January 16, 201313 yr Just read that the FAA is grounding the 787 fleet until fire problems with onboard batteries can be resolved. John
January 17, 201313 yr Just read that the FAA is grounding the 787 fleet until fire problems with onboard batteries can be resolved. John It should be resolved by taking lithium ion batteries out of the aircraft :lol: Chris Miller
January 17, 201313 yr Not that easy, this aircraft does not use bleed air for engine start, it is almost wholly dependant on electrics. They chose Lithiun batteries because they are the lightest and most powerful, but alas, they are also the most unstable. Replacing them will need a redesign, I don't think adding cooling will suffice, and I don't think Boeing will appease the FAA by simply providing statistics that point to low probability of a fire, they will need to do some hard core re-designing here. Kudos to the FAA for taking action now and giving the manufacturer the breathing space to actually fix the battery issue, hope they also solve the fuel leaks while they are at it. Will Reynolds Flight Sim Addict
January 17, 201313 yr Not that easy, this aircraft does not use bleed air for engine start, it is almost wholly dependant on electrics. They chose Lithiun batteries because they are the lightest and most powerful, but alas, they are also the most unstable. Replacing them will need a redesign, I don't think adding cooling will suffice, and I don't think Boeing will appease the FAA by simply providing statistics that point to low probability of a fire, they will need to do some hard core re-designing here. Kudos to the FAA for taking action now and giving the manufacturer the breathing space to actually fix the battery issue, hope they also solve the fuel leaks while they are at it. I agree--great for the FAA to act now. Does such a grounding also apply to the 787's in use in other countries? Regards, John
January 17, 201313 yr Kudos to the FAA for taking action now and giving the manufacturer the breathing space to actually fix the battery issue, hope they also solve the fuel leaks while they are at it. Kudos for being the last governing agency to do so? The FAA is wholly reactionary and does very little to be proactive. Chris Miller
January 17, 201313 yr Beter the FAA acts now than the NTSB having to do it later.... Will Reynolds Flight Sim Addict
January 17, 201313 yr Beter the FAA acts now than the NTSB having to do it later.... What? The NTSB has been investigating this since it happened. http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130114.html Chris Miller
January 17, 201313 yr It is figure-of-speech. Better the administrator get in now before we have true costly accidents. Will Reynolds Flight Sim Addict
January 17, 201313 yr With JAL and ANA fleet grounded, do they get some sort of reimbursement for these circumstances for the lost revenue? This is not one aircraft, this is their whole fleet of brand new aircraft. That is alot of cancelled flights even though they can juggle aircraft. They must be irate to say the least. I guess this of course affects other customers. CYVR LSZH I7-14700k 64gb 6000Mhz DDR5 ASUS z690 ROG STRIX Gaming RTX 4080 Super,
January 17, 201313 yr Depends what the commercial terms are. For entry to service there would be allowances Boeing would have made, such as Boeing technicians on site for a period of time, etc. Grounding an entire fleet is a whole different matter, and I guess there would be some fast and furious phone calls to Seattle as we speak. Will Reynolds Flight Sim Addict
January 20, 201313 yr Before and after pictures of the batteries. http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/01/787-investigation-battery/ RJ
January 20, 201313 yr Kudos for being the last governing agency to do so? The FAA is wholly reactionary and does very little to be proactive. AFAIK the FAA were the first to mandate a grounding, although ANA and JAL had already voluntarily grounded their fleets, EASA followed FAA one or two days later. I'm not sure whether the Lan, Qatar and Ethiopian groundings are voluntary or not. I agree--great for the FAA to act now. Does such a grounding also apply to the 787's in use in other countries? Regards, John In principle the FAA only has a mandate over aircraft registered in the US, and, to a lesser extent, aircraft operated into, out of, or over the US. This means that the FAA grounding doesn't mean LOT (or JAL, ANA, etc) can't fly their 787s, although they may be prohibited from flying them into or out of the US (not sure how that works). In practise though if one of the two big regulators (FAA or EASA) announce something like an emergency grounding it would be very unusual for regulators in other countries not to follow suit. Indeed in this case EASA ordered a grounding within a day or two of the FAA order. John-Alan Pascoe
January 21, 201313 yr Moderator LOT's lot was to be caught on the ground here in the U.S., so until inspected and released, it's lot will be to remain here racking up ground fees... ...and there's not a lot LOT can do except grin and bear it. Fr. Bill AOPA Member: 07141481 AARP Member: 3209010556 Avsim Board of Directors | Avsim Forums Moderator
January 21, 201313 yr LOT's lot was to be caught on the ground here in the U.S., so until inspected and released, it's lot will be to remain here racking up ground fees... ...and there's not a lot LOT can do except grin and bear it. I can't tell if you were trying to make a tongue twister or if you just happened to use the word lot so many times by accident. Captain Kevin Air Kevin 124 heavy, wind calm, runway 4 left, cleared for take-off. Live streams of my flights here.
January 21, 201313 yr I guess he just had trouble putting ANA in such a sentence. :lol: This leaves a LOT to be desired in my eyes. :He He:
Create an account or sign in to comment