would YOU get on a 787?

[RevMan2]

After close to 3m km...
Not.A.Chance

[gdiphil]

Who on earth thought of using these batteries? I thought we couldn't check them in our hold luggage, something about them being too dangerous. And I thought they have brought down a couple of cargo 747's, although I could have that wrong and would happily be corrected. What is more, why are the airlines so happy to take an aircraft with them in the first place? It is all very well blaming Boeing and the FAA as some are in some threads and in the media but surely airlines are aware of the dangers in these batteries. They should have said no to the aircraft. I certainly will until this is sorted.

[GrahamO]

Who on earth thought of using these batteries?

They are the only ones with the level of energy density available. Don't be fooled into thinking this is a few Duracell Lithium batteries tied together. The electrical requirements of the 787 are HUGE compared with other aircraft. There is currently no other solution.

I thought we couldn't check them in our hold luggage, something about them being too dangerous.

You couldn't check them in any luggage as they are not publicly available, are not on any aircraft and are made of materials not available even in hybrid cars. There are reports that they contain Lithium when in fact this is only in minute quantities and they are in fact, cobalt oxide batteries.

And I thought they have brought down a couple of cargo 747's, although I could have that wrong and would happily be corrected.

Don't think so as these batteries are only on the 787.

What is more, why are the airlines so happy to take an aircraft with them in the first place?

Because they thought they were safe and they had no option. Next time you go and buy a car, try telling the showroom that you are not satisfied with its safety record and you'd like them to change a few bits of the braking mechanism, - they will tell you to buy something else.

It is all very well blaming Boeing and the FAA as some are in some threads and in the media but surely airlines are aware of the dangers in these batteries.

Do you imagine the airlines design aircraft and decide on the choice of every component and check every engineering decision ? Do you do the same when you get in your car and drive off ? Do you know every component safety situation in your car ?

They should have said no to the aircraft. I certainly will until this is sorted.

Bah humbug attitude with a touch of self-importance ..... there are many many more things that can go wrong with an aircraft but it is as they say, entirely your choice. However, if you drive to your destination, you are statistically even lesss likely to arrive safely.

Travel safely.

[CafeClub]

Grahamo, there are a squillion threads on pprune alone where you can spout your "expertise" on all things technical / cutting edge / statistical on the 787.

The point of this thread was a simple one: would you fly in this aircraft?

You never said.

[ampclamp]

I would not fly in one right now (if not already grounded). For something that was supposed to be next to impossible, 2 similar incidents in quick succession is a concern.

This from the Boeing PR on the battery.....

GS Yuasa’s Li-ion technology offers some key advantages over the existing nickel-cadmium solution used in commercial jetliners. With 100% greater energy storage capacity, lithium-ion
offers two times of energy from the same dimension nickel-cadmium battery. The battery can charge from 0 to 90% in only 75 minutes and comes with battery management electronics which guarantees multiple levels of safety features. The rugged prismatic sealed battery design is
capable of withstanding extreme operating conditions far greater than those normally seen in commercial aircraft operation and requires absolutely no maintenance.

“Thales is determined to create the safest, most advanced, efficient and reliable power system possible for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. We are partnering with GS Yuasa because we are
delighted with their battery technology. Since it is maintenance-free and has longer service life comparing to current nickel-cadmium batteries, it makes for lower operating costs and increased safety for airline companies,” said Steve Grinham, General Manager of the electrical activity of Thales.
So far so good....

[JustOccurred2Me]

Not sure where GrahamO gets his info - they are Lithium Cobalt Oxide batteries in the Dreamliner, commonly referred to as Lithium Ion. LiCoO2 batteries are much the same as in your laptop.

And yes, Duracell do make Lithium Cobalt Oxide cells.

[YorkshireTyke]

I couldn't live with myself as I saw the happy smiling faces of the kids in the school yard as we ploughed into it, or the thought of all the hospital patients that died as we smashed into the hospital....

Don't worry - the headline will say ..... Heroic pilot avoided school and hospital.

They always do -- the heroic pilots I mean.

You'll be just as dead of course.

[A2QFI]

"Hero Pilots"

The older newspaper reports used to include the phrase "Wrestled with controls of crippled jet" ISTR?

[DaveReidUK]

The electrical requirements of the 787 are HUGE compared with other aircraft. There is currently no other solution.

That's tantamount to saying that the 787 is never going to fly again, because it clearly isn't going to do so with Li-ion batteries in a timeframe that would allow Boeing to get the 787 programme back on track. Li-ion is not the only solution to the 787's electrical needs, it's just the option that results in the lowest weight and space requirement.

"I thought they have brought down a couple of cargo 747's"

Don't think so as these batteries are only on the 787.

The reference to 747s being brought down is correct. The clue is in the word "cargo" - the batteries were part of the payload, not fitted to the aircraft.

Next time you go and buy a car, try telling the showroom that you are not satisfied with its safety record and you'd like them to change a few bits of the braking mechanism, - they will tell you to buy something else.

That's a ridiculous analogy. The BMW dealer won't care a hoot if you walk out the showroom and buy a Volvo instead, but if Boeing (or Airbus) think they are about to lose a 50-aircraft order they will bend over backwards to offer all sorts of concessions, and those often include engineering ones.

Airlines have a huge amount of influence over manufacturers in determining the spec of the aircraft that they buy.

[dpsilverba]

Yes I have!!!!!!. Had a fantastic flight BRU/WAW with LO in 'First' before these scares. Would I do it again..ET/LA/BA oooooooooohhhhhyes

[DeepDene]

..." Plus, I'm always reassured that pilots are utterly professional humans. No crew I've ever met would knowingly fly something that they didn't believe was absolutely safe."....

I'm sure that's true, but how many pilots know every single design compromise made in the development of a new aircraft and are brave enough to take an individual stand when things do start to go wrong? Isn't that the role of the Pilots unions?

[MPN11]

Would I fly on a 787? If there was no choice, then I expect I would, albeit with some nervousness. If there was a choice, I'd rather not at this stage.

However, the entire battery issue makes interesting reading, as I've recently purchased a Peugeot iOn all-electric car. Fortunately it appears to have lithium manganese-oxide batteries, and is thus less likely to burst into flames. Probably