11 ms·

Heathrow shut after Boeing Dreamliner 787 fire

52 points by bodski 13y ago

uslic001 13y ago
Sounds like Boeing should have taken Elon Musk up on his offer to help out with the lithium battery design.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- davepage 13y ago
  This incident is clearly not directly related to the previous electronics bay battery issue. It could be indirectly related -- an electrical short in the cabin, for example, which would be fed by the batteries.
ollysb 13y ago
Maybe they should have taken Elon up on his offer...
- ihsw 13y ago
  Reference: http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-boeings-fix-for-the-dreamliner-2013-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-boeings-fix-for-the-dre... > Unfortunately, the pack architecture supplied to Boeing is inherently unsafe. Large cells without enough space between them to isolate against the cell-to-cell thermal domino effect means it is simply a matter of time before there are more incidents of this nature.
- untog 13y ago
  So glad we found a way to talk about Elon Musk some more
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- lotso 13y ago
  Elon Musk: The only person who knows how to design lithium ion batteries.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    More accurately, the person who has a bunch of lithium ion battery people at his disposal...
  - rbanffy 13y ago
    Well... There is some evidence pointing that way. Or, better, that the Boeing folks took the wrong approach.
smackfu 13y ago
Fire doesn't look like it's near the batteries.
- italophil 13y ago
  The auxiliary power unit on the 787 has a battery near the tail of the plane.
  - bobthedino 13y ago
    The APU battery is towards the middle of the plane, according to page 7 of this: http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/arff/arff787.pdf http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/arff/ar...
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      Yup, here's a photo of one on fire http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/02/07/ntsb-identifies-origin-of-jal-boeing-787-battery-fire/ http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/02/07/ntsb-identifies-o...
- gtani 13y ago
  that's what this analyst is saying, based on a few photos http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2021380327_787heathrowxml.html http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2021380327_7...
jlgreco 13y ago
I suppose this (assuming it was the batteries again. I understand they swapped them out with a new design) is the downside to making a system fail safe instead of making it just not fail. They modified the battery compartments so that a fire wouldn't threaten the air-worthiness of the aircraft but any fire is still likely to cause bad press and, in this case, disrupt traffic at an airport.
robomartin 13y ago
The question in my mind is far more fundamental than anything related to the design of the battery packs or whether or not Elon Musk's involvement is of any real engineering value. None of that matters. He/they would have to convince me that LiPo/LiIon packs are safe. This coming from someone who's waiting for Tesla's SUV's. I kind of draw a demarcation line between flight and road-based vehicles. Fires are a thousand times more dangerous at 30,000 feet. The fundamental issue I keep coming back to is that Lithium Polymer batteries are dangerous. One or multiple cells. It does not matter. I've been using and abusing them extensively for, I don't know, maybe a decade, in all of my RC gliders and helicopters. I keep them locked-up in a fireproof container and never --ever-- charge them unless I can be in the room during charging. There are plenty of accounts in RC circles of battery packs spontaneously combusting, catching fire in flight, catching fire while charging or lighting-up if damaged. The problem, as it was explained to me, is that these cells can produce methane and have an avalanche failure mode. Methane is a product of a manufacturing defect whereby a small amount of moisture is sealed into the package. Lithium reacts unfavorably with moisture and the rest is history. Lithium Polymer battery fires are extremely hot, fast and very powerful. I've seen it myself with three and six cell packs. I would not want to be anywhere near a fire in a larger pack. And so the fundamental question for me is simple: Why? Why use Lithium-based chemistry for a flight battery pack. Yes, I know, lower weight, lower volume. However, I am not sure these packs can ever be considered to be safe. How can an aircraft manufacturer ensure that the quality of the packs it assembles is as required? Can you ever know? I know millions of Lithium-based batteries are in use in everything from phones to laptops and more. Not sure how to think about that. A fire is a fire. A laptop stowed away in cargo can still cause a huge problem if it catches fire. To be fair, I have never had a spontaneous fire in any of my thirty of forty packs (ranging from 2 cells to 12 cells). I have had cells spontaneously puff-up --inflating like a baloon-- and destroy the pack by expanding so much that the battery pack's casing cracks open. In those cases I've used them to experiment by overcharging to see how they light up. It does take a lot, but when they do it is massive fireball. Perhaps someone with information closer to the source or quantifiable safety and reliability data can pitch in? EDIT: Prior to LiPo's I was using NiCd (Nickel Cadmium) cells and have never had any issues, even with abuse and mechanical damage.
- 13y ago
detritus 13y ago
I wonder how Airbus pulled this off? peeks from under tinfoil hat

52 points by bodski 13y ago

uslic001 13y ago

Sounds like Boeing should have taken Elon Musk up on his offer to help out with the lithium battery design.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
davepage 13y ago
This incident is clearly not directly related to the previous electronics bay battery issue. It could be indirectly related -- an electrical short in the cabin, for example, which would be fed by the batteries.

ollysb 13y ago

Maybe they should have taken Elon up on his offer...

ihsw 13y ago
Reference: http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-boeings-fix-for-the-dreamliner-2013-2 http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-boeings-fix-for-the-dre... > Unfortunately, the pack architecture supplied to Boeing is inherently unsafe. Large cells without enough space between them to isolate against the cell-to-cell thermal domino effect means it is simply a matter of time before there are more incidents of this nature.
untog 13y ago
So glad we found a way to talk about Elon Musk some more
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
lotso 13y ago
Elon Musk: The only person who knows how to design lithium ion batteries.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  More accurately, the person who has a bunch of lithium ion battery people at his disposal...
- rbanffy 13y ago
  Well... There is some evidence pointing that way. Or, better, that the Boeing folks took the wrong approach.

smackfu 13y ago

Fire doesn't look like it's near the batteries.

italophil 13y ago
The auxiliary power unit on the 787 has a battery near the tail of the plane.
- bobthedino 13y ago
  The APU battery is towards the middle of the plane, according to page 7 of this: http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/arff/arff787.pdf http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/arff/ar...
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Yup, here's a photo of one on fire http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/02/07/ntsb-identifies-origin-of-jal-boeing-787-battery-fire/ http://news.aviation-safety.net/2013/02/07/ntsb-identifies-o...
gtani 13y ago
that's what this analyst is saying, based on a few photos http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2021380327_787heathrowxml.html http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2021380327_7...

jlgreco 13y ago

I suppose this (assuming it was the batteries again. I understand they swapped them out with a new design) is the downside to making a system fail safe instead of making it just not fail. They modified the battery compartments so that a fire wouldn't threaten the air-worthiness of the aircraft but any fire is still likely to cause bad press and, in this case, disrupt traffic at an airport.

robomartin 13y ago

The question in my mind is far more fundamental than anything related to the design of the battery packs or whether or not Elon Musk's involvement is of any real engineering value. None of that matters. He/they would have to convince me that LiPo/LiIon packs are safe. This coming from someone who's waiting for Tesla's SUV's. I kind of draw a demarcation line between flight and road-based vehicles. Fires are a thousand times more dangerous at 30,000 feet. The fundamental issue I keep coming back to is that Lithium Polymer batteries are dangerous. One or multiple cells. It does not matter. I've been using and abusing them extensively for, I don't know, maybe a decade, in all of my RC gliders and helicopters. I keep them locked-up in a fireproof container and never --ever-- charge them unless I can be in the room during charging. There are plenty of accounts in RC circles of battery packs spontaneously combusting, catching fire in flight, catching fire while charging or lighting-up if damaged. The problem, as it was explained to me, is that these cells can produce methane and have an avalanche failure mode. Methane is a product of a manufacturing defect whereby a small amount of moisture is sealed into the package. Lithium reacts unfavorably with moisture and the rest is history. Lithium Polymer battery fires are extremely hot, fast and very powerful. I've seen it myself with three and six cell packs. I would not want to be anywhere near a fire in a larger pack. And so the fundamental question for me is simple: Why? Why use Lithium-based chemistry for a flight battery pack. Yes, I know, lower weight, lower volume. However, I am not sure these packs can ever be considered to be safe. How can an aircraft manufacturer ensure that the quality of the packs it assembles is as required? Can you ever know? I know millions of Lithium-based batteries are in use in everything from phones to laptops and more. Not sure how to think about that. A fire is a fire. A laptop stowed away in cargo can still cause a huge problem if it catches fire. To be fair, I have never had a spontaneous fire in any of my thirty of forty packs (ranging from 2 cells to 12 cells). I have had cells spontaneously puff-up --inflating like a baloon-- and destroy the pack by expanding so much that the battery pack's casing cracks open. In those cases I've used them to experiment by overcharging to see how they light up. It does take a lot, but when they do it is massive fireball. Perhaps someone with information closer to the source or quantifiable safety and reliability data can pitch in? EDIT: Prior to LiPo's I was using NiCd (Nickel Cadmium) cells and have never had any issues, even with abuse and mechanical damage.

13y ago

detritus 13y ago

I wonder how Airbus pulled this off? peeks from under tinfoil hat