I refuse to go outside without a helmet until the 787 is permanently grounded.    

 

So you're saying that one primary issue that can be fixed should permanently ground an airliner?

Would cabin crew be permitted to stay or return to the “overhead cabin crew rest cabin” during those hours it was parked up?

 

Find it too much of a coincidence it was directly above that area.

 

Not likely, they'd have been tucked up in a hotel room. Not sure if they'd be refused access, but I can't see a case where they'd go back to the aircraft...

 

Regards,

Ró.

Why would they do that when the airline would put them up in a hotel room which is much nicer than crew bunks? 

 

Not asking why they would. Why would anyone do anything if that was the case. 

 

Im asking if its been known to happen?

Not asking why they would. Why would anyone do anything if that was the case. 

 

Im asking if its been known to happen?

 

Highly doubt it, the plane would get rather stuffy without the APU and it would be impractical to go to and from the plane like that during the layover.

Highly doubt it, the plane would get rather stuffy without the APU and it would be impractical to go to and from the plane like that during the layover.

 

Thats true.

Now this is interesting. The battery is not at the rear of the plane according to this image from Boeing. So...what could have caused the fire?

 

Is this the battery layout before or after the recent battery modifications?  Or is the layout unchanged? 

This one from Boeing suggest otherwise:

 

Maybe it differs in the variants given the significant length differences.

 

For example, in this photo you can see the proximity of the Aft cargo door, where the above suggests the battery is, to where the fire damage is on the heathrow fire incidence aircraft.

 

Gee whiz. They cant buy a break.  Must be sabotage by Airbus employees.  :ph34r:

Has the cause of the Thompson incident been reported? I haven't heard what that issue was. I believe that one was reported after the fire at Heathrow, so is it possible Thompson just recalled that flight because of what happened at Heathrow?

Has the cause of the Thompson incident been reported? I haven't heard what that issue was. I believe that one was reported after the fire at Heathrow, so is it possible Thompson just recalled that flight because of what happened at Heathrow?

Apparently it was a technical issue... http://avherald.com/h?article=4653cb10&opt=0

 

The Thomson incident happened long before the Ethiopian incident... 

This one from Boeing suggest otherwise:

 

Maybe it differs in the variants given the significant length differences.

 

For example, in this photo you can see the proximity of the Aft cargo door, where the above suggests the battery is, to where the fire damage is on the heathrow fire incidence aircraft.

 

the apu battery is in the cargo bay, and still fwd of the cargo door. this fire occurred in the crown of the plane much farther aft. Also from the pictures ive seen the cargo doors wernt even opened to combat the fire which proves to me this fire was never in the cargo bay and therefore was not caused by the batteries.

So you're saying that one primary issue that can be fixed should permanently ground an airliner?

 

I don't know about you, but being burned alive in a locked tube at 33000 feet, is the most scary thing you can ever experience.

 

Yes the plane should be grounded again, not only the reputation is closed to zero but imagine if it's happen on a oceanic flight.

I don't know about you, but being burned alive in a locked tube at 33000 feet, is the most scary thing you can ever experience.

 

Yes the plane should be grounded again, not only the reputation is closed to zero but imagine if it's happen on a oceanic flight.

 

I think you've missed my point. The battery issue is a fixable issue. If it is fixed at some point (regardless of whether or not this fire was caused by the battery, and on a plane that had Boeing's attempt at a fix installed) I don't see why the 787 should be permanently grounded. Grounded until it's fixed? Yes, that makes does indeed make sense.

Just read apparently the fire originated in the rear galley. Appears a coffee reheater was left on and the system never shut off, it overheated and caught fire. Of course Boeing will probably tell us again there was never a fire