Is the 787 a failure ?

On 1/25/2013 7:00 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jan 10, 2:02 pm, Transition Zone wrote:
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:23:55 -0500
Local: Thurs, Dec 23 2010 9:23 pm

JF Mezei wrote:

On December 23rd, Boeing announced it is now resuming flight testing on
ZA004.
They have updated the power distrubution *software* and will test this,
along with deployment of RAT before resuming normal testing for
certification.
So it appears that the hammer that was left in some electrical cabinet
probably highlighted some software problems. Thankfully, updating
software is less tedious than having to dismantly, change a part and
reassemble the number of 787s already built.

A Week Boeing Would Like To Forget
By Alex Zolbert, CNN, updated 2:01 PM EST, Thu January 10, 2013

More concerns for Dreamliner - (CNN) -- Some passengers pay no
attention to what type of airplane they'll be flying on. Others are
obsessed.
I'd put myself in the middle of the pack, mainly due to the new planes
on offer from Airbus and Boeing.
So I was in slightly better spirits this week, as I boarded the 11-
hour United Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Tokyo this week.
It was my first chance to fly on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
But the trip quickly descended into -- certainly not a nightmare --
but definitely a headache.
Dreamliner catches fire at airport

It's a drill millions of travelers know all too well.
After starting the taxi out to the runway Monday morning, we were
informed that there was an issue with the computer system, and they
were unable to start one of the plane's engines. We remained onboard
for nearly 3 hours, as flight attendants sheepishly offered cups of
water to frustrated passengers.
Eventually we disembarked.
A delay of four hours turned into five, then six, seven ... and the
flight was eventually canceled.
We then had the pleasure of spending the night at an airport hotel
that seemed to have been last updated around the time commercial air
travel started.
It was then that I realized we weren't the only ones encountering
issues with the Dreamliner on Monday.
A Japan Airlines' 787 caught fire in Boston after passengers
disembarked.

Boeing said the fire was traced to a battery unit that helps to power
electrical systems when the engines are idle -- typically while a
plane is being serviced or cleaned. And the company says it's
cooperating with investigators.
As Tuesday morning arrived, we were back on board another United
Airlines' Dreamliner in Los Angeles.
But in a rather comical turn of events, the second plane never left
the gate.
We were told there was an issue with the paperwork filed with the FAA.
More than a day late, many coffees, and very little sleep later, the
third time finally proved to be the charm -- more than 24 hours after
our scheduled departure.
But as we finally took to the skies, more Dreamliner issues were
unfolding.
Another Japan Airlines' 787 in Boston had to scrap a takeoff on
Tuesday due to a fuel leak. And an ANA Dreamliner flight was canceled
in Japan on Wednesday, because of a glitch with its brake system.
But Boeing is standing by its latest aircraft. The company's chief
project engineer, Mike Sinnett, says he is "100% convinced the
airplane is safe to fly."

Analysts seem not to be alarmed, saying that new aircraft models often
have "growing pains."
But what is very clear is this was a week that Boeing would certainly
like to forget.
After a nearly 40-hour trip back home, I'll second that.

--http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/10/business/dreamliner-los-angeles/

BIG problem.

The batteries are obviously being overcharged..a system problem.

To fix the problem and have the recertifications will take time..and
BIG dollars until the plane files again.

I suspect it is a failure to properly oversee system integration
within Boeing.

And where there is smoke there is fire...if the electrical system has
not been properly reviewed it is a KEY signal that there are other
similar oversights.

Bottom line..if I were actively flying I would NOT fly the 787 for
years...let someone else be the lab rat.

It sounds like they are being overcharged. That is prevented by
a simple card addition that prevents it on only of overcharging
but undercharging. Easy fix.

Daryl

--
http://tvmoviesforfree.com
for free movies and Nostalgic TV. Tons of Military shows and
programs.

"Daryl" wrote in message
...

It sounds like they are being overcharged. That is prevented by a
simple card addition that prevents it on only of overcharging but
undercharging. Easy fix.

Daryl

The Lithium medical and electric vehicle packs I worked on were
controlled by ICs that monitored and recorded individual cell voltage
and overall charge and discharge current. Those are point measurements
that are easy to do. What's harder is detecting unexpected hot spots
away from the temperature sensors. Minor differences (improvements)
between the acceptance sample and production devices can change heat
flow paths.
http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm

On 1/26/2013 6:00 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Daryl" wrote in message
...

It sounds like they are being overcharged. That is prevented by a
simple card addition that prevents it on only of overcharging but
undercharging. Easy fix.

Daryl

The Lithium medical and electric vehicle packs I worked on were
controlled by ICs that monitored and recorded individual cell voltage
and overall charge and discharge current. Those are point measurements
that are easy to do. What's harder is detecting unexpected hot spots
away from the temperature sensors. Minor differences (improvements)
between the acceptance sample and production devices can change heat
flow paths.
http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm




I can see a problem that is being addressed in Electric Vehicles.
Heat and cold.

On an electric vehicle, getting the battery too cold will (not
can) result in a degrading of the performance of the cells. The
fix is adding an "Electric Blanket" to keep the battery warm (not
hot). The residual power required by the blanket is negligible.
You get back much more than you lose.

Heat. I can see problems with the Lipo batteries. The battery
they chose is one that is not on the list of Vehicle safe
batteries. It is the best, the highest output but with it comes
problems. Lithium cobalt oxide (LCO), for vehicles, is listed as
unstable compared to the rest. It's very suspeptable to heat.
And sitting on the ground running up on a hot day, the battery
compartment will sky rocket in heat. The safest to use is the
lead acid but it's very short lived in this application. To use
any Lipo battery, it requires a cooling and a heating system to
keep the battery at an optimal temperature. The LCO is just the
worst of the lot for overrunning (catching fire, generating
Oxygen when it burns) than any other Lipo battery.

The Fix? Get rid of the LCO and temperature control the battery
compartment. Even a Lead Acid doesn't like excessive cold or
heat. But it won't turn into a major oxygen fire. Sometimes,
newer isn't better. But the various other Lipo batteries are
safer than the LCO which has a proven track record of burning.

BTW, the LCO isn't the cheapest by far. The LipoMG battery is
the cheapest but it has a low service charge rate. The Lipo4 has
a decent service rate and is what is primarily used in various
vehicle applications. But, maybe, the old Lead Acids may be the
way to go on this one. They are the most stable and the most
safe if you keep them in a wide range of temperatures.

Newer isn't always better.

Daryl



--
http://tvmoviesforfree.com
for free movies and Nostalgic TV. Tons of Military shows and
programs.

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:46:22 -0700, Daryl
wrote:

On 1/26/2013 6:00 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Daryl" wrote in message
...

It sounds like they are being overcharged. That is prevented by a
simple card addition that prevents it on only of overcharging but
undercharging. Easy fix.

Daryl

The Lithium medical and electric vehicle packs I worked on were
controlled by ICs that monitored and recorded individual cell voltage
and overall charge and discharge current. Those are point measurements
that are easy to do. What's harder is detecting unexpected hot spots
away from the temperature sensors. Minor differences (improvements)
between the acceptance sample and production devices can change heat
flow paths.
http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm




I can see a problem that is being addressed in Electric Vehicles.
Heat and cold.

On an electric vehicle, getting the battery too cold will (not
can) result in a degrading of the performance of the cells. The
fix is adding an "Electric Blanket" to keep the battery warm (not
hot). The residual power required by the blanket is negligible.
You get back much more than you lose.

Heat. I can see problems with the Lipo batteries. The battery
they chose is one that is not on the list of Vehicle safe
batteries. It is the best, the highest output but with it comes
problems. Lithium cobalt oxide (LCO), for vehicles, is listed as
unstable compared to the rest. It's very suspeptable to heat.
And sitting on the ground running up on a hot day, the battery
compartment will sky rocket in heat. The safest to use is the
lead acid but it's very short lived in this application. To use
any Lipo battery, it requires a cooling and a heating system to
keep the battery at an optimal temperature. The LCO is just the
worst of the lot for overrunning (catching fire, generating
Oxygen when it burns) than any other Lipo battery.

The Fix? Get rid of the LCO and temperature control the battery
compartment. Even a Lead Acid doesn't like excessive cold or
heat. But it won't turn into a major oxygen fire. Sometimes,
newer isn't better. But the various other Lipo batteries are
safer than the LCO which has a proven track record of burning.

Lead acid is and has for quite some time been a "non-starter" for the
application - for good reason.Nicads have been the standard for
decades - and have their issues as well Lithium iron would be a better
choice .

BTW, the LCO isn't the cheapest by far. The LipoMG battery is
the cheapest but it has a low service charge rate. The Lipo4 has
a decent service rate and is what is primarily used in various
vehicle applications. But, maybe, the old Lead Acids may be the
way to go on this one. They are the most stable and the most
safe if you keep them in a wide range of temperatures.

Newer isn't always better.

Daryl

On Jan 25, 9:00*pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jan 10, 2:02*pm, Transition Zone wrote:









Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:23:55 -0500
Local: Thurs, Dec 23 2010 9:23 pm

JF Mezei wrote:

On December 23rd, Boeing announced it is now resuming flight testing on
ZA004.
They have updated the power distrubution *software* and will test this,
along with deployment of RAT before resuming normal testing for
certification.
So it appears that the hammer that was left in some electrical cabinet
probably highlighted some software problems. Thankfully, updating
software is less tedious than having to dismantly, change a part and
reassemble the number of 787s already built.

A Week Boeing Would Like To Forget
By Alex Zolbert, CNN, updated 2:01 PM EST, Thu January 10, 2013

More concerns for Dreamliner - (CNN) -- Some passengers pay no
attention to what type of airplane they'll be flying on. Others are
obsessed.
I'd put myself in the middle of the pack, mainly due to the new planes
on offer from Airbus and Boeing.
So I was in slightly better spirits this week, as I boarded the 11-
hour United Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Tokyo this week.
It was my first chance to fly on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
But the trip quickly descended into -- certainly not a nightmare --
but definitely a headache.
Dreamliner catches fire at airport

It's a drill millions of travelers know all too well.
After starting the taxi out to the runway Monday morning, we were
informed that there was an issue with the computer system, and they
were unable to start one of the plane's engines. We remained onboard
for nearly 3 hours, as flight attendants sheepishly offered cups of
water to frustrated passengers.
Eventually we disembarked.
A delay of four hours turned into five, then six, seven ... and the
flight was eventually canceled.
We then had the pleasure of spending the night at an airport hotel
that seemed to have been last updated around the time commercial air
travel started.
It was then that I realized we weren't the only ones encountering
issues with the Dreamliner on Monday.
A Japan Airlines' 787 caught fire in Boston after passengers
disembarked.

Boeing said the fire was traced to a battery unit that helps to power
electrical systems when the engines are idle -- typically while a
plane is being serviced or cleaned. And the company says it's
cooperating with investigators.
As Tuesday morning arrived, we were back on board another United
Airlines' Dreamliner in Los Angeles.
But in a rather comical turn of events, the second plane never left
the gate.
We were told there was an issue with the paperwork filed with the FAA.
More than a day late, many coffees, and very little sleep later, the
third time finally proved to be the charm -- more than 24 hours after
our scheduled departure.
But as we finally took to the skies, more Dreamliner issues were
unfolding.
Another Japan Airlines' 787 in Boston had to scrap a takeoff on
Tuesday due to a fuel leak. And an ANA Dreamliner flight was canceled
in Japan on Wednesday, because of a glitch with its brake system.
But Boeing is standing by its latest aircraft. The company's chief
project engineer, Mike Sinnett, says he is "100% convinced the
airplane is safe to fly."

Analysts seem not to be alarmed, saying that new aircraft models often
have "growing pains."
But what is very clear is this was a week that Boeing would certainly
like to forget.
After a nearly 40-hour trip back home, I'll second that.

--http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/10/business/dreamliner-los-angeles/

BIG problem.

The batteries are obviously being overcharged..a system problem.

To fix the problem and have the recertifications will take time..and
BIG dollars until the plane files again.

I suspect it is a failure to properly oversee system integration
within Boeing.

And where there is smoke there is fire...if the electrical system has
not been properly reviewed it is a KEY signal that there are other
similar oversights.

Bottom line..if I were actively flying I would NOT fly the 787 for
years...let someone else be the lab rat.

Other planes have made bad splashes into the market or service and
later fared better. Here, I think the battery system was being
strained; i.e. being used without a diesel (jet fuel) powered main
power unit, which all planes on the ground need. Probably human error.

Too_Many_Tools writes:

The batteries are obviously being overcharged..a system problem.
Not necessarily. They may simply be too big to properly handle modest
fluctuations in heat even under proper charge. That's an even bigger
problem.
--
Who depends on another man's table often dines late.
--John Ray

On Jan 10, 2:02*pm, Transition Zone wrote:
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:23:55 -0500
Local: Thurs, Dec 23 2010 9:23 pm

JF Mezei wrote:

On December 23rd, Boeing announced it is now resuming flight testing on
ZA004.
They have updated the power distrubution *software* and will test this,
along with deployment of RAT before resuming normal testing for
certification.
So it appears that the hammer that was left in some electrical cabinet
probably highlighted some software problems. Thankfully, updating
software is less tedious than having to dismantly, change a part and
reassemble the number of 787s already built.

A Week Boeing Would Like To Forget
By Alex Zolbert, CNN, updated 2:01 PM EST, Thu January 10, 2013

More concerns for Dreamliner - (CNN) -- Some passengers pay no
attention to what type of airplane they'll be flying on. Others are
obsessed.
I'd put myself in the middle of the pack, mainly due to the new planes
on offer from Airbus and Boeing.
So I was in slightly better spirits this week, as I boarded the 11-
hour United Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Tokyo this week.
It was my first chance to fly on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
But the trip quickly descended into -- certainly not a nightmare --
but definitely a headache.
Dreamliner catches fire at airport

It's a drill millions of travelers know all too well.
After starting the taxi out to the runway Monday morning, we were
informed that there was an issue with the computer system, and they
were unable to start one of the plane's engines. We remained onboard
for nearly 3 hours, as flight attendants sheepishly offered cups of
water to frustrated passengers.
Eventually we disembarked.
A delay of four hours turned into five, then six, seven ... and the
flight was eventually canceled.
We then had the pleasure of spending the night at an airport hotel
that seemed to have been last updated around the time commercial air
travel started.
It was then that I realized we weren't the only ones encountering
issues with the Dreamliner on Monday.
A Japan Airlines' 787 caught fire in Boston after passengers
disembarked.

Boeing said the fire was traced to a battery unit that helps to power
electrical systems when the engines are idle -- typically while a
plane is being serviced or cleaned. And the company says it's
cooperating with investigators.
As Tuesday morning arrived, we were back on board another United
Airlines' Dreamliner in Los Angeles.
But in a rather comical turn of events, the second plane never left
the gate.
We were told there was an issue with the paperwork filed with the FAA.
More than a day late, many coffees, and very little sleep later, the
third time finally proved to be the charm -- more than 24 hours after
our scheduled departure.
But as we finally took to the skies, more Dreamliner issues were
unfolding.
Another Japan Airlines' 787 in Boston had to scrap a takeoff on
Tuesday due to a fuel leak. And an ANA Dreamliner flight was canceled
in Japan on Wednesday, because of a glitch with its brake system.
But Boeing is standing by its latest aircraft. The company's chief
project engineer, Mike Sinnett, says he is "100% convinced the
airplane is safe to fly."

Analysts seem not to be alarmed, saying that new aircraft models often
have "growing pains."
But what is very clear is this was a week that Boeing would certainly
like to forget.
After a nearly 40-hour trip back home, I'll second that.

--http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/10/business/dreamliner-los-angeles/

Another week...and the 787 is still GROUNDED.

Any guess how many MILLIONS OF DOLLARS this has cost Boeing?

TMT

TMT

|
| Even before two battery failures led to the grounding of
| all Boeing 787 jets this month, the lithium-ion batteries
| used on the aircraft had experienced multiple problems that
| raised questions about their reliability.
|
| Officials at All Nippon Airways, the jets' biggest
| operator, said in an interview on Tuesday that it had
| replaced 10 of the batteries in the months before fire and
| smoke in two cases caused regulators around the world to
| ground the jets.
| ...
| Kelly Nantel, a spokeswoman for the National Transportation
| Safety Board, said investigators had only recently heard
| that there had been "numerous issues with the use of these
| batteries" on 787s. She said the board had asked Boeing,
| All Nippon and other airlines for information about the
| problems.
|
| In a little-noticed test in 2010, the F.A.A. found that the
| kind of lithium-ion chemistry that Boeing planned to use --
| lithium cobalt -- was the most flammable of several
| possible types. The test found that that type of battery
| provided the most power, but could also overheat more
| quickly.
| ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/business/boeing-aware-of-battery-ills-before-the-fires.html

--bks

Yow!
|
| Boeing had numerous reliability issues with the main
| batteries on its 787 Dreamliner long before the two battery
| incidents this month grounded the entire fleet.
|
| More than 100 of the lithium ion batteries have failed and
| had to be returned to the Japanese manufacturer, according
| to a person inside the 787 program with direct knowledge.
|
| "We have had at least 100, possibly approaching 150, bad
| batteries so far," the person said. "It's common."
|
| The frequency of battery failures reflects issues with the
| design of the electrical system around the battery, said
| the person on the 787 program.
| ...
http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020241385_787deadbatteriesxml.html

--bks

|
| TOKYO - (AP) -- U.S. transport safety regulators have asked
| Boeing Co. to provide a full operating history of the
| lithium-ion batteries used in its grounded 787 Dreamliners.
|
| The National Transportation Safety Board said in a
| statement it made the request after recently becoming aware
| of battery incidents that occurred before a Jan. 7 battery
| fire in a 787 parked at Boston's Logan International
| Airport.
| ...
http://www.newsday.com/business/us-regulator-asks-boeing-for-full-battery-history-1.4532223

--bks