Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Boeing 787 Dreamliner Grounded In US and EU

Posted by timothy on from the michael-crichton-did-it dept.

Some Bitch writes "Following previous stories that the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration was to review the safety of the Boeing 787 and that Japan had already grounded their fleet, the FAA has issued an airworthiness directive which has been endorsed around the world with the fleets of all eight airlines flying the 787 now grounded. EADS (the parent company of Airbus) shares were up 3.9% at close of business." General Electric's call for more sifting of more data from more sensors might have some resonance right now within Boeing.

12 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Batteries by hawguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    How embarassing for Boeing to have a $200M plane grounded because of a battery problem. They should have bought quality OEM batteries instead of going for the cheap Chinese imports on EBay.

    1. Re:Batteries by alexander_686 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I know you are trying to be funny, but you are just showing that you are ignorant racist. Try not to be both at the same time. The batteries are Japanese.

      Young Doc: No wonder this circuit failed. It says "Made in Japan".
      Marty McFly: What do you mean, Doc? All the best stuff is made in Japan.
      Young Doc: Unbelievable.

    2. Re:Batteries by Alex+Zepeda · · Score: 5, Informative

      How does this get modded up? The batteries are Japanese (Yuasa) in origin, sourced by a French company (Alcatel/Thales).

      --
      The revolution will be mocked
    3. Re:Batteries by rtfa-troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know you are trying to be funny, but you are just showing that you are ignorant racist.

      Ignorant yes; racist we don't have much evidence for. Nobody makes jokes about cheap Taiwanese batteries even though Taiwan is largely ethnically Chinese. By the time Japan had recovered to the level that China is at today it already had a reputation for quality. The reason is simple. Taiwan is a democracy with proper freedom of speech and so the quality of things made there has gone up massively. Japan mostly the same. If someone tried things like they get away with in China then someone would speak up. Things like the crap that goes on in China - deadly chemicals in baby milk - failing to buy properly made signalling equipment from Siemens to save a few euros and then trying to bury a train full of dead people - would never go on if Chinese people in China had control of their own destiny instead of a bunch of party plutocrats.

      The racists are the people who say things like "democracy isn't suitable for China".

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    4. Re:Batteries by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      The problem isn't even conclusively in the batteries themselves. It may be the chargers used, the thermal cutoff, or simply overloading.

      Some reports in the press suggest that the batteries are being recharged way too fast:

      An inspection of the All Nippon Airways 787 that made an emergency landing in western Japan found that electrolytes, a flammable battery fluid, had leaked from the plane's main lithium-ion battery. Investigators found burn marks around the damage. ... The two incidents resulted in the release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage and smoke, the FAA confirmed. The release of battery fluid is especially concerning, safety experts said.

      Once the electrolyte (which includes the lithium) catches fire it is very hard to put out. Boeing, knowing this provided special containment for these batteries, which has kept the fires from doing much besides destroying the battery (so far). However the risks are very real that this will be insufficient.

      Large size Lithium batteries (over 8 to 25 grams of lithium) are not even allowed on aircraft as baggage or carry on, due to the propensity to burn when shorted or punctured, but some how Boeing talked the FAA into certifying this plane with these batteries to save a weight. Bad enough that these batteries are prone to catch fire when shorted, but Lithium fires are almost impossible to put out with the fire suppression systems found on planes (page 9). How Boeing talked the FAA into allowing this on the plane (in multiple locations) is beyond me.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    5. Re:Batteries by Dinghy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How Boeing talked the FAA into allowing this on the plane (in multiple locations) is beyond me.

      $$$$$

    6. Re:Batteries by Roman+Coder · · Score: 5, Funny

      They'd be mother-fucking OEM snakes on the mother-fucking OEM plane.

      --
      "The future can only affect the present if there is room to write its influence off as a mistake." - Yakir Aharonov
  2. share movement causality questionable by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, EADS's shares are up, and since their major competitor Boeing had bad news today, perhaps we can speculate that "EADS shares up on bad news for rival Boeing", as finance journalists like to speculate. But you know who else's shares went up today? Boeing's. The stock market is weird, and a lot of factors go into price movements.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  3. Boeing Battery pic by Crash+McBang · · Score: 5, Informative

    See http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/15/uk-boeing-dreamliner-ntsb-idUSLNE90E00Y20130115

    This looks bad.

    I hope Boeing can [manage|subcontract] themselves out of this before they go broke...

    --
    To put a witty saying into 120 characters, jst rmv ll th vwls.
    1. Re:Boeing Battery pic by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

      It does indeed *look* bad, until you know what you should be looking for - the exterior of the box is largely unburned, and the strap is intact with no signs of burning, so the box did its job in containing the fire. The lid was removed by the fire personnel, using a tool which caused the dent in the left hand side, and the box was thrown from the aircraft.

      The charring on the front of the box was caused by the connecting mechanism on the front arcing, and not the main fire itself.

      So all in all, yes it looks bad, but in actuality the box did its job!

  4. It is standard for Boeing by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As everyone should know, modern airliners are pressurized. Now it is generally considered a BAD idea if it was to depressurize in midflight by say a window or door blowing out. How do you make it hard for this to happen? Well, you make the door open to the INSIDE, so that when locked and the airplane is under pressure, the pressure will press the door INTO the frame, making it impossible to blow out. This is why airline doors open INTO the aircraft and NOT out.

    Basic stuff right? Only a company with no care for safety would change it.

    Well boeing did it, so they could shove more cargo in it.

    But surely then they would build the door really really well and have it tested really really well?

    no... they did not and a LOT of people died when the door inenvitably did blow out and brought down the airplane.

    Boeing has ALWAYS taken shortcuts and never given a shit about the risk and the FAA has always let them get away with it. Read up on the cargo door, it took a second incident for Boeing to be told to fix it BUT it was allowed to keep the outside opening door despite it being an obvious weak area.

    You have to remember that in airliners, the interests are so gigantic that there is gigantic pressure on the engineers to find shortcuts and for those who are charged to oversee safety to look away so that their nations industry isn't hampered.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:It is standard for Boeing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Flight number: United Airlines Flight 811
      Models: Tyra, Giselle, Chanel Iman

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_811