News_Editor Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 Boeing 787 Dreamliner incidents raise safety concerns < br /> 2013-01-09 20:10:27 GMT+7 (ICT) BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS (BNO NEWS) -- A Boeing 787 Dreamliner operated by Japan Airlines suffered a fuel leakage Tuesday while preparing to take off from an airport in Massachusetts, making it the second mishap involving a Dreamliner aircraft in as many days, officials said. The Dreamliner, operated by Japan Airlines and carrying 181 passengers on board, was about to take off from Boston's Logan International Airport when a pilot from another aircraft advised air traffic control of a leakage from a wing. The control tower then informed the aircraft's crew. Boeing has not made any statements regarding Tuesday's incident, but it is believed around 40 gallons (151 liters) of fuel spilled from the aircraft, causing the flight to be delayed for nearly four hours. It has raised further safety concerns about the Dreamliner aircraft as it came less than 24 hours after another mishap. On Monday, a fire broke out in the electronics and equipment bay of another Dreamliner aircraft which was also at Boston's Logan Airport and being operated by Japan Airlines. The fire was extinguished after about 40 minutes, and while no passengers or crew members were on board, one firefighter received minor injuries. In a preliminary update, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said Tuesday that its investigator on scene found that the aircraft's auxiliary power unit battery had severe fire damage. Thermal damage to the surrounding structure and components was confined to the area immediately near the APU battery rack in the aft electronics bay. Investigators said Japan Airlines representatives have indicated that airplane maintenance and cleaning personnel were on the airplane with the APU in operation just prior to the detection of smoke in the cabin. Boeing said it is working closely with all parties concerned to find the cause of the fire. "As is standard practice within the industry, it would be premature to discuss additional details at this stage as the investigation is ongoing," the aircraft manufacturer said in a statement on Tuesday. "However, nothing that we've seen in this case indicates a relationship to any previous 787 power system events, which involved power panel faults elsewhere in the aft electrical equipment bay." -- © BNO News All rights reserved 2013-01-09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 9, 2013 Share Posted January 9, 2013 3 incidents in 3 days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heatherm Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Fuel leak and fire. What's the third? Sent from my GT-P1010 using Thaivisa Connect App Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Ground them all the same as Concorde was grounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 That what happens when you outsource to China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Fuel leak and fire. What's the third? Sent from my GT-P1010 using Thaivisa Connect App A brake failure. The aircraft was towed back to the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 10, 2013 Share Posted January 10, 2013 Ground them all the same as Concorde was grounded. Not forgetting RR powered A380s more recently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Made in China? A faulty valve caused a fuel leak on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Boston airport this week, operator Japan Airlines Co. said on Thursday.In one of several problems relating to Boeing's newest model in recent weeks, about 40 gallons of fuel spewed onto the taxiway in Boston, compelling the plane to cancel takeoff and to return to the gate. "The cause of the fuel leak in Boston was a faulty valve," a JAL spokesman said. No reason was given for the valve's failure. Due to the fault, fuel flowed from the center tank to the left main tank, and when that tank filled up, it overflowed into a surge tank and out through a vent, the spokesman said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heatherm Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I have to get on one Monday. At least it's with ANA. Sent from my GT-P1010 using Thaivisa Connect App Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endure Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Ground them all the same as Concorde was grounded. Not forgetting RR powered A380s more recently And the Engine Alliance powered Emirates one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I have to get on one Monday. At least it's with ANA. Sent from my GT-P1010 using Thaivisa Connect App One of the 787 failures 1st listed was ANA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Oops! And another one.... A fuel leak has been found on a 787 Dreamliner during a test in Japan on Sunday. The incident has joined a growing list of problems facing the highly anticipated aircraft prior to a high-priority review by the US Federal Aviation Administration. The leak came from a fuel nozzle on the left wing that is used to remove kerosene, according to a Japan Airlines spokeswoman, who added that the cause of the incident was unknown. The aircraft is currently undergoing checks in Tokyo. Friday’s decision by the American government to order a thorough review of Boeing 787 immediately followed a similar incident, which happened to another jet in Boston, when about 40 gallons of fuel spilled onto the airport taxiway due to a valve-related problem. The review will not ground planes or halt production of new 787s, but will examine the plane's design, manufacture and assembly, according to US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. http://rt.com/news/boeing-plane-malfunction-dreamliner-921/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 That what happens when you outsource to China. Really? The equipment and parts implicated are not of Chinese origin. The Lithium battery supplier is GS Yuasa (Japan). The fuel tank and valve suppliers are a mix of established US and EU firms with no Chinese companies involved. For the record; AVIC Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Group is the sole supplier of Boeing 787 rudder, and it is also the only supplier of 747-8 aileron and spoiler. Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC) is the sole supplier of Boeing 787 vertical stabilizer leading edge. Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation is the supplier of Boeing 787 wing-body fairing panels. To date there are no problems reported with these components. Don't you feel foolish blaming the Chinese for components that are sourced from non Chinese sources? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Dreamer Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I thought that some Thais thought that Thailand was a manufacturing HUB, doesn't look line Airbus and Boeing think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 An off-topic post has been removed. Please stay on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koheesti Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The Dreamliner, operated by Japan Airlines and carrying 181 passengers on board, was about to take off from Boston's Logan International Airport when a pilot from another aircraft advised air traffic control of a leakage from a wing. The control tower then informed the aircraft's crew. They had to be told by a pilot from another aircraft? Shouldn't there be a little red light or alarm going off in the cockpit if there is a fuel leak? Yikes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The Dreamliner, operated by Japan Airlines and carrying 181 passengers on board, was about to take off from Boston's Logan International Airport when a pilot from another aircraft advised air traffic control of a leakage from a wing. The control tower then informed the aircraft's crew. They had to be told by a pilot from another aircraft? Shouldn't there be a little red light or alarm going off in the cockpit if there is a fuel leak? Yikes! It isn't just the Dreamliner. Wasn't it a Phuket Air Boeing 747 that was spewing fuel as it taxied to the runway in Sharjah? The passengers actually alerted the flight deck to it, and it was only their actions in refusing to be seated that forced the captain to return to the gate and offload them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The Dreamliner, operated by Japan Airlines and carrying 181 passengers on board, was about to take off from Boston's Logan International Airport when a pilot from another aircraft advised air traffic control of a leakage from a wing. The control tower then informed the aircraft's crew. They had to be told by a pilot from another aircraft? Shouldn't there be a little red light or alarm going off in the cockpit if there is a fuel leak? Yikes! It isn't just the Dreamliner. Wasn't it a Phuket Air Boeing 747 that was spewing fuel as it taxied to the runway in Sharjah? The passengers actually alerted the flight deck to it, and it was only their actions in refusing to be seated that forced the captain to return to the gate and offload them. Bit of a difference between an aging 747 and a brand spanking 787. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The Dreamliner, operated by Japan Airlines and carrying 181 passengers on board, was about to take off from Boston's Logan International Airport when a pilot from another aircraft advised air traffic control of a leakage from a wing. The control tower then informed the aircraft's crew. They had to be told by a pilot from another aircraft? Shouldn't there be a little red light or alarm going off in the cockpit if there is a fuel leak? Yikes! It isn't just the Dreamliner. Wasn't it a Phuket Air Boeing 747 that was spewing fuel as it taxied to the runway in Sharjah? The passengers actually alerted the flight deck to it, and it was only their actions in refusing to be seated that forced the captain to return to the gate and offload them. Bit of a difference between an aging 747 and a brand spanking 787. But not in the fact that there was a fuel leak and the pilots didn't get any cockpit alarms. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 That what happens when you outsource to China. Really? The equipment and parts implicated are not of Chinese origin. The Lithium battery supplier is GS Yuasa (Japan). The fuel tank and valve suppliers are a mix of established US and EU firms with no Chinese companies involved. For the record; AVIC Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Group is the sole supplier of Boeing 787 rudder, and it is also the only supplier of 747-8 aileron and spoiler. Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (SAC) is the sole supplier of Boeing 787 vertical stabilizer leading edge. Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation is the supplier of Boeing 787 wing-body fairing panels. To date there are no problems reported with these components. Don't you feel foolish blaming the Chinese for components that are sourced from non Chinese sources? Whoa big man. If they are outsourcing you don't think their parts suppliers aren't too? I could quote you an example but it's veering too far off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 BBC has just reported. A Boeing 787 operated by All Nippon Airways Co made an emergency landing in Takamatsu in western Japan after smoke was detected in the cabin. The fault is said to be a battery malfunction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 If they are outsourcing you don't think their parts suppliers aren't too? I could quote you an example but it's veering too far off topic. The Boeing manufacturing contracts do not allow unapproved outsourcing. If a component supplier outsources, then this must be declared to Boeing and the subcontractor must be vetted and is added to the manufacturers listing. Have you looked at the component manufacturer listing? Why make an allegation that you cannot substantiate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 ANA reacts to the latest episode. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/16/us-boeing-ana-idUSBRE90F01820130116 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ianatlarge Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Not that I know anything about planes (except get an aisle seat), but is all this an overreaction? I mean, a few minor incidents. Every new gadget, big or small, has teething problems. The question is, is the 787 fundamentally flawed (an Edsel) or are the bugs simply being ironed out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 JAL have grounded their fleet. I'd have to say it's a lot of bugs in 1 week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 If they are outsourcing you don't think their parts suppliers aren't too? I could quote you an example but it's veering too far off topic. The Boeing manufacturing contracts do not allow unapproved outsourcing. If a component supplier outsources, then this must be declared to Boeing and the subcontractor must be vetted and is added to the manufacturers listing. Have you looked at the component manufacturer listing? Why make an allegation that you cannot substantiate? Actually I did but it got deleted. I wonder who makes the offending batteries? http://eandt.theiet.org/news/2013/jan/images/640_dreamliner-battery.jpg It certainly seems to be turning into a major issue. John Goglia, a former member of the NTSB who led public hearings after ValuJet Flight 592 crashed into the Florida Everglades in 1996, killing all 105 passengers and crew members, said that problems with lithium batteries catching fire in laptops, cellphones and electric cars were well documented and “should have raised a flag with the FAA.”“We’ve had a long-running issue with lithium batteries,” he said. “They’re not allowed to be carried on passenger airplanes.” Goglia said weight was the most likely reason Boeing went with the 63-pound lithium battery, which is lighter and more powerful than other types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crossy Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 The pprune forum has five 787 threads on page one, not a happy aeroplane Two incidents/fires associated with the lithium batteries, more than somewhat worrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I wonder who makes the offending batteries? Yuasa Japan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 (edited) Quite an investigative team: The investigation includes representatives named by the Japan Transport Safety Board and French civil aviation security authorities. Others included in the NTSB-led team are experts from the Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing, U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center's Carderock Division, Japan Airlines, battery manufacturer GS Yuasa and APU battery/charger system Thales Avionics Electrical Systems. Although there's one there I don't quite understand! The Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, located in Potomac, Maryland, specializes in ship acoustics and stealth technology Edited January 16, 2013 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Apparently, Oprah was busy with the Lance Armstrong interview, so they had to call in the 2nd string to do the investigating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now