Re: [SystemSafety] 787 Groundings

From: Matthew Squair < >
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 13:58:03 +1100


For those on the list interested in the followup to the B787 battery fires, the NTSB investigation and it's results to date can be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013/boeing_787/boeing_787.html. I've also posted on the issue at Critical Uncertainties http://wp.me/px0Kp-1CC.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Peter Bernard Ladkin < ladkin_at_xxxxxx

> Just in case y'all missed it, the FAA has grounded US 787 aircraft because
> of the battery issues.
> http://www.flightglobal.com/**news/articles/analysis-**
> grounding-order-moves-787-**into-uncharted-territory-**381148/<http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-grounding-order-moves-787-into-uncharted-territory-381148/>EASA followed suit, which grounded LOT's two:
> http://www.flightglobal.com/**news/articles/european-**
> regulator-adopts-faas-787-**grounding-381166/<http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/european-regulator-adopts-faas-787-grounding-381166/>and various other countries.
>
> The 32V 8-cell lithium-ion batteries are made by the Japanese company GS
> Yuasa. I didn't know that a building in Tucson "burned to the ground"
> during a "botched" test of one of the batteries in 2006.
>
> Flight International in its paper edition this week has an article, also
> by Stephen Trimble, (p15) written before the latest incident, including a
> diagram source to Boeing of "787 lithium-ion battery locations". There are
> two; the APU-starter battery in the aft bay by the aft cargo door, and the
> main battery in a bay under the aft cockpit, accessed through an "equipment
> access door" in the aircraft. I can't find this article on the FlightGlobal
> WWW site.
>
> The ground explosion in Boston was the APU battery, and the latest
> smoke-in-flight incident was reported to have been associated with the Main
> Battery.
>
> Bernd and I have been questioning why and how on earth a battery
> technology known to be susceptible to thermal runaway, with consequences
> fire and explosion, made it into an aircraft. Yes, Boeing went to extra
> lengths and the FAA required specific justification and so on. But why take
> the chance just to save a few kilos? Does anyone here have a handle on the
> economics of it?
>
> I found out an interesting tidbit on Tuesday at a meeting of the German
> electrotechnical/**informatiotechnical standardisation organisation DKE
> in Frankfurt (in a committee I chair). We did get around to a little chat
> about the news. Apparently the DKE standardises the individual cells of
> batteries, but another standardisation organisation, VDA, which
> standardises stuff to do with automation, has the battery remit. I guess
> there was a time when automation had little to do with electrotechnics, but
> all that has changed in the last half-century. I imagine there was some
> horse-trading in the recent past as the two areas converged, but I don't
> know any of that yet. The car people have their own, NA-Automobil, and
> there is the overall industrial-standardisation body DIN.
>
> PBL
>
> --
> Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of
> Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany
> Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319 www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> The System Safety Mailing List
> systemsafety_at_xxxxxx >

-- 
*Matthew Squair*
*
*
Mob: +61 488770655
Email: MattSquair_at_xxxxxx



_______________________________________________ The System Safety Mailing List systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
Received on Fri Feb 08 2013 - 03:58:13 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Feb 16 2019 - 18:17:05 CET