lomapaseo
My concern is that the vast majority of survivable crashes, (in fact the norm) for commercial aircraft result in compromised, fractured, open doors , open slides,etc, thus allowing ingress into the cabin of toxix gases and smoke from the external CFRP fire. I have cited over 150 such commercial airline survivable crashes to both Boeing and FAA since 1970, all involving compromised and fractured fuselages to no avail.
To my knowledge this critical safety condition was never tested for during development and certification of the 787. Specifically, Boeing did burn-through tests via cone calorimeters only on intact and non-compromised panels and the FAA and Boeing both refused to replicate the Air France A340 Malton overrun crash a few years back, which would serve as an ideal and totally reproducible example of such survivable fuel fed fire crashes. This could easily be performed on on of the four now non-flying 787 prototypes and such a test, replicating a survivable fuel fed fire crash with 100% passenger and crew survival in the case in the A340 with a fuel fed ground fire would end the debate on either side of the FST issue.
To quote the old aviation aphorism "One test is worth 1000 expert opinions".