On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:00:33 +1300, Dave Doe wrote:

In article ,
, Mr.B1ack says...

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:47:49 +0000, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:

|
| What, then, is wrong with the Dreamliner? |
| "I think people had their fingers crossed that it was a | battery
fault," Keith Hayward, head of research at the | Royal Aeronautical
Society, told BBC. "It looks more | systemic and serious to me. I
suspect it could be difficult | to identify the cause."
| ...
http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment...ces/2013/0128/
Boeing-787-battery-passes-initial-probe.-What-s-wrong-with-the-Dreamliner

--bks


NOT a battery fault ... something in the circuitry
that monitors and controls the charge state. Could
be rather minor - and under-rated low-ohm resistor,
a cheapo Chinese cap or inductor ... or it could be
further up, in the software.

In the first case it means that EVERYTHING that uses
similar components, and/or was designed by the same
engineers, has to be taken apart and torture-tested.
In the second case ... COULD be a local firmware
glitch - assuming they're using "smart" modules -
or it COULD be in the system software. The former
is less of a big deal - such control programs tend
to be relatively short. If the system software
is nanny to this and more components however ....

Posted again...

http://www.luxresearchinc.com/news-a...eases/148.html
So far EVERYTHING, including the opinions of the so-called experts
is just speculation. The smoking gun has not been found yet.

MY opinion is still that it will be found to be a relatively simple
tweek - but they MAY end up switching from Lithium Cobalt Oxide to a
different lithium chemistry as a precaution and to re-assure the
public that a mistreated battery won't cause a fire in flight.