FAA grounds 787

"A new production system was devised, with 70 percent of the plane designed and built by suppliers around the world".

Just like many industries such as mine(HVAC). One of the reasons for our great economy.
 
Re: 787's grounded

Greg Bockelman said:
Well, they wouldn't get furloughed. What would ultimately happen if the fleet were grounded for an extended period, as in months, or longer, is the pilots would get surplussed off the 787 fleet and would have to bid something else. It isn't like they could just come over to the 777 fleet and start flying. There is a process to these things. :yes: :D
Click to expand...

I thought the type ratings were the same?
 
Nothing worse then an inflight fire.. If they don't change something,, it is gonna happen.. Probably sooner then later too.. IMHO.:yikes::hairraise::eek:

Now paging a Mr Ricky Nelson....:sad:
 
Re: 787's grounded

us AAirways said:
I thought the type ratings were the same?
Click to expand...

They are. But just because you were trained in a 787 does not mean you can jump in and fly a 777. There is about a week, maybe two, of "Differences" training that is required.

But that isn't really an issue. As far as the airline is concerned, the 787 is considered a different fleet. A 787 pilot cannot come fly the 777 just the same as an Airbus guy can't come fly the 777. There is a bid process that has to happen. And then training, and yada yada yada. And if there is no need for 777 pilots at the time . . .
 
SCCutler said:
Crud, can't find it now. May have been updated. All now saying batteries may have been "overcharged." Like that was not apparent.
Click to expand...
There is a vast difference between "problem is limited to a small portion of batteries" (suggests manufacturing defect) and "batteries were overcharged".
 
And LaHood was quoted today as saying the FAA will not allow the 787 to return to service until Boeing has convinced them to 1000% that there are no further risks.

Looks like a long time as I as m not sure how you prove anything to 1000%.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 
Maybe a few hundred pounds more on a 500,000 pound plane to have NiCad batteries. Heck of a lot safer though
 
SCCutler said:
it is logical to consider that a prime possibility, based upon the sequence and timing.
Click to expand...
Nothing is considered 'prime' at this point. All pieces of this whole charging system get equal amount of scrutiny. We only now know that no excessive voltage was applied to the battery.
 
Last edited:
olasek said:
Nothing is considered 'prime' at this point. All pieces of this whole charging system get equal amount of scrutiny. We only now know that no excessive voltage was applied to the battery.
Click to expand...

You are, of course correct.

As a non-participating observer, that's where my speculation rests first, based solely upon my gut feeling and electronics knowledge (which is also getting pretty ossified).

Bad batteries.

Excessive-charging as result of charging circuit / logic errors.

Which reminds me: How do you all feel about computerized circuit breakers?
 
SCCutler said:
You are, of course correct.

As a non-participating observer, that's where my speculation rests first, based solely upon my gut feeling and electronics knowledge (which is also getting pretty ossified).

Bad batteries.

Excessive-charging as result of charging circuit / logic errors.

Which reminds me: How do you all feel about computerized circuit breakers?
Click to expand...

Or surges/spikes that were not recorded by the FDR.
 
wsuffa said:
Or surges/spikes that were not recorded by the FDR.
Click to expand...
Apparently FDR is not the only place where such things are recorded and they will be looking tomorrow into APU controller's own non-volatile memory which records different events.
 
WASHINGTON - In a press conference today, National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman released preliminary findings from the NTSB's ongoing investigation into the Jan. 7, 2013, Boeing 787 battery fire in Boston. "We have not ruled anything out as a potential factor in the battery fire; there are still many questions to be answered," Hersman said.

Noting that there was a B-787 battery incident in Japan on Jan. 16, 2013, which is being investigated by the Japan Transport Safety Board, Hersman said, "One of these events alone is serious; two of them in close proximity, especially in an airplane model with only about 100,000 flight hours, underscores the importance of getting to the root cause of these incidents."

The investigation revealed that the battery in the B-787 fire in Boston showed signs of short circuiting, and had indications of thermal runaway, a situation in which a significant temperature increase can initiate a destructive chain reaction.
Click to expand...

http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130124.html
 
Press Release – FAA Approves Boeing 787 Certification Plan

For Immediate Release

March 12, 2013
Contact: Laura J. Brown
Phone: (202) 267-3455
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today approved the Boeing Commercial Airplane Company's certification plan for the redesigned 787 battery system, after thoroughly reviewing Boeing’s proposed modifications and the company’s plan to demonstrate that the system will meet FAA requirements. The certification plan is the first step in the process to evaluate the 787’s return to flight and requires Boeing to conduct extensive testing and analysis to demonstrate compliance with the applicable safety regulations and special conditions.
“This comprehensive series of tests will show us whether the proposed battery improvements will work as designed,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We won’t allow the plane to return to service unless we’re satisfied that the new design ensures the safety of the aircraft and its passengers.”
The battery system improvements include a redesign of the internal battery components to minimize initiation of a short circuit within the battery, better insulation of the cells and the addition of a new containment and venting system.
“We are confident the plan we approved today includes all the right elements to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the battery system redesign,” said FAA Administrator Michael P. Huerta. “Today’s announcement starts a testing process which will demonstrate whether the proposed fix will work as designed.”
The certification plan requires a series of tests which must be passed before the 787 could return to service. The plan establishes specific pass/fail criteria, defines the parameters that should be measured, prescribes the test methodology and specifies the test setup and design. FAA engineers will be present for the testing and will be closely involved in all aspects of the process.
The FAA also has approved limited test flights for two aircraft. These aircraft will have the prototype versions of the new containment system installed. The purpose of the flight tests will be to validate the aircraft instrumentation for the battery and battery enclosure testing in addition to product improvements for other systems.
The FAA will approve the redesign only if the company successfully completes all required tests and analysis to demonstrate the new design complies with FAA requirements. The FAA’s January 16, 2013 airworthiness directive, which required operators to temporarily cease 787 operations, is still in effect, and the FAA is continuing its comprehensive review of the 787 design, production and manufacturing process.
 
wsuffa said:
And LaHood was quoted today as saying the FAA will not allow the 787 to return to service until Boeing has convinced them to 1000% that there are no further risks.
Click to expand...

Does this idiot understand that there is no such thing as 1000%

If there is never another failure for the rest of time eternal, that would = 100% you can never reach 101%
 
silver-eagle said:
That would have required a nuclear reactor. Greenpiece would of had an issue with that even if AEC rubberstamped it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the required plutonium would surely have driven the prices up even more. Besides, having jumbo jets jumping through time before they even get off the runway would be hell on the controllers.
 
OkieFlyer said:
Yeah, the required plutonium would surely have driven the prices up even more. Besides, having jumbo jets jumping through time before they even get off the runway would be hell on the controllers.
Click to expand...

Time travel into the future already exists. Regarding time travel into the past, I agree with the Vulcan Science Directorate. :)
 
Has anyone else here watched the movie "Primer"?

If you have could you please explain to me WTF happened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top