ANA 787 Emergency Landing in TAK - FAA grounds 787

[James Bond]

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

[TheKiecker]

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 .

[James Bond]

Originally Posted by TheKiecker

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):

ANA Airways suspending all Boeing 787 Dreamliner flights for emergency inspection, following emergency landing tonight.

[TheKiecker]

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

17 out of how many? This is unreal. Hey Gabriel how is your teething pain?

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by TheKiecker

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.

[TeeVee]

and out come the airbus fanboys....

[TheKiecker]

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]

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/

[TheKiecker]

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

http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intel...unded-for-now/

[Gabriel]

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?

[Deadstick]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

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.

[3WE]

Originally Posted by Deadstick

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.

[TheKiecker]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

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..

[Alessandro]

Originally Posted by TheKiecker

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

[UALdave]

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.

[Alessandro]

Originally Posted by UALdave

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

[SYDCBRWOD]

Originally Posted by Alessandro

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.

[saupatel]

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.

[Highkeas]

Today's NTSB press release
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/2013/130207.html

[TheKiecker]

ANA to Ground All Dreamliners in Fleet After Series of Glitches - NHK