Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

FAA Grounds 787s

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

FAA Grounds 787s

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 1st Jun 2013, 05:06
  #1861 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Placerville, CA
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Skyblade:
A well written article on 787 battery issue.
Perhaps well written overall, but their mention that the forward battery is used to start the main engines seems ludicrous to me based on what I have read here and elsewhere.
The forward battery can be used to power the fuel metering and transfer system to allow partial refueling without engine, APU or ground power. But to start the main engines without ground power requires the APU.

And if I recall correctly, the "very high surge current rating of 1000A max.," is actually above the rating that Yuasa gives for the batteries.

Last edited by inetdog; 2nd Jun 2013 at 08:07. Reason: clarified refueling, thanks Pub User.
inetdog is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2013, 06:50
  #1862 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've learned more from other articles on the battery failures, nothing new here, just a rehash of known events albeit reasonably concise and non dramatic.

The best article IMO is here James Surowiecki: The Trouble with Boeing’s 787 : The New Yorker
This gets closer to the 'Root cause' than anything so far.
Momoe is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2013, 09:18
  #1863 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grobelling through the murk to the sunshine above.
Age: 60
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The forward battery can be used to power the fuel metering and transfer system to allow refueling without engine, APU or ground power.
The refuelling system will only fuel up to 1500kg on battery power. This allows the APU to be started and refuelling can then continue.
Pub User is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2013, 09:55
  #1864 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
[QUOTE]The world’s most modern aircraft in LOT’s livery took off today at 1:18 PM from the Warsaw airport to New York. This is the first transatlantic passenger flight of the LOT Polish Airlines Dreamliner after the three-month break. Thus, the Polish national carrier resumes scheduled transatlantic flights with Boeing 787 aircrafts.

The aircraft with the registration number SP-LRC with 205 passengers onboard is scheduled to reach the JFK airport in New York at 4 PM local time. The flight will last 8 hours and 8 minutes. [/QUOTE
Looks like an ETOPS flight straight away . With nearly full house. So confidence seems to be back , in Poland at least .
ATC Watcher is online now  
Old 3rd Jun 2013, 07:15
  #1865 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 840
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Reports from the Japan Times (3rd June 2013) that JAL has pulled a 787 fight due to a sensor issue related to the battery

A Japan Airlines’ Boeing 787 Dreamliner scheduled to fly Sunday from Tokyo to Beijing experienced a problem with an air pressure sensor for its battery container, prompting JAL to use another aircraft for the flight.
JAL 787 is grounded by glitch in battery bay | The Japan Times
Just a spotter is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2013, 15:18
  #1866 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,651
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 15 Posts
From a 19 May incident on a 787 which had just re-entered service

One of the nuts that connects wires and the board had come loose and an area around it of about 4 square centimeters had turned black....
and now

Japan Airlines halts 787 flight after battery pressure sensor problem

TOKYO, June 3 (Reuters) - Japan Airlines Co said it halted a scheduled 787 Dreamliner flight on Sunday after engineers detected a faulty pressure sensor in one of its newly reinforced lithium-ion batteries ......
The fault which affected the Tokyo-Beijing flight on Sunday was caused by tape that had been mistakenly left over the pressure sensor when Boeing engineers installed the new batteries, Japan Airlines said in a press release.
What chance a quality installation of the fix ? I thought ETOPS certification was based on bullet-proof maintenance procedures. Not like these ones by the "fix team".

Last edited by WHBM; 3rd Jun 2013 at 15:20.
WHBM is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2013, 05:25
  #1867 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Japanese Pilots Worry About Repaired Boeing 787 Jets

Perhaps the pilots in Japan should be overseeing their nuclear power plants.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/bu...-787-jets.html
Mark in CA is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2013, 07:16
  #1868 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,955
Received 144 Likes on 87 Posts
Here's another Mitsubishi example of how simply dropping a Lion battery (during testing for example) can set the scene for thermal runaway. Something to be kept in the back of the mind, anyway.
Mitsubishi Motors recalls plug-in hybrids -NHK WORLD English-

Quote: "The maker has already suspended production of the 3 models.
Mitsubishi says the recall was triggered by 3 cases of batteries short-circuiting and melting. The company says its investigation found that some lithium-ion batteries had been accidentally dropped on the floor during testing.

The ministry says the batteries with damaged electrodes could short-circuit during charging, or even overheat and melt."
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2013, 02:13
  #1869 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
JAL has good reason to be sensitive about Boeing repairs. In 1985 JAL suffered worst loss of life in a single aircraft accident after Boeing botched repair of rear pressure bulkhead on a 747. See http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2005/aug/28-33.pdf. Long ago but many remember.
ozaub is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2013, 12:08
  #1870 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 950
Received 33 Likes on 27 Posts
JAL Article

The article reports that JAL did the repair ( with Boeing supervision, whatever form that took ) and that JAL signed off on the repair.
JohnDixson is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2013, 01:02
  #1871 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
JL operated the plane on test flights and at least one revenue flight (as the issue was discovered during a turn) so what did this JL flight crew / ground crew notice that the earlier JL flight crews / ground crews did not that led them to identify the tape still being on?

Last edited by Kiskaloo; 7th Jun 2013 at 01:05.
Kiskaloo is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2013, 02:02
  #1872 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WAW-JFK is really not an ETOPS route unless some of the enroute diversion possibilities are unavailable due to weather.
RobertS975 is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2013, 03:40
  #1873 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RobertS975 :
WAW-JFK is really not an ETOPS route unless some of the enroute diversion possibilities are unavailable due to weather.
Thanks did not know. Can you explain ? looking at the tracks that day and the flight time , it really looked like it ( but I did not see the PLN).
ATC Watcher is online now  
Old 7th Jun 2013, 07:40
  #1874 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Noticed on Flightradar24.com - Live flight tracker! ? the first ? Thompson 787 fly over us Manchester to Prestwick and that it's previous flights were Paine Field to MAN. Would that have been an ETOPS flight?
dfstrottersfan is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 13:54
  #1875 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Age: 92
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Japan B787 problems

Any new aircraft introduced into service WILL incur teething problems and the two in Japan are no exception. Let's not get carried away with trivial things and look at repeat problems instead (i.e. trend of a particular problem, such as Airbus pitot probes etc))
Yankee Whisky is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 14:35
  #1876 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yea right.
glad rag is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 17:20
  #1877 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,955
Received 144 Likes on 87 Posts
787s were grounded and they are now flying again, but it is a probationary period and people will be interested in every little thing that occurs to see if any patterns might be emerging. People are still nervous in Japan. The press in Japan will pick up on anything, feeling it is in the public interest, whereas these incidents may not get reported in English.

Part of me wonders whether there is a reluctance in the English press to follow any further, whether they just want to give these new planes a break, or if there is some other force at play.

Anyway, in the interests of freedom of information I have given a rough translation of the two articles above. Personally I feel it is better to know what is happening up at the sharp end where the majority of Dreamliners are putting in the exploratory miles.

At the same time I agree that this thread concerns the electrics, specifically Lion battery performance, so if this is off-topic then point taken.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 19:09
  #1878 (permalink)  
A4

Ut Sementem Feeceris
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,462
Received 149 Likes on 30 Posts
Do you have daily comparisons against the B777 as well?
Probably not - but what's the global 777 fleet size compared to the 787? With Japan being the most prolific user of the type and with both public and pilots expressing concern/subjecting to scruitiny ANY event is going to be reported - and 2 (minor) events in two days on a fleet of 50ish aircraft resulting in a cnx and a turn back isn't great PR.

The problem is if there are multiple sensor/valve/switch events then questions start to be raised about quality. Is there not already history of nuts working loose causing minor scorching, misfit battery boxes/tape over sensors?
A4 is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 20:40
  #1879 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Correct A4. quality seems to be an issue indeed, but not surprisingly if you read the Seatle Times..

On a comparative note, if one looks at the MA-60, one can see that the FAA at least takes things seriously..
In China and Indonesia , the largest MA-60 operators, the aircrfat continues to fly despite a much worse record than the 787 : only 64 a/c in service , 7 accidents, of wich 3 in 2 months .
But to be fair , the FAA did not certify it..
ATC Watcher is online now  
Old 11th Jun 2013, 21:07
  #1880 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Age: 56
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any new aircraft introduced into service WILL incur teething problems and the two in Japan are no exception. Let's not get carried away with trivial things and look at repeat problems instead (i.e. trend of a particular problem, such as Airbus pitot probes etc))
Yeah, I've always considered airborne electrical fires trivial too!!

Are you serious?
busTRE is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.