Seeking Alpha

Boeing (BA +1.4%) reports the completion of a "straightforward and uneventful" 787 certification...

Boeing (BA +1.4%) reports the completion of a "straightforward and uneventful" 787 certification demonstration flight today today with a Boeing-owned production airplane built for LOT Polish Airlines. Today's flight marks the final certification test for the new battery system, and completes the required FAA testing. BA now plans to gather and analyze the data and submit the required materials to the agency for further dialog.
Comments (15)
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    If the flight was only 2-3 hours this is no big deal. A longer flight 6-11 hours is a different ballgame. If they loose ETOP certification it will be a major problem since most airlines were looking to use this airplane to do long haul flights that are cheaper for the airline. The Foreign Companies wanted the 787 for this purpose. Trips across the poles to shorten routes was expected to help bring more passengers to major cities around Europe-The Middle East, Asia-N. America. and all the Americas with flights to Africa or S. America to New Zealand or Australia. ANA Airlines was going to fly Tokyo to Boston but if ETOP is cancelled this route is cancelled for now. The 787 will have to stay with in a 2 hour corridor from an airport. That will cut most long haul over water flights leading to cancellations of present orders and leading to other aircraft companies to catch up and take market share over the next few years.
    6 Apr 2013, 04:07 AM Reply Like
  • DavidTTaylor
    , contributor
    Comments (62) | Send Message
     
    Usually they start with 2-3 hours
    8 Apr 2013, 02:47 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Yes DTT but these short runs are not long enough to see a problem with out electrical spikes causing over heating leading to fires. Worse they maybe running the aircraft with little on board power use defeating the process unless there is a defect or sloppy connection. Best Wishes
    8 Apr 2013, 05:05 AM Reply Like
  • normanbk
    , contributor
    Comments (36) | Send Message
     
    Any chance of some longer test flights?
    6 Apr 2013, 08:42 PM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Normanbk not officially so far they have made a trip to the Moscow air show which took 11-12 hours with no problems. the crew reported a smooth flight while using all the computer assistance to reduce workload. The procedures are the same for a regular long flight for this aircraft so they got to test them out on a VIP flight proving the procedures worked well to reduce the workload and stress of the flight crew. that trip was a total success. Proving if these teething problems get fixed the aircraft can do the job, making this a real problem for the parts and design folks. They have a plane that can do the job if they get it fixed. Best Wishes
    7 Apr 2013, 12:10 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Sorry NormanBk that Moscow trip was in the past before the battery problems. Since 2010 I think, what is interesting is that plane had no trouble at all. Its flight time was approximately 20-24 hours in the air yet it flew so well. Boeing should be going over these 3-6 aircraft to find out if these parts were poor or if its a design flaw or both. The present fix is just a start in the right direction but they should have done this from the start. This is a safety issue that should have been gone over during the design phase then mechanical testing. lastly I had never heard of the Japanese battery company before so somebody was doing it on the cheap. That is not the way it should be done, safety first. ANA is thinking they could be flying in June maybe so. Best Wishes
    7 Apr 2013, 02:48 AM Reply Like
  • thomas85225
    , contributor
    Comments (563) | Send Message
     
    Wow More Flight Testing of the 787 in 2009 thru 2013 and the
    787-9 & -10 yet to comes, these aircrafts will need their first Check “C” before lone and will these aircrafts still be under warranted,
    I hope the airlines will order a Car Fax reported before they take delivery.
    Boeing battery fix could still back fire! That why the battery should be located under the on board aircraft lav alone with the on board drinking water storage tank with a fire sprinkler head installed in the tanks, and the tank then located over the battery
    How accurate is the testing when there are No Passenger on board the aircraft and cabin electrical system is TURN OFF and not placing an electrical load on the aircraft electrical systems!
    When the 787 or any other aircrafts is flight tested, the cabin electrical system is not installed, laves galley, ect and are not placing an electrical load on the aircraft system, the FAA should update their required to have a full sized electrical iron bird/ ground mock up of the aircraft fuselage and flight deck for testing and certification of the aircraft, like 777-200 with the SEL lab for LRU’s with loadable software.
    The military and NASA have used full size working mock up of the Apollo and shuttle space craft (Apollo 1 & 13)

     

    ======================...

     

    double click on """""(84MB)"""" to watch the FAA training video
    http://bit.ly/10GYBND

     

    How to fight fires caused by Lithium batteries in portable electronic devices
    By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Jul 4th 2009 09:07Z, last updated Saturday, Jul 4th 2009 09:07Z
    The FAA have released a Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) recommending procedures of how to fight fires that can be caused by Lithum (non-rechargeable) and Lithium-Ion (rechargeable) batteries. Both types are capable of ignition and subsequent explosion due to overheating. Overheating the batteries results in a thermal runaway, which can cause the release of either molten burning Lithium or flammable electrolyte. Once one cell goes into a thermal runway, it produces enough heat to cause adjacent cells go into thermal runaway, too. The resulting fire can flare repeatedly as each cell ruptures and releases its contents.

     

    The FAA therefore recommends a two step approach:

     

    1) Extinguish the fire by utilizing a Halon, Halon replacement or water extinguisher and prevent the spread of the fire to other flammable materials.

     

    2) Cool the remaining cells to prevent them from going into a thermal runaway by dousing the device with water or other non-alcoholic liquids.

     

    Do not use ice to cool the device, as the ice would rather insulate the device and assist the thermal runaway. Do not cover the device, which would again insulate the device assisting thermal runaway.

     

    Do not pick up or move a smoking or burning device, bodily injury can be the result.

     

    The FAA have released a training video (84MB) about laptop battery fires and effective techniques to fight Lithium type battery fires.
    7 Apr 2013, 03:11 AM Reply Like
  • thomas85225
    , contributor
    Comments (563) | Send Message
     
    I once read that new aircraft must be in service for two years before it will be allow to have ETOP for 330min

     

    That may explaine why the aurlines are leasing A330 to used while there 787 are gounded
    7 Apr 2013, 03:17 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Thomas85225 that is interesting I would have thought for certification flights they would need a finished aircraft shame on the FAA. For these Electrical fires I figured they would already be using both Halon and an ABC powder extinguisher systems. If they did not take this seriously from the start the insurance will go to the Moon until the planes are changed. Best Wishes
    7 Apr 2013, 03:48 AM Reply Like
  • projomni
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
     
    How does that impact $BA price in the near-term? Buy or sell?
    http://bit.ly/1450p9b
    8 Apr 2013, 06:03 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Projomni if you have Boeing already hold it. The buying spree is to soon because these buyers assume Boeing has fixed the problems and can get the regulators to give them a quick turn around and certify the fix and get them flying in a short period of time say 1-3 weeks. I doubt that quick they can speed up the process by having a full power long flight test in the next few days. A trip from Seattle to Rio de Janeiro would have a good range with plenty of airports a long the route.
    8 Apr 2013, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Projomni I checked Yahoo Travel and found two flights that are 1 stop both are around 16 hours. 1 stops in Charlotte, N. Carolina 2 stops in Houston, Texas. I assume both stops are 11/2-2 hour lay over's so a 14 hour flight would totally work for Boeing. It gives them a chance to show there customers that this was a teething issue that has been handled and the aircraft fly's well and within there expected guide lines.
    So be cautious on Boeing for now but I would look to buy on dips. This company as many irons in the fire which will help them get through this bad patch. Best Wishes
    8 Apr 2013, 09:56 AM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Today Boeing got some good news the battery fix was approved but they are still at 180 minute ETOP. 3 hours from an airport is there limit over sea or bad land type terrain. They have lost approximately 500 million so far with more to come do to cancelled flights and airlines having to lease aircraft for those expected flights. Best Wishes
    P.S. There is still the investigation going in over that taxiway battery fire. A news conference maybe next week.
    19 Apr 2013, 11:17 PM Reply Like
  • thomas85225
    , contributor
    Comments (563) | Send Message
     
    UPS Airlines Flight 6 encyclopediaen.wikiped...

     

    In October 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a Safety Alert for Operators highlighting the fact that the cargo on board Flight 6 contained a large quantity of lithium-ion batteries and

     

    *****that Halon 1301 was inefficient in fighting fires ******

     

    involving them.[8] The FAA issued a restriction on the carrying of lithium batteries in bulk on passenger flights
    20 Apr 2013, 08:32 PM Reply Like
  • Richard93
    , contributor
    Comments (817) | Send Message
     
    Thank you Thomas that is an important point. That means they have to freeze & vacuum out the battery bay in case of a fire. Powder ABC will also be needed and available in a serious quantity to handle problem if it were to happen 180 minutes from the closest airport.
    29 Apr 2013, 02:36 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|