...The separate investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board and Japan Transport Safety board into the root cause of the battery problem will also continue...
<SNIP>
jspira is online now  
Old Jan 28, 13, 10:40 am
  #99  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 6,936
Originally Posted by Flubber2012 View Post
do all y'all think they'll get stricter about lithium batteries in checked bags?
Spare lithium batteries are already prohibited in checked baggage.
LarryJ is online now  
Old Jan 28, 13, 12:25 pm
  #100  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 523
Is the concern loose/spare lithium batteries contacting something that conducts elecricity and short circuiting?

That's why it's OK to have lithium batteries powering all kinds of devices but not OK to transport spare batteries?

Last edited by Flubber2012; Jan 29, 13 at 7:30 am
Flubber2012 is offline  
Old Jan 28, 13, 4:06 pm
  #101  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: BOS and ...
Programs: UA 2MM, DL 500k, WoH 1M, HH Gold, Rad. Gold, CP Gold, Miracle Fruit-su Club
Posts: 9,931
If it's not the batteries - which would have been the direct, discrete fix - then it's a larger *system*. If the system still involves the batteries, then it's going to be important that - if it becomes focused on the monitoring part of the system - that it's not easy to characterize the solution/monitoring system as a "bandaid" for the acceptably risky batteries. Which failed in this beta.

To the OP, I think I'll be comfortable after they take one of the planes that had the problem on a long haul to see if the problem doesn't show up 14 hours down range. US to Dubai would be fine, over Gander, Reykjavik etc. Then turn it around as soon as it's fueled and inspected. Better that the beta is this, at a minimum, without me. Lab tests aren't enough.
Firewind is offline  
Old Jan 29, 13, 1:19 am
  #102  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by Firewind View Post

To the OP, I think I'll be comfortable after they take one of the planes that had the problem on a long haul to see if the problem doesn't show up 14 hours down range. US to Dubai would be fine, over Gander, Reykjavik etc. Then turn it around as soon as it's fueled and inspected. Better that the beta is this, at a minimum, without me. Lab tests aren't enough.
i read this to say"one 28 hr test, and all is well" i am certain boeing et al are running hundreds of these 28 hr tests and controlled experiments to try to recreate the problem.

i sort of think the grounding is for passenger service, and tests flights can be run. i also think the grounding is a usa thing. so boeing can play with the planes offshore.

i think the big problem is boeing has not been able to replicate the occurrence, and they got 50 test sites.
slawecki is offline  
Old Jan 29, 13, 12:13 pm
  #103  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: BOS and ...
Programs: UA 2MM, DL 500k, WoH 1M, HH Gold, Rad. Gold, CP Gold, Miracle Fruit-su Club
Posts: 9,931
Post

We see comment ranging from "Not going to be the beta" to "Meh..."

Possible quantification: Heard Carol Hymowitz, BloombergBusinessWeek Editor-at-Large, say on NPR this morning that the impact on Boeing is estimated to be $500 million. While looking up how to spell her name, I found this:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...again#r=auth-s

...Some insight into some of the impact within Boeing in real time.
Firewind is offline  
Old Jan 29, 13, 12:54 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 6,936
Originally Posted by Flubber2012 View Post
Is the concern loose/spare lithium batteries contacting something that conducts elecricity and short circuiting?

That's why it's OK to have lithium batteries powering all kinds of devices but not OK to transport spare batteries?
That is correct.

Also, you want the spare batteries in the cabin (carry-on) so that they are accessible if a fire does start and the crew can fight the fire.
LarryJ is online now  
Old Jan 29, 13, 9:39 pm
  #105  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,223
Here's an FAA summary of 132 incidents involving all kinds of batteries (PDF): Batteries & Battery-Powered Devices: Aviation Incidents Involving Smoke, Fire, Extreme Heat or Explosion

Lithium batteries can self-ignite for a variety of reason, not limited to external short circuits.
Bobster is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: