Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANA 787 Emergency Landing in TAK - FAA grounds 787

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by UALdave View Post
    I really don't understand what investigations will produce, ...................
    Lithium-ion batteries are used on other aircraft including the A350. So maybe the problem is not the battery itself but to do with its associated equipment such as the charger (made by a different company than that of the battery). Also if the investigation finds improper or negligent maintanence by the airline then Boeing may not be responsible for costs.
    The investigation will also identify corrective action which may mean changing the battery type, or removing the battery and relying on external power to start the APU.

    Comment


    • #62
      There was once a saying in aviation......

      ....."The working engine in a twin with one engine failed can only be absolutely guaranteed to do one thing.....take you in gentle turn to the site of the crash !!"
      If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
        Lithium-ion batteries are used on other aircraft including the A350. So maybe the problem is not the battery itself but to do with its associated equipment such as the charger (made by a different company than that of the battery). Also if the investigation finds improper or negligent maintanence by the airline then Boeing may not be responsible for costs.
        The investigation will also identify corrective action which may mean changing the battery type, or removing the battery and relying on external power to start the APU.
        OK, good points and information! Does the 747-8 use these batteries?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
          If you are rally good at handling engine failures in light twins, your chances to survive an engine failure are better in a twin than in a single.
          But what about a single...wouldn't a big parachute be a good idea?
          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
            The problem is two-fold.
            1) On a twin, you have twice the chances to suffer an engine failure.
            2) Pilots of small twins, on average, are not that good at handling 1 dead engine and the other at full power. The result is that, oftentimes, they lose control, with consequences typically much worse than a forced-off airport landing with no power.

            Combining 1) and 2), the result is that, after an engine failure, there are proportionally more deaths in light twins than in singles.

            But that's on average. If you are really good at handling engine failures in light twins, your chances to survive an engine failure are better in a twin than in a single.
            Fixed.
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
              There was once a saying in aviation......

              ....."The working engine in a twin with one engine failed can only be absolutely guaranteed to do one thing.....take you in gentle turn to the site of the crash !!"
              I question the word "gentle".
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #67
                What else are these batteries used for in airplanes, other then starting the APU??

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by UALdave View Post
                  What else are these batteries used for in airplanes, other then starting the APU??
                  In the A380 a Li-ion battery is used for emergency lighting according to this report:
                  It's likely that fires on two Boeing 787 Dreamliners were caused by overcharging lithium ion batteries, aviation safety and battery experts said Friday, pointing to developments in the investigation of ...


                  Note that a Li-ion battery was involved in a Cessna Citation fire.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
                    Note that a Li-ion battery was involved in a Cessna Citation fire.
                    I read on another forum that the actual battery manufacturer had a building burn down while developing the 787 battery.

                    Not sure I belive it, but...
                    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by mfeldt View Post
                      I guess that is not so easy, as Li-ion was of course chosen for a reason: In the 787 many systems are operated electrically that conventionally were powered hydraulically or by something else. thus, the reserve batteries which supply the electricity in case of engine failure must provide a very high capacity.

                      So I guess exchanging Li-Ion for something else is not an option - it's either to make the Li-ion technology safe for aviation, or to change the concept of the airplane. The latter would be a pity, because I think the way they were going is the right one!
                      I dont share your sentiment that Li-Ion batteries can´t be replaced.
                      Of course its not easy, but aviation seldom is.
                      "The real CEO of the 787 project is named Potemkin"

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Alessandro View Post
                        I dont share your sentiment that Li-Ion batteries can´t be replaced.
                        Of course its not easy, but aviation seldom is.
                        That's right - they could be replaced by any of the previous 'safe' battery chemistries, albeit at a space and weight penalty. Particularly if the older tech is a lead acid battery.

                        The word safe as used above was in inverted commas because if you maltreat any battery you will get an uncontained failure. As a rule of thumb a deep cycle lead acid battery is capable of generating 6 x it's amp hour rating if short circuited. That's enough power to weld with. I have many pictures of ruptured burnt out lead acid batteries from a short.

                        for the 787 to meet it's design parameters it needs Li-Ion battery technology - it is safe provided it is properly charged, installed, used and constructed.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          I just received next weeks AW&ST - it has a three page article on the 787 battery incident. It also describes the function of the two 787 batteries.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            The Japanese reckon the ANA incident was caused by the Battery being overcharged.

                            Japanese safety investigators have determined an All Nippon Airways 787 lithium-ion main battery malfunctioned after being over-charged, forcing the widebody...


                            I'm guessing they're virtually popping the Champagne at Boeing, surely faulty Chargers can be fixed? If this is found to be the common issue I reckon it's good news. But then again I'm not an Electrician. Anyone want to comment on how easily/quickly this type of issue could be sorted?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Here´s a pic of the 787 that got scorned from the outside,
                              "The real CEO of the 787 project is named Potemkin"

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Alessandro View Post
                                Here´s a pic of the 787 that got scorned from the outside,
                                http://news.sky.com/story/1040689/dr...gation-widened
                                Rut Row...how does one fix cheap....errr, I mean quality composites that have been exposed to scorching heat?

                                Lay a new layer of fiberglass & bondo over it, sand and paint?
                                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X