B787 Fire On Ground at BOS

jynxyjoe said:
It could be that top FAA people are political appointments too. It's too much to ask to just have a continuous professional group of higher level employees hu? If only they'd let me be dictator.
Click to expand...
The best way to rule would be with a benevolent dictatorship. The problem is, finding the benevolent side of the dictators. Apparently they are in short supply.
 
I wonder if the other 787 customers (Air India, Ethiopian, LAN, LOT) grounded theirs? It seems only the Japanese 787s are having issues, minus the UAL plane.
 
SeanD said:
I wonder if the other 787 customers (Air India, Ethiopian, LAN, LOT) grounded theirs? It seems only the Japanese 787s are having issues, minus the UAL plane.
Click to expand...
They have over half of the 787 out in service right now. Probably why they are running into the problems.
 
I love the fact that these heavily outsourced planes are having tons of problems. The skycatcher recently had a very nice AD on it which I thought was hilarious. (As long as nobody dies or gets seriously hurt of course).

Build the planes here, pay people to do it. The end.
 
It's easy to point the finger at outsources but I think Boeing took a big chance in the engineering department with getting rid of bleed air and going all electrical. That's a lot of amperage going through small conduit, any resistance and its bound to over heat.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Sealed lead-acid batteries are heavy, but do not overheat.

NiCads do.

Li-ions do.

But the old tech does not.
Click to expand...
I can bet you there are plenty of folks at Boeing that are bumming that they did not for go the 80 lbs differential (or whatever it is) for a more conventional (lead acid /nicad/AGM) battery. It really makes me wonder how else weight was saved. I know nicad and li-ion batteries fairly well, anyone with decades of RC experience does. There is a whole thread dedicated to modelers who burned down their shed or workshop due to ignorance or oscar sierra moments with lipos.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=719116
 
I've got the AD if anyone wants to see it, but I've never uploaded a PDF here before. If anyone wants me to post it, you'll have some 'splainin' to do.
 
tomokc said:
I've got the AD if anyone wants to see it, but I've never uploaded a PDF here before. If anyone wants me to post it, you'll have some 'splainin' to do.
Click to expand...
If you can at least post the AD number that would be cool, that's easy to look up on rgl.faa.gov.
 
2013-02-51. Here's a bad cut & paste job...

1
FAA
Aviation Safety
EMERGENCY
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/alerts/
DATE: January 16, 2013
AD #: 2013-02-51
Emergency airworthiness directive (AD) 2013-02-51 is sent to owners and operators of The
Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes.
Background
This emergency AD was prompted by recent incidents involving lithium ion battery failures
that resulted in release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage, and smoke on two Model 787-8
airplanes. The cause of these failures is currently under investigation. These conditions, if not
corrected, could result in damage to critical systems and structures, and the potential for fire in the
electrical compartment.
FAA’s Determination
We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the
unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type
design.
AD Requirements
This AD requires modification of the battery system, or other actions, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
Interim Action
We consider this AD interim action. As the investigation progresses, we might determine that
additional action is necessary.
Authority for this Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation
safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA
with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices,
methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely
to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
Presentation of the Actual AD
We are issuing this AD under 49 U.S.C. Section 44701 according to the authority delegated to
me by the Administrator.
2
2013-02-51 The Boeing Company: Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-016-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This Emergency AD is effective upon receipt.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes, certificated in any
category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code
24, Electrical power.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by recent incidents involving lithium ion battery failures that resulted
in release of flammable electrolytes, heat damage, and smoke on two Model 787-8 airplanes. The
cause of these failures is currently under investigation. We are issuing this AD to prevent damage to
critical systems and structures, and the potential for fire in the electrical compartment.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Modification or Other Action
Before further flight, modify the battery system, or take other actions, in accordance with a
method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.
(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACOAMOC-
Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking
a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
3
(i) Related Information
For further information about this AD, contact: Robert Duffer, Manager, Systems and
Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-6493; fax: 425-917-6590; email:
Robert.Duffer@faa.gov.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 16, 2013.
Original signed by:
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
 
tomokc said:
I've got the AD if anyone wants to see it, but I've never uploaded a PDF here before. If anyone wants me to post it, you'll have some 'splainin' to do.
Click to expand...
one.jpg
 

Attachments

What I find ironic is people always want better, cooler, more high tech, revolutionary yet act all surprised when the A model does not go completely to plan.


Also, outsourcing does not always equal poor quality, plenty of bad products are made in America (Hello, Chevy...I'm looking at you!).

I applaud Boeings attempt to try something different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top