Hi All,

I have flown on probably a dozen 787's in the last two years. Both the -8 and -9 and with several airlines. Flown as a passenger, and in a jump. I really enjoy the plane and find it to be lovely. Very nice experience. I am not sure what I think of this piece, but I feel pretty confident in Boeing having done their job, despite the early troubles. Wondering what others feel/think?

Regulators Complain of Undo Pressure on the 787

 

Well, one thing is for certain. The 787 carries TWICE as much weight in lithium batteries to run the electrical system than we are allowed to carry as cargo on passenger airplanes.

 

Pax batteries aren't manufactured to the same standards as aviation batteries. Boeing outsourced a bunch of stuff, and the quality on the batteries slipped through the cracks but presumably that is fixed now. Time will tell...if Boeing can't get it right then maybe Li batteries aren't ready for aviation yet. But it's been good since they ungrounded them.

A lot of uncharted territory technology-wise on that airplane, so there were bound to be some regulatory dust-ups. Just because the feds can't quite wrap their heads around it all doesn't mean Boeing is stoopid. I'm confident that Boeing got the design right (I know some people there), not quite as confident that the outsourced manufacturing can execute the way it's intended. But given all the new tech it hasn't been too troublesome of a new airplane other than the batteries.

 

The "fix" was to put the batteries in a "fireproof" box and vent it overboard. A Rube Goldberg fix at best, an admission of poor basic design concept. Weight saving at the expense of safety, IMHO.

 

The fix was actually to improve the manufacturing tolerances of the internal structures of the battery othewise there would still be fires contained in boxes. The box was just added safety, and probably should have been there all along in case a battery caught fire during overwater ops.

 

Details:

Boeing Reveals 787 Battery Fix Details | AWIN content from Aviation Week

 

Agree with both: the tolerances were tightened, and the box should have been there all along (but I'm sure they did a bean-count that said "over the life of the plane, this extra 100 lbs will cost $6.9 million!!!").

Another vexing issue: the few 787 guys I've talked to have said dispatch reliability is poor, and the airplane STILL cannot take external power at most airports. If they try it, due to some tolerances in the paralleling system, it dumps computers....be they flight control, navigation, or display, I don't know. But allegedly, that is why dispatch reliability is low.

As such, they have to keep the APU running during turns, or even overnight.

That would tend to eat up some of your operational efficiencies.

So I've been told.

 

I could see this being something they have to deal with. Most airports probably have less "filtered" power than the APU provides to the onboard systems. Perhaps they will get this worked out over time.

I do find that the 787 is comfortable and is high and fast on the trips I have taken. Talking with the guys who fly them, they do seem to like it. Really enjoyed the two times I was able to ride the jump.

The battery is very different than the inexpensive (dare I say "cheap") consumer electronics batteries. Plus, they are controlled by the BMS and the other onboard systems. I feel the steel box and venting is something that should have been there to begin with. But I haven't heard of it being used much since the original issue. I feel very safe with it.

I am wondering about the other items in this reporting piece. The misalignments of fittings, etc. Seems like they were trying to make Boeing look bad.