But if it had happened in flight ... ?

Give them a break! When the alarm goes and the tenders are sent out, there isn't time to start asking if it is a little, medium of big fire.

I'm sure they will have everything back to normal as soon as is technically possible, positioning sectors from Luton are not good for anyone, nor are empty departure lounges.

One commentator already said fire not relating to previous 787 issues, but I wonder how much damage there is that can't be seen. Thankfully no injuries reported, but a hull loss so early on would not be good for the type.

Maybe other fire services attending another event on the airport (just suggesting)?

Thomson 788 G-TUIC has also just returned to Manchester nearly a quarter of the way enroute to Orlando with as yet unknown issue, the 787 has had some pretty bad days..

BBC footage in last 10 mins clearly shows charring, possibly even fuse burn through on the fuse crown, immediately forward of the vertical fin.

The obvious question - are the batteries there or further back and lower down, nearer the APU?

From what I understand, Boeing has said there has never been a 787 that has caught on fire before. :ugh:

EDIT: Boeing stock immediately dropped 7%

R4 report Thomson say that the Manchester flight incident is unrelated to what has happened at Heathrow.

Burn marks not evident on starboard side:

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...130712_BA3.jpg

Unbelievable!!!!! :mad: :eek: If I am not mistaken, Ethiopian conducted its own repairs on its 787 fleet and got them into the air the quickest of any airline.

Fingers crossed this does not shut down the 787 flying again....

If that is hull damage from 'whatever fire' then:

1. 787 gets bad Press again.
2. I will not fly on one.

Looking at the damaged area (about 1-2 meters on the topside in front of the fin) and bearing in mind this is composite, how will they repair that?

I saw a fair few incidents in my time at Heathrow, including aircraft accidents, but I never saw the place closed. Bizarre.

It appears the damage is directly above the overhead crew rest cabin.

maybe a better pictures?

http://i1237.photobucket.com/albums/...%20Air/etz.jpg

Have you ever read the requirements?

i haven't for years, but I doubt that LHR has the 300% cover you are imagining.

Runways now open at Heathrow.

Anyone know if that is directly over the rear galley, forward of the rear galley or is there a rear galley on a 787? Thus possibly a galley fire?

You wouldn't expect batteries there in most other types but I have no idea for the 787.

The aircraft was reported to be either being prepared to be towed or had been towed.

Battery located in aft electronics bay wherever that is?

There is a difference between the airport being 'closed' and commerical airlines being unable to land or depart due to lack of fire cover.

Do ET have the rear crew rest loft fitted because the scorch marks would be about right if they do?

APU batteries are located in the in the aft eebay. There are no batteries at the fire location in the crown afaik