Another 787 electrical/smoke incident (on ground)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GT.. Only in Fairyland would anyone miss the implications for ETOPS...
You are the first one who had the b---s to bring it up....
keel beam.... There is a monumental possibility the implications will be missed if a solution is really that simple. For now, explanations are being tested that have to do with wishing and hoping, both that there is a simple fix, and/or, the problem is at least seen that way....or that the 'creation' of a separate headache will diminish the import of the real deal.
Fire has nought to do with teething... If it was simple, it would not have happened the first time. It is either too expensive, too complicated, or too time consuming to remedy with an "Ah-HAH".
My first impression, with Laredo, was a systemic, or design issue.... Space weight and cost are the goblins of a/c design; throw in safety and reliability, and the designers are simply incarnations of Merlin, the alchemist. Their degree is in magic, as much as anything else.
It is forgivable, that new aircraft will have issues. But that does not make the problems acceptable. Especially fire. I am not telling tales, and I hope with all my heart the aircraft is soon as dependable and profitable as the Fat One.
Cheers, they're on it....
You are the first one who had the b---s to bring it up....
keel beam.... There is a monumental possibility the implications will be missed if a solution is really that simple. For now, explanations are being tested that have to do with wishing and hoping, both that there is a simple fix, and/or, the problem is at least seen that way....or that the 'creation' of a separate headache will diminish the import of the real deal.
Fire has nought to do with teething... If it was simple, it would not have happened the first time. It is either too expensive, too complicated, or too time consuming to remedy with an "Ah-HAH".
My first impression, with Laredo, was a systemic, or design issue.... Space weight and cost are the goblins of a/c design; throw in safety and reliability, and the designers are simply incarnations of Merlin, the alchemist. Their degree is in magic, as much as anything else.
It is forgivable, that new aircraft will have issues. But that does not make the problems acceptable. Especially fire. I am not telling tales, and I hope with all my heart the aircraft is soon as dependable and profitable as the Fat One.
Cheers, they're on it....
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: leafy suburbs
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lyman
Yes a simple solution, but I do agree that a thorough investigation is required, leaving no stone unturned.
I think more disturbing is that though Boeing appeared to have a similar incident with one of their test aircraft a year or two back, the problem arises again. Clearly not as simple a solution as I may have implicated!
Yes a simple solution, but I do agree that a thorough investigation is required, leaving no stone unturned.
I think more disturbing is that though Boeing appeared to have a similar incident with one of their test aircraft a year or two back, the problem arises again. Clearly not as simple a solution as I may have implicated!
Last edited by keel beam; 8th Jan 2013 at 19:32.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The WSJ reported a short while ago online that UA has discovered "wiring issues" with one of its 787s after inspecting them following the gate fire on the JAL 787 in BOS yesterday.
Earlier, it reported that the same bay was involved in the November 2010 test aircraft fire and the recent UA emergency landing in MSY. It speculated that the ETOPs certification was at risk.
Earlier, it reported that the same bay was involved in the November 2010 test aircraft fire and the recent UA emergency landing in MSY. It speculated that the ETOPs certification was at risk.
Here's an update from Reuters: UPDATE 3-Boeing 787 with fuel leak returns to gate in Boston | Reuters
Boeing stock is down . . . big surprise!
Boeing stock is down . . . big surprise!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's aircraft, the one involved in the fuel leak, did eventually depart BOS Logan after a three hour delay.
There should be some tower communication with the aircraft on this link:
Second Japan Airlines plane stopped before takeoff at Logan | Metro News - WCVB Home
There should be some tower communication with the aircraft on this link:
Second Japan Airlines plane stopped before takeoff at Logan | Metro News - WCVB Home
Last edited by RobertS975; 8th Jan 2013 at 21:06.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still Boeing all the way vs Airbust. Always a kink or two in a radical new design. Boeing always comes out on top though. Thing is with Airbus, at best they are junk IMO. Pilots like them sometimes though and that is because they have no idea what is actually going on within an Airbus.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pittodrie
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for feeding the troll.
Temp Spike
"Thing is with Airbus, at best they are junk IMO" and other random crap.
In your opinion perhaps....
Have a word with yourself sunshine, you're embarrassing.
Temp Spike
"Thing is with Airbus, at best they are junk IMO" and other random crap.
In your opinion perhaps....
Have a word with yourself sunshine, you're embarrassing.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The National Transportation Safety Board is looking into the fire. In an investigative update issued today, it said that the fire severely damaged the auxiliary power unit battery and caused “thermal damage to the surrounding structure and components.” One firefighter was injured, the agency said.
The Wall Street Journal, citing an unidentified source, reported today that United Airlines found an improperly installed bundle of wires in one of its 787s during an inspection following the Logan fire. The wires connected to the battery used to start the auxiliary power unit.
A United spokeswoman confirmed that the airline inspected all six of its 787s overnight after the Logan incident, but she would not comment on the results. None of the planes are out of service.
The Wall Street Journal, citing an unidentified source, reported today that United Airlines found an improperly installed bundle of wires in one of its 787s during an inspection following the Logan fire. The wires connected to the battery used to start the auxiliary power unit.
A United spokeswoman confirmed that the airline inspected all six of its 787s overnight after the Logan incident, but she would not comment on the results. None of the planes are out of service.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CT Yankee...the Seattle news is reporting that the image shown in that post is NTSB investigator Robert Swaim evaluating the damage to the 787 Dreamliner in Boston on Jan. 8, 2013. (Photo: National Transportation Safety Board)
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - Boeing is confirming that a fire on one of its new 787s appears to have started in a battery, as scrutiny of the problem increases.
Also Tuesday, the National Transportation Safety Board said it will send two more investigators to Boston to examine the Japan Airlines plane. The NTSB says the battery had "severe fire damage."
The fire happened on the ground Monday, with no passengers on board. But in-flight fires can be catastrophic, so the matter is getting close scrutiny by aviation authorities.
United Airlines says it checked its own 787s overnight. It would not say what the inspections found, but the Wall Street Journal reported the airline found improperly installed wiring on one of its 787s.
Boeing says the problem appears to be unrelated to previous electrical problems on the 787. Boeing Co. shares have fallen nearly 5 percent since the fire was reported.
It was the first of two issues this week involving a Japan Airlines 787 in Boston.
Massachusetts Port Authority spokesman Richard Walsh said the Boeing 787 was towed back to the gate for evaluation early Tuesday afternoon after about 40 gallons of fuel spilled. He said the plane had 178 passengers and 11 crew members on board.
A JAL spokeswoman said the crew reported a "mechanical issue" before returning to the gate.
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - Boeing is confirming that a fire on one of its new 787s appears to have started in a battery, as scrutiny of the problem increases.
Also Tuesday, the National Transportation Safety Board said it will send two more investigators to Boston to examine the Japan Airlines plane. The NTSB says the battery had "severe fire damage."
The fire happened on the ground Monday, with no passengers on board. But in-flight fires can be catastrophic, so the matter is getting close scrutiny by aviation authorities.
United Airlines says it checked its own 787s overnight. It would not say what the inspections found, but the Wall Street Journal reported the airline found improperly installed wiring on one of its 787s.
Boeing says the problem appears to be unrelated to previous electrical problems on the 787. Boeing Co. shares have fallen nearly 5 percent since the fire was reported.
It was the first of two issues this week involving a Japan Airlines 787 in Boston.
Massachusetts Port Authority spokesman Richard Walsh said the Boeing 787 was towed back to the gate for evaluation early Tuesday afternoon after about 40 gallons of fuel spilled. He said the plane had 178 passengers and 11 crew members on board.
A JAL spokeswoman said the crew reported a "mechanical issue" before returning to the gate.
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 9th Jan 2013 at 00:10.
