Announcement

Collapse

The GaijinPot Forum Is Closed

Please join us on our new Facebook Group.
See more
See less

Top

Collapse

Booing Boeing

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Hijinx View Post
    Sure. Ultimately, Boeing is responsible for the safety of parts supplied by outside suppliers. But absolutely no mention of Yuasa when discussing the batteries on TV (I was just watching a show now). This could be a major blow to a Japanese company, yet no need to mention this as a detail. Seems like the J-media is trying to keep this from the general public until they absolutely can't ignore it anymore. Like you said, maybe the fault is entirely Boeing's--we'll see. However, my prediction: there is a design flaw in the batteries and this will turn into some degree of finger pointing between Boeing and Yuasa regarding fault. And, of course, the J-media will rally around Yuasa.
    Sounds like you're making this out to be a conspiracy theory!!!

    Tsk tsk!!!

    Comment


    • #32
      I'm all for dying in fuel enrage airplane...

      Comment


      • #33
        Well, Washington doesn't seem to think there's anything to worry about:
        WASHINGTON —

        Obama administration officials struggled Wednesday to defend their initial statements that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is safe while promising a transparent probe of mishaps involving the aircraftfs batteries.

        Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stood by his Jan 11 assertion that the 787, Boeingfs newest and most technologically advanced airliner, was safe. At that time, LaHood and the head of the Federal Aviation Administration, Michael Huerta, declared the plane fit to fly despite a battery fire in one plane.

        Five days later, following another battery mishap that led to an emergency landing of a 787 in Japan, LaHood and Huerta ordered United, the lone U.S. carrier with 787s, to ground the planes. Authorities in Europe and elsewhere — including Chile, Poland, Ethiopia, Qatar and India — swiftly followed suit. Two Japanese airlines voluntarily grounded their planes before FAAfs order.

        Overall, 50 Dreamliners have been grounded worldwide. FAAfs order applies only to Unitedfs the six 787s.

        gOn the day we announced the planes were safe, they were,h LaHood told reporters at an aviation industry luncheon. He became testy when a reporter pressed him on whether his initial pronouncements had been too hasty.

        gIfm not doing these hypothetical look-backs,h he said. gWe did what we did.h
        http://www.japantoday.com/category/b...ng-787-mishaps

        Comment


        • #34
          Anyone out there think that they're pushing this up for Golden Week or is this truly a 'go'?

          I read that the pilots weren't getting paid during this down time...why?
          Can't they be rescheduled on other planes?

          Dreamliner flights to restart within weeks: Boeing
          TOKYO —
          Boeing said Friday it sees commercial flights of its grounded 787 jets resuming gwithin weeksh even though it has not pinpointed the cause of battery overheating.

          Boeing Co. Chief Project Engineer Michael Sinnett outlined a fix centered on a new design for the lithium-ion battery system that has many layers of safeguards to prevent overheating. It also has measures to contain any problems if malfunctions do occur.

          gWe could be back up and going in weeks and not months,h Sinnett told reporters at a Tokyo hotel. A third of safety tests have already been completed. A Japanese official said it was possible flights could resume next month.

          http://www.japantoday.com/category/n...n-weeks-boeing

          Comment


          • #35
            Was watching the news earlier and it seems that while Boeing has come up with many possible reasons for the battery problems, they do not have a clear answer as to why this all happened.
            Seems they're just a few steps away from being cleared for take off too....are we good with this?

            Comment


            • #36
              Just happen to be an aerospace mechanic/inspector/engineer and no I donft think it is safe yet to fly on this bad boy. When new aircraft are built and put in the industry it takes about two years to get all the bugs worked out. However for the new B-787 there is an issue with the battery charging system or the battery would not overheated. The battery is just like a bucket you fill it up with water dump it and fill it again. The charging system for this battery (bucket) is pretty special and only allows a certain about of voltage to charge the battery exceed the limit the battery catches five. This is a known problem that is why the NTSB is still looking into the electrical system and just not the battery. I fly ANA B-777 myself proven aircraft with just a few bugs and different type battery.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Pizo View Post
                The charging system for this battery (bucket) is pretty special and only allows a certain about of voltage to charge the battery exceed the limit the battery catches five.
                That is exotic. The convential approach is that batteries need to be charged at, or slightly over their rated voltage. Give them any voltage much below that and they are being discharged not charged and any voltage significantly higher risks overheating, breakdown, fire etc. The rate of charging is controlled by the current supplied (amps rather than volts) - That often needs to be controlled quite carefully to avoid problems.

                Lithium Ion batteries have a somewhat chequered history even when the charging system is well designed and working properly. On the other hand they are light in weight for the current they can store and deliver. That is what makes them attractive for portable electronic devices and I suppose super efficient aircraft. They have been quite a few problems over the years with them overheating and even exploding.
                Last edited by Brown Cow; 2013-05-10, 09:32 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  They're still trying to get these nightmares up in the air, but it's just not working.
                  What's it going to take to ground these things forever?

                  ANA Boeing 787 has engine problem before takeoff
                  TOKYO —
                  An All Nippon Airways Dreamliner had engine trouble before takeoff Wednesday, a day after a rival airline had a problem on another 787 plane.

                  Neither problem was with the lithium-ion batteries that were overheating and resulted in the Boeing aircraft being grounded for four months. The 787s returned to commercial service last month with their batteries now encased to prevent overheating from spreading.

                  The ANA flight was scheduled to go from Ube to Tokyofs Haneda airport but the right-side engine would not start, airline spokesman Yoichi Uchida said. He said its 141 passengers are taking other flights.

                  On Tuesday, a Japan Airlines 787 returned to Haneda shortly after takeoff because of a problem in its deicing system.

                  The system is needed depending on weather conditions, and a malfunction can at times be dangerous, but the jet was not at risk and it returned safely, JAL spokesman Jian Yang said. The flight was en route to Singapore.

                  http://www.japantoday.com/category/n...before-takeoff

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Really?

                    United 787 heading to Tokyo diverted to Seattle:
                    SEATTLE (AP) — A Boeing 787 flying from Denver to Tokyo diverted to Seattle because of an oil filter issue, a United Airlines spokeswoman said.

                    An airline maintenance team was inspecting the jet after Flight 139 landed normally Tuesday afternoon at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, United spokeswoman Mary Ryan said in an email statement.

                    United just put its 787s back in the air May 20 after smoldering batteries on two 787s owned by other airlines prompted authorities to ground the planes in January.

                    The Tokyo-bound jet's problem was "completely unrelated to any battery issues," Boeing spokesman Kate Bergman told The Seattle Times on Tuesday evening.

                    "We are aware of the situation, and we're working with United to help however they need us," Bergman added.

                    In her statement, the United spokeswoman said the crew decided to land in Seattle because of "an indication of a problem with an oil filter."

                    Asked whether the latest 787 issue raised any concerns with United after the recent battery issue, Ryan said she did not immediately have any additional information.

                    The airline provided the flight's approximately 200 customers with hotel rooms and planned to fly them to Tokyo on Wednesday, Ryan said.

                    When it returned the 787s to service last month, Chicago-based United said it planned to use the jets on shorter domestic flights before resuming international flying June 10 with Denver-to-Tokyo service as well as temporary Houston-to-London flights. It's adding flights to Tokyo, Shanghai, and Lagos, Nigeria, in August.

                    Those long international flights are the main reason the 787 exists. Its medium size and fuel efficiency are a good fit for long routes.

                    At the Paris Air Show on Tuesday, Boeing Co. won major orders from five customers, including United, for a stretched-out version of the 787.

                    Boeing announced the formal launch of its 787-10 program at the air show and said it already has commitments for 102 jets from the five customers. The new 787-10 lists at $290 million, making the deal worth nearly $30 billion at full price, although customers often negotiate deep discounts.

                    United remains the only U.S.-based airline to fly the 787, which is steadily winning customers after being beset with problems concerning lithium-ion batteries on two Japanese carriers. The plane, like its newest rival the Airbus A350, uses lightweight materials and new engine technology to cut down on fuel consumption at a time of rapidly increasing jet fuel prices.

                    The two battery incidents in January included an emergency landing of one plane, and a fire on another. Federal authorities lifted the grounding order on April 19.

                    The incidents never caused any serious injuries. But the grounding embarrassed Boeing and disrupted schedules at the affected airlines.

                    The 787 uses more electricity than any other jet. And it makes more use of lithium-ion batteries than other jets to provide power for things like flight controls and a backup generator when its engines are shut down. Each 787 has two of the batteries.

                    Boeing never did figure out the root cause of the battery incidents. Instead, it redesigned the battery and its charger. The idea was to eliminate all of the possible causes, 787 chief engineer Mike Sinnett has said.
                    http://news.yahoo.com/united-787-hea...004236885.html

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by thefg
                      they dont put that much 'new' technology into aeroplanes or even space ships (at least not as new or as much of it as people might think) The risks are too high. Majority of the technology employed in such applications is well well proven established technologies.
                      Things that go wrong are usually not with new technologies but the new way they may be utilised.

                      not that that makes much difference when your plummeting to the ground in a ball of flames...
                      It's more dangerous to drive a car than it is to fly. My pilot's license was revoked after I was diagnosed and operated on for a tumour in my eye that caused a detachment of my retina. And yet, it's perfectly ok for me to drive a car.

                      Parts and machinery for aircraft and the people that maintain and fly them must meet more exacting requirements than parts, machinery and people in other industries must. Believe me, you're safer in the air (unless you've pissed off a CA) than you are on the ground.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I hear what you're both saying, but if I open my car door, I can touch the ground with my foot.
                        On a plane............?????

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          [QUOTE=thefg;1327606]
                          Originally posted by Old Style View Post
                          I hear what you're both saying, but if I open my car door, I can touch the ground with my foot.
                          On a plane............?????[/QUOTE
                          Crash your car at say 80km/h and your going to be no less dead than if your plane hits the side of a mountain at 600mph.
                          above a certain rate of deceleration how fast your going makes no difference - your still dead
                          baring that in mind along with the fact that you are more likley to crash your car than your aeroplane crashing and clearly its all in the head.
                          but hey i hate flying too!
                          I didn't always hate flying.
                          There was a time when flying was a privilege.
                          Men wore suits.
                          The stewardesses were hot.
                          The stewards were gay.
                          Drinks were free.
                          There was room to stretch out.

                          And now?
                          People dress like they're going to the beach.
                          The 'flight attendants' look like monsters.
                          The stewards.........well, they're still gay.
                          Drinks are expensive.
                          If you'd like to stretch out, you'd better sit on the wing itself!!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            And now the $$$$$ comes in to play:

                            JAPAN TODAY
                            JAL starts compensation talks with Boeing over Dreamliner:
                            TOKYO —
                            Japan Airlines (JAL) has started talks with U.S. aviation giant Boeing over losses stemming from the grounding of its troubled 787 Dreamliner, a company spokesman said Wednesday.

                            The Japanese carrier was forced to cancel hundreds of flights since mid-January, when its entire 787 fleet was grounded due to battery-related problems.

                            gJapan Airlines has been discussing with Boeing for compensation regarding the 787 grounding,h a spokesman said in a statement.

                            JAL, which held a shareholders meeting Wednesday, said it lost about 3.9 billion yen from the incident.

                            JAL and rival All Nippon Airways (ANA), the worldfs two biggest operators of 787s, have now put their Dreamliner fleets back into service following a four-month suspension as regulators investigated troubles with the next-generation aircraft. ANA has previously said it may begin compensation talks after the problems were fixed.

                            A global grounding order was issued in January after lithium-ion batteries overheated on two different planes, with one of them catching fire while the aircraft was parked.


                            Boeing admitted in April that, despite months of testing, it did not know the root cause of the problems on its flagship plane, but rolled out modifications it said would ensure they were safe.

                            Since then, Dreamliners have experienced a series of glitches, including an anti-icing problem that forced a Singapore-bound Dreamliner operated by JAL to abort the flight and return to Tokyo earlier this month.

                            http://www.japantoday.com/category/b...ver-dreamliner

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              [QUOTE=Old Style;1327608]
                              Originally posted by thefg
                              I didn't always hate flying.
                              There was a time when flying was a privilege.
                              Men wore suits.
                              The stewardesses were hot.
                              The stewards were gay.
                              Drinks were free.
                              There was room to stretch out.

                              And now?
                              People dress like they're going to the beach.
                              The 'flight attendants' look like monsters.
                              The stewards.........well, they're still gay.
                              Drinks are expensive.
                              If you'd like to stretch out, you'd better sit on the wing itself!!
                              Mega yep. Used to get dressed up when going on a plane. (First airline for me, Yellowbird Airlines.) Now it's like a flying bus. Last time I went back to the U.S., took Southwest. Got the impression that people with screaming babies or those with waistlines measured in meters got to fly free.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Old Style View Post
                                I hear what you're both saying, but if I open my car door, I can touch the ground with my foot.
                                On a plane............?????
                                I just don't know why but people just didn't like my landings....

                                Gentlemen this is your pilot speaking. We are currently flying at 1200m and a speed of 230kmph. We are 5 min out from the target. Winds on the ground are light at 32kmph, temps are 21ºC and cloud cover is moderate. Please check and secure your gear, exit will be by the ramp to the rear of the aircraft. Please follow the instructions of the Jumpmaster and good hunting.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X