Old 01-15-2013, 11:57 PM   #1
James Bond
Member
 
James Bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: 4329'04.4"S 17231'30.7"E
Posts: 235
Default ANA 787 Emergency Landing in TAK - FAA grounds 787

Reported as a "battery malfunction warning" by CNBC. All pax and crew safe.

Destination was HND.

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-b787-34497.htm
__________________
AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangehuggy View Post
the most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet

Last edited by seahawk; 01-17-2013 at 05:11 AM.
James Bond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 12:09 AM   #2
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21038128#TWEET527941

Gabriel will tell us its no big deal... You couldnt pay me to get on one of these shitboxes .
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 12:52 AM   #3
James Bond
Member
 
James Bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: 4329'04.4"S 17231'30.7"E
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKiecker View Post
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21038128#TWEET527941

Gabriel will tell us its no big deal... You couldnt pay me to get on one of these shitboxes .
Just in (CNBC):

Quote:
ANA Airways suspending all Boeing 787 Dreamliner flights for emergency inspection, following emergency landing tonight.
__________________
AirDisaster.com Forum Member 2004-2008

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangehuggy View Post
the most dangerous part of a flight is not the take off or landing anymore, its when a flight crew member goes to the toilet
James Bond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 12:57 AM   #4
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...09U05G20130116

17 out of how many? This is unreal. Hey Gabriel how is your teething pain?
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 01:08 AM   #5
Gabriel
Senior Member
 
Gabriel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buenos Aires - Argentina
Posts: 4,088
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKiecker View Post
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...09U05G20130116

17 out of how many? This is unreal. Hey Gabriel how is your teething pain?
Okay, you are right. It's a pain in the ass. Like when Qantas and others grounded the A380 fleet to check the engines.
Gabriel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 01:40 AM   #6
TeeVee
Senior Member
 
TeeVee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: MIA
Posts: 1,400
Default

and out come the airbus fanboys....
TeeVee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 01:41 AM   #7
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default

But its not just ONE thing its multiple things.. battery fires, fuel spills, oil spills, smoke in the cockpit.. Within 1 WEEK !!!!!

Its a different bag of rice here.
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 10:12 PM   #8
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default 787 GROUNDED by the FAA

Sorry charlie, ( Gabriel) I guess its not the Airbus boys. Its just common sense.

RT @MattSoleyn: #Breaking - #FAA: All U.S. Airlines ordered to ground the #Boeing 787 indefinitely. $BA #finance


http://www.prod.kirotv.com/news/news...ng-787s/nTyfB/

Last edited by TheKiecker; 01-16-2013 at 10:25 PM. Reason: linky
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 10:42 PM   #9
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default

I cant believe Airbus would do this to Boeing !!!

http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intel...unded-for-now/
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 10:51 PM   #10
Gabriel
Senior Member
 
Gabriel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buenos Aires - Argentina
Posts: 4,088
Default

Okay, I admit there is an important issue to be fixed there (I had done it in the past too, saying that, among all the incidents, the electrical system was critical thing).

But is there a necessity to call my name and put happy, LOLing and dancing emoticons? I can't imagine you happiness if a 787 crashes in downtown Manhattan killing 1000 souls.

And, for the record, I've never been part in the "Airbus fanboys vs Scarebus" discussion. Ok?
Gabriel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 11:32 PM   #11
Deadstick
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 769
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
Okay, I admit there is an important issue to be fixed there (I had done it in the past too, saying that, among all the incidents, the electrical system was critical thing).

But is there a necessity to call my name and put happy, LOLing and dancing emoticons? I can't imagine you happiness if a 787 crashes in downtown Manhattan killing 1000 souls.

And, for the record, I've never been part in the "Airbus fanboys vs Scarebus" discussion. Ok?
I agree it's over the top Gabriel. A few weeks ago I questioned the precautionary landing of a 787 in New Orleans. I think I was correct in questioning it, but it has certainly shown in the following events that there have been a number of serious issues with this aircraft. I believe, like you, that the 787 is probably a good airplane, and will end up being shown to be so, but right now there are some very serious questions about its systems that need to be resolved.

3WE, I apologize.
Deadstick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:36 AM   #12
3WE
Senior Member
 
3WE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadstick View Post
3WE, I apologize.
No need- I'm always playing devil's advocate- and took 1/2 of your statement- when you did lay out "both sides" in your full post.

Gosh, I forgot about that incident...yeah, something electrical and a moderately prompt precautionary landing...

I'm also thinking of Brian W's post about how getting someone to the emergency room in 6 min, but they die is a success because you met your goals...

Too many business grads who spewing 'agressive feel good goals and processes' while running over math and valid concerns?

The timeline is everything...proper 'construction' is secondary.
__________________
Chief Instructor, Sweet Monkey River Flight School, Del Norte.
Learn to Fly your Favorite Flight Simulator Game! Takeoff, Land, Fly on Instruments! Be ready when the flight crew gets food poisoning!
Call 1-800-BR-549...classes starting now!
3WE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:05 AM   #13
TheKiecker
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 238
Send a message via AIM to TheKiecker Send a message via Yahoo to TheKiecker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
Okay, I admit there is an important issue to be fixed there (I had done it in the past too, saying that, among all the incidents, the electrical system was critical thing).

But is there a necessity to call my name and put happy, LOLing and dancing emoticons? I can't imagine you happiness if a 787 crashes in downtown Manhattan killing 1000 souls.

And, for the record, I've never been part in the "Airbus fanboys vs Scarebus" discussion. Ok?

Jan 16 2013 : Gabriel admits he MIGHT be wrong..
TheKiecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 02:06 AM   #14
Alessandro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: European Union
Posts: 1,067
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKiecker View Post
Sorry charlie, ( Gabriel) I guess its not the Airbus boys. Its just common sense.

RT @MattSoleyn: #Breaking - #FAA: All U.S. Airlines ordered to ground the #Boeing 787 indefinitely. $BA #finance


http://www.prod.kirotv.com/news/news...ng-787s/nTyfB/
As for calling Gabriel for ITS, well, not too pleasant, ITS always called 787 a "plastic plane".
Heres the official response to the grounding, http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2563
__________________
"The real CEO of the 787 project is named Potemkin"
Alessandro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 02:16 PM   #15
UALdave
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 183
Default

How much weight would be added to the 787 if traditional lead cadmium batteries were installed, in place of the lithium ion batteries now in place? How much would it cost?

I just can't understand why Boeing would go with the more risky lithium ion batteries-I mean, it's not like they didn't make the 787 light enough without them.
UALdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 07:35 PM   #16
Alessandro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: European Union
Posts: 1,067
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by UALdave View Post
How much weight would be added to the 787 if traditional lead cadmium batteries were installed, in place of the lithium ion batteries now in place? How much would it cost?

I just can't understand why Boeing would go with the more risky lithium ion batteries-I mean, it's not like they didn't make the 787 light enough without them.
Its also a matter of size, since other batteries with the same amount of juice will be larger.
Another interesting claim is that the current batteries on the 787 only can be used up to
85% otherwise the get locked. I heard the term "usable fuel" but not "usable electricity"?
http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...mid=obinsource
__________________
"The real CEO of the 787 project is named Potemkin"
Alessandro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 10:32 PM   #17
SYDCBRWOD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessandro View Post
Its also a matter of size, since other batteries with the same amount of juice will be larger.
Another interesting claim is that the current batteries on the 787 only can be used up to
85% otherwise the get locked. I heard the term "usable fuel" but not "usable electricity"?
http://seattletimes.com/html/busines...mid=obinsource
Not that uncommon - it (ironically) with some battery types improves longevity.

The battery in the Toyota Prius is only ever allowed to charge to 80% and discharge no lower than 40% - effectively you have a battery pack you are only using 40% of its total capacity out of.

See here for more: http://www.hybridinterfaces.ca/stockNIMH.html


Same with Lead acid chemistry - many people believe that because they have a deep cycle battery in their RV/House/ Second battery in the 4x4 that they can regularly cane all the energy out of it. Cycle life in all lead acid chemistry is massively improved the lower the depth of discharge.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=le...tm%3B500%3B345

The only battery that seems to be the exception to this is NiFe chemistry.
SYDCBRWOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 03:52 PM   #18
saupatel
Member
 
saupatel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 546



Send a message via Yahoo to saupatel
Default

Looks like Boeing is flight testing one of the frame today from FTW to PNE.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE382

Nevermind. Its just a relocation flight with special permission from the FAA.
__________________

Last edited by saupatel; 02-07-2013 at 05:33 PM.
saupatel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 08:30 PM   #19
Highkeas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: at 1,600 metres
Posts: 1,098
Default

Today's NTSB press release
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130207.html
Highkeas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2013, 07:38 AM   #20
Cairns65
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Berlin , Germany
Posts: 61
Default The 787 - A technical masterpiece ?

It seems to me that the Boeing 787 is an airplane without any special skills. Technically not round and full of problems and dangerous breakdowns. The FAA gronded the type because of many many problems we all know.
Now it happened again in Heathrow when a 787 from Ethiopian caught fire and was damaged and in Boston recently when this bird had to return to Logan Intl. because of a light that warned from a fire.

These are more than theeting troubles to me. They are now dangerous and nasty. The 787 : a great plane with starting problems or a flop ?

What do you think out there around the globe ?
Cairns65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright JetPhotos.Net 2003-2011