PickyPerkins
20th Apr 2013, 20:37
In a TV program on the 787 battery situation, Dan Rather mentioned in passing that there are fourteen technologies on the 787 covered by FAA "Special Conditions", of which the Lithium battery technology is one. I have no idea whether this is true or not, but it sounds possible.
The FAA has apparently approved all the changes proposed and tested by Boeing for the 787, and it will go back into service.
Press Release ? FAA Approves Boeing 787 Battery System Design Changes (http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14554)
Meanwhile the whole subject of the safety of flying around "with fire in the hold" has been discussed at length on various PPRuNe threads.
Now I am wondering how another of the FAA Special Conditions, for "Fire Resistance in a Crash Landing", have been satisfied?
[This is not a new article.]
US FAA wants 787 fuel-tank fire resistance demonstrated (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/04/10/213144/us-faa-wants-787-fuel-tank-fire-resistance-demonstrated.html)
Questions:
(1) Were the requirements outlined in the above article actually written into "Special Conditions"?
(2) If so, what tests were actually conducted that satisfied the FAA that the Conditions would be met for various aircraft fuel loads?
This subject is not on the agenda for the NTSB 787 hearing starting on Tuesday, April 24th, which will deal solely with the batteries.
===========
The FAA has apparently approved all the changes proposed and tested by Boeing for the 787, and it will go back into service.
Press Release ? FAA Approves Boeing 787 Battery System Design Changes (http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14554)
Meanwhile the whole subject of the safety of flying around "with fire in the hold" has been discussed at length on various PPRuNe threads.
Now I am wondering how another of the FAA Special Conditions, for "Fire Resistance in a Crash Landing", have been satisfied?
[This is not a new article.]
US FAA wants 787 fuel-tank fire resistance demonstrated (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/04/10/213144/us-faa-wants-787-fuel-tank-fire-resistance-demonstrated.html)
Questions:
(1) Were the requirements outlined in the above article actually written into "Special Conditions"?
(2) If so, what tests were actually conducted that satisfied the FAA that the Conditions would be met for various aircraft fuel loads?
This subject is not on the agenda for the NTSB 787 hearing starting on Tuesday, April 24th, which will deal solely with the batteries.
===========