not that you'll find me on a "Dreamliner" (I bet they regret that name big time) anytime soon.
Per
Or anyone else for that matter...
Moderators: FrankM, el, Dmmoore
not that you'll find me on a "Dreamliner" (I bet they regret that name big time) anytime soon.
Per
everything's gone very quiet.....
That's what happens when you park an airplane and turn off the engines.everything's gone very quiet.....
everything's gone very quiet.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21332256Boeing seeks Dreamliner test flights
Lithium batteries go boom without being re- or de-charged. I've had one returend and checked by the manufacturer and.......................nothing found. A test flight with the same tyype of batteries and charging system proves nothing. Every flight thereafter will be a test flight, sans moi.everything's gone very quiet.....http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21332256Boeing seeks Dreamliner test flights
Boeing will propose to regulators as early as this week a short-term fix to bolster the 787′s defenses in case of battery fires like those that have kept the jet grounded for the past month.
The interim fix includes a heavy-duty titanium or steel containment box around the battery cells, and high-pressure evacuation tubes that, in the event of a battery fire, would vent any gases directly to the outside of the jet.
Absolutely. If the galley has any problems heating coffee or meals, FA's can come down and cook on the battery box. See? That's redundancy at work...Genius!
/Boeing will propose to regulators as early as this week a short-term fix to bolster the 787′s defenses in case of battery fires like those that have kept the jet grounded for the past month.
The interim fix includes a heavy-duty titanium or steel containment box around the battery cells, and high-pressure evacuation tubes that, in the event of a battery fire, would vent any gases directly to the outside of the jet.
Fixed.Brill-yunt!
Boeing will propose to regulators as early as this week a short-term fix to bolster the 787′s defenses in case of battery fires like those that have kept the jet grounded for the past month.
The interim fix includes a heavy-duty titanium or steel containment box around the battery cells, and high-pressure evacuation tubes that, in the event of a battery fire, would vent any gases directly to the outside of the jet.
You couldn't make it up!
http://skift.com/2013/02/17/boeing-push ... -in-sight/
Indeed. And the damage becomes self limiting. The batteries melt down, the box heats up and melts it's way through the skin thus falling away from the airframe. Problem solved. Brill-Yunt!They've been using titanium encasement for APUs for years, so I don't see what the big deal here is.
I'm not aware of a single case of an APU fire resulting in said APU's departure from the airframe in the way you describe, but I'm sure you know better than me. I suppose they may want to look into a battery fire retardant system back there. Or maybe just go back to a lead-acid battery. Sure, it will be heavier, but on an aircraft that size, who cares?Indeed. And the damage becomes self limiting. The batteries melt down, the box heats up and melts it's way through the skin thus falling away from the airframe. Problem solved. Brill-Yunt!They've been using titanium encasement for APUs for years, so I don't see what the big deal here is.
Are you sure about that one, Ik?... but I'm sure you know better than me.
LOL100% incorrect Ever hear of Ferry Permit? issued for Non airworthy aircraftno such thing as "barely airworthy" it's either Airworthy or Notyou still have to find a crew willing to fly this "barely airworthy" heap
I thought Ni/Cd was the modern standard (for Airbus at least)Or maybe just go back to a lead-acid battery. Sure, it will be heavier, but on an aircraft that size, who cares?
LOL100% incorrect Ever hear of Ferry Permit? issued for Non airworthy aircraftno such thing as "barely airworthy" it's either Airworthy or Notyou still have to find a crew willing to fly this "barely airworthy" heap
Fixed.I'm not aware of a single case of an APU fire resulting in said APU's departure from the airframe in the way you describe, but I'm sure you know better than me. I suppose they may want to look into a battery fire retardant system back there. Or maybe just go back to a lead-acid battery. Sure, it will be heavier, but on an aircraft made from super-light-yet-strong composite material, who cares?Indeed. And the damage becomes self limiting. The batteries melt down, the box heats up and melts it's way through the skin thus falling away from the airframe. Problem solved. Brill-Yunt!They've been using titanium encasement for APUs for years, so I don't see what the big deal here is.
LOL100% incorrect Ever hear of Ferry Permit? issued for Non airworthy aircraftno such thing as "barely airworthy" it's either Airworthy or Notyou still have to find a crew willing to fly this "barely airworthy" heap
Brill-Yunt! Where's Charles when ya need him?
I have been provided with both a supply of fresh air and facilities for disposing of my waste products. Thank you for your concern.Where's Verbal?
My fear is that Boeing has encased him in a Titanium box without providing him with a high pressure evacuation tube.
My point was that in a transport-category aircraft the battery isn't so vital a component that it has to be the latest and greatest.I thought Ni/Cd was the modern standard (for Airbus at least)Or maybe just go back to a lead-acid battery. Sure, it will be heavier, but on an aircraft that size, who cares?
http://www.airdisaster.info/forums/view ... 7&start=25
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests