April 20, 2024

Setback to Boeing’s Hopes for Longer Range for 787

Boeing designed the jet to fly 330 minutes — five-and-a-half hours — from the nearest airport at any point on its routes, a feature that would allow extended flights over water or deserted regions like the North Pole. That held tremendous appeal for airlines, which often must stay within three hours of emergency landing spots, and Boeing estimated that 450 new routes would be created.

But Boeing is struggling to get past the 787’s recent smoke and fire episodes with its lithium-ion batteries that have led to the grounding of all 50 planes delivered so far. And with investigators in the United States and Japan still looking for the cause of those problems, it could be months before federal regulators would feel confident enough in Boeing’s redesign of the batteries to approve extending 787 flights to ultralong distances from the jetliner’s current three-hour limit.

That could dilute its appeal to some airlines and further raise the costs of the program for Boeing, which already was unlikely to make a profit on any 787s for at least two years. The company could lose orders and have to pay penalties to carriers if the 787 failed to meet its performance targets.

“It is crucially important that the powers that be get convinced that Boeing can contain and exhaust a fire, and that the fix really worked,” said Hans J. Weber, the president of Tecop International, an aviation consulting firm.

He said that even after the jets start flying again, Boeing and the airlines would have to monitor the activity inside the batteries for tens of thousands of flight hours before experts would feel sure enough that the fixes would prevent a fire or that the jet’s range could be safely expanded.

Federal Aviation Administration officials said it was premature to speculate about what they might decide about the plane’s range. Boeing said Friday that it had not changed its goal to win approval for the longer flights.

The 787 fleet was grounded in January after the battery in one jet ignited in Boston and another battery began smoldering on a flight in Japan.

Boeing and other companies that rely on the volatile lithium-ion batteries, including hybrid carmakers, worry about public perceptions of the batteries and want to get the planes back up in the air as soon as possible. The F.A.A. is expected to approve a plan next week to start testing the possible fixes.

Mr. Weber said that several studies had suggested that jetliners have an average of 18 to 20 minutes to land if a fire erupts without special containment in a cargo or equipment bay. And it could take 20 minutes more to get all the passengers and crew members off the plane, he said.

As a result, George W. Hamlin, an aviation consultant, said he believed that to justify even its current ability to fly up to three hours from the nearest airport, Boeing would have to demonstrate that its new battery case could contain a fire for at least 180 minutes. Otherwise, he said, the plane’s appeal could diminish.

Having a fire in a plane is a situation all pilots dread. (They are trained to find the nearest landing spot.) But containing a potential fire could be an acceptable answer for the F.A.A., Mr. Weber and Mr. Hamlin said.

The agency already has many requirements to offset other safety concerns on planes. For instance, Mr. Weber said, the F.A.A. accepts the risk of one engine failing in flight by requiring that all twin-engine jets can fly on the remaining one.

And while the current rule that 787s must stay within three hours of airports is sufficient for most North American, trans-Atlantic and even many flights across the Pacific Ocean, several Middle Eastern, Australian and Asian airlines are counting on the extension to gain more flexibility in their routes and maximize the fuel savings from the plane.

“The part of the raison d’être in the design of the 787 is being able to connect virtually anywhere,” Mr. Hamlin said.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/09/business/setback-to-boeings-hopes-for-longer-range-for-787.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Boeing to Propose Battery Fixes to F.A.A.

The officials said Boeing has narrowed down the ways the lithium-ion batteries on the jetliners could fail, and believes that adding insulation between the cells of the batteries and making other changes would provide enough assurance that they would be safe to use.

Raymond L. Conner, the president of Boeing’s commercial airplane division, plans to propose the fixes in a Friday meeting with Michael P. Huerta, the head of the Federal Aviation Administration. Mr. Huerta is not expected to approve the changes immediately, but the meeting is likely to start a high-level discussion on the standards Boeing needs to meet as it tests the fixes and seeks to get the planes flying again.

Boeing’s plan could be a pivotal moment in the history of the innovative fuel-efficient planes. Mr. Huerta and regulators around the world grounded the planes in mid-January after a battery caught fire on one jet parked at the Boston airport and smoke forced another 787 to make an emergency landing in Japan.

Investigators have not determined what caused those problems. But Boeing’s engineers have worked closely with the F.A.A. and outside experts to identify ways in which the batteries could have failed, and Boeing is now asking the government to sign off on a calculation that they have now come up with a safer design.

Given the risks in moving ahead, federal officials said, the F.A.A. has insisted behind the scenes that Boeing needed to come up with changes to prevent failures at the same time as it proposed further steps to wall off problems with the batteries and vent any smoke or fire outside the planes.

Boeing officials said they had also hoped to make all the fixes at once rather than dividing them into temporary and longer-term changes. By delaying some changes, Boeing could have been exposed to more problems.

As a result, one big change under Boeing’s plan would be to redesign the batteries to place insulation inside and around each of the eight cells to minimize the risk that a short circuit or fire in one of the cells could spread to the others, as investigators have said occurred on the battery that caught fire in Boston on Jan. 7. Boeing might also adjust how tightly the batteries are packed.

Boeing would make other changes within the batteries to reduce the chance that vibrations, swelling or moisture could cause problems, industry officials said. Boeing has already been testing some of the changes. The plane maker believes it could rebuild the batteries by next month on the 50 jets that have been delivered to airlines. But federal officials are likely to move more slowly and demand more tests and assurances, and the final decision could rest with Mr. Huerta’s supervisors at the Transportation Department.

Federal officials said that if the fixes check out, the jets could start flying again by April. Boeing will also have to win back the confidence of the flying public.

Besides taking more steps to prevent short circuits from occurring, Boeing’s plan would enclose the battery within a sturdier metal container and create tubes to vent any hazardous materials outside the plane. It would add systems to monitor the activity inside each cell instead of just the battery as a whole.

Industry officials said there is enough space in the electronics bay to expand the container and add the vent tubes.

Until now, regulators have focused on the need to pin down the cause of the battery problems. But investigators, now weeks into their work, have been able to find only limited clues in the charred remains of the batteries in the Boston and Japan incidents.

The lithium-ion batteries weigh less but provide more energy than conventional batteries, and the 787s make greater use of them than other planes. The stakes are substantial for Boeing, which will have to pay penalties to some of the airlines that have been unable to use them. Boeing also cannot deliver more of the planes while they are grounded.

The company has orders for 800 additional planes. The jets rely as well on lightweight carbon composites and more efficient engines.

Boeing awarded the contract for the batteries to GS Yuasa, a Japanese firm, in 2005, and it won approval from the F.A.A. to use the batteries in 2007. Concerned about fires with smaller lithium-ion batteries in cellphones and laptops, the agency placed special conditions on Boeing’s use of the batteries that required containment and venting measures that have proved inadequate.

Advances in research have contributed to a better understanding of the risks since then. But Boeing, which was consumed with problems with other parts that delayed the introduction of the 787s by several years, did not significantly update the battery designs before it began delivering the planes in 2011. So Boeing’s plan to fix the problems also amounts to a belated incorporation of what has been learned about how to handle the risks.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/business/boeing-to-propose-battery-fixes-to-faa.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Boeing 787 Completes Test Flight

The flight was the first since the Federal Aviation Administration gave Boeing permission on Thursday to conduct in-flight tests. Federal investigators and the company are trying to determine what caused one of the new lithium-ion batteries to catch fire and how to fix the problems.

The plane took off from Boeing Field in Seattle heading mostly east and then looped around to the south before flying back past the airport to the west. It covered about 900 miles and landed at 2:51 p.m. Pacific time.

Marc R. Birtel, a Boeing spokesman, said the flight was conducted to monitor the performance of the plane’s batteries. He said the crew, which included 13 pilots and test personnel, said the flight was uneventful.

He said special equipment let the crew check status messages involving the batteries and their chargers, as well as data about battery temperature and voltage.

FlightAware, an aviation data provider, said the jet reached 36,000 feet. Its speed ranged from 435 to 626 miles per hour.

All 50 of the 787s delivered so far were grounded after a battery on one of the jets caught fire at a Boston airport on Jan. 7 and another made an emergency landing in Japan with smoke coming from the battery.

The new 787s are the most technically advanced commercial airplanes, and Boeing has a lot riding on their success. Half of the planes’ structural parts are made of lightweight carbon composites to save fuel.

Boeing also decided to switch from conventional nickel cadmium batteries to the lighter lithium-ion ones. But they are more volatile, and federal investigators said Thursday that Boeing had underestimated the risks.

The F.A.A. has set strict operating conditions on the test flights. The flights are expected to resume early this week, Mr. Birtel said.

Battery experts have said it could take weeks for Boeing to fix the problems.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/business/boeing-787-completes-test-flight.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Prior Problems In 787 Battery Set Off Concerns Boeing Was Aware of 787 Battery Problems Before Failure

Officials at All Nippon Airways, the jets’ biggest operator, said in an interview on Tuesday that it replaced 10 of the batteries in the months before fire in one plane and smoke in another led regulators around the world to ground the jets.

The airline said it told Boeing of the replacements as they occurred but was not required to report them to safety regulators because they were not considered a safety issue and no flights were canceled or delayed.

National Transportation Safety Board officials said Tuesday that their inquiry would include the replacements.

The airline also, for the first time, explained the extent of the previous problems, which underscore the volatile nature of the batteries and add to concerns over whether Boeing and other plane manufacturers will be able to use the batteries safely.

In five of the 10 replacements, All Nippon said that the main battery had showed an unexpectedly low charge. An unexpected drop in a 787’s main battery also occurred on the All Nippon flight that had to make an emergency landing in Japan on Jan. 16.

The airline also revealed that in three instances, the main battery failed to operate normally and had to be replaced along with the charger. In other cases, one battery showed an error reading and another, used to start the auxiliary power unit, failed. All the events occurred from May to December of last year. The main battery on the plane that made the emergency landing was returned to its maker, GS Yuasa, and that 10 other batteries involved in mishaps were sent to the airline’s maintenance department.

Kelly Nantel, a spokeswoman for the National Transportation Safety Board, said investigators had only recently heard that there had been “numerous issues with the use of these batteries” on 787s. She said the board had asked Boeing, All Nippon and other airlines for information about the problems.

“That will absolutely be part of the investigation,” she said.

Boeing, based in Chicago, has said repeatedly that any problems with the batteries can be contained without threatening the planes and their passengers.

But in response to All Nippon’s disclosures, Boeing officials said the airline’s replacement of the batteries also suggested that safeguards were activated to prevent overheating and keep the drained batteries from being recharged.

Boeing officials also acknowledged that the new batteries were not lasting as long as intended. But All Nippon said that the batteries it replaced had not expired.

A GS Yuasa official, Tsutomu Nishijima, said battery exchanges were part of the normal operations of a plane but would not comment further.

The Federal Aviation Administration decided in 2007 to allow Boeing to use the lithium-ion batteries instead of older, more stable types as long as it took safety measures to prevent or contain a fire. But once Boeing put in those safeguards, it did not revisit its basic design even as more evidence surfaced of the risks involved, regulators said.

In a little-noticed test in 2010, the F.A.A. found that the kind of lithium-ion chemistry that Boeing planned to use — lithium cobalt — was the most flammable of several possible types. The test found that batteries of that type provided the most power, but could also overheat more quickly.

In 2011, a lithium-ion battery on a Cessna business jet started smoking while it was being charged, prompting Cessna to switch to traditional nickel-cadmium batteries.

The safety board said Tuesday that it had still not determined what caused a fire on Jan. 7 on a Japan Airlines 787 that was parked at Logan Airport in Boston. The fire occurred nine days before an All Nippon jet made its emergency landing after pilots smelled smoke in the cockpit.

Federal regulators said it was also possible that flaws in the manufacturing process could have gone undetected and caused the recent incidents.

The batteries’ maker X-rays each battery before shipping to look for possible defects.

Matthew L. Wald contributed reporting.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/business/boeing-aware-of-battery-ills-before-the-fires.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Deepening Crisis for the Dreamliner

The 137 passengers and crew members aboard Flight NH692 from Ube, in western Japan, to Tokyo used emergency slides to leave the aircraft early Wednesday after battery trouble and an “unusual smell” in the cockpit prompted its pilots to land instead at Takamatsu airport, according to All Nippon, or A.N.A. The jet’s main battery in the front of the plane was later found to have become discolored and to be seeping electrolyte fluid, All Nippon said.

The public broadcaster, NHK, said smoke had entered the cockpit, although All Nippon could not confirm that report. One passenger was taken to a hospital with hip pain but was later discharged, All Nippon said.

The emergency landing followed a string of problems in the past month with the Boeing 787, known as the Dreamliner, including a battery fire, fuel leaks and a cracked cockpit window. All Nippon said the problems Wednesday involved the same lithium-ion batteries that caught fire last week in Boston on a Dreamliner operated by Japan Airlines.

Ryosei Nomura, a spokesman for All Nippon, said Wednesday that the airline was temporarily grounding all 17 of its Dreamliners for inspections, leading to the cancellation of 38 domestic and international flights. Japan Airlines also said in a news release that it would ground the five Dreamliners it was operating; two other aircraft were already undergoing safety checks.

Akihiro Ota, the Japanese transportation minister, said that the emergency landing had raised concerns about the Dreamliner’s safety and that he would dispatch officials to investigate. “I see this as a serious incident which could have led to a serious accident,” Mr. Ota said in Tokyo.

Osamu Shinobe, vice president of All Nippon, said at a news conference at Haneda Airport in Tokyo, “I apologize for the grave concern and trouble we have caused our passengers, their families and others.” He said the airline was still investigating.

All Nippon and Japan Airlines said the planes would be back in the air after safety checks, though it was unclear how soon that would be. There were, for now, no plans to review their use of Boeing’s new jet, the airlines said.

The U.S. authorities have also voiced concern about problems the Dreamliner has faced but endorsed it as a safe airplane. Last week, the Federal Aviation Administration ordered a comprehensive review of the Dreamliner’s manufacturing and design, with a special focus on the plane’s electrical systems. But in a news conference last Thursday, the transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, made no mention of grounding Dreamliners.

Still, the review is unusual, just 15 months after the Dreamliner entered service following a lengthy certification process by the F.A.A. It comes amid a formal investigation by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board of what caused a battery fire on a Japan Airlines plane that flew to Boston from Tokyo last week.

The safety board said it was “currently in the process of gathering information about the B-787 emergency landing in Japan earlier today.”

Eight airlines now fly the Dreamliner: All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines in Japan own 24 of the 50 delivered by Boeing since November 2011. The other operators are Air India, Ethiopian Airlines, LAN Airlines of Chile, LOT of Poland, Qatar Airways and United Airlines of the United States.

Boeing has sought to ease concerns about the plane’s design and reliability, and has insisted it was no more trouble-prone than other new commercial airplane programs. Boeing officials said Wednesday they had no comment on the Japanese groundings.

Updesh Kapur, spokesman for Qatar Airways, reiterated Wednesday the airline’s view that the Dreamliner was safe but declined to comment on the decisions by the Japanese carriers. Qatar Airways operates three Dreamliners and has orders and purchase options for 57 more.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/business/global/deepening-crisis-for-the-dreamliner.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Frequent Flier: Jared Fogle, Subway Guy, on Being Recognized in Airports

About two years ago, I had a scary landing that was even worse for a fellow passenger. The pilot came on the speaker saying there was an indicator light on and, out of caution, we were going to make an emergency landing in Dulles. The light indicated a cargo door was open.

Everyone was a little uncomfortable, but then a woman behind me started screaming. Her dog was in the cargo hold and she, of course, was afraid of what happened to her pet. She had to be restrained. When we landed, there were all kinds of emergency vehicles on the runway. Fortunately, everything was fine. No door was open and the woman’s pet was O.K.

One time, I thought someone was playing a joke on me.

I was traveling from Las Vegas to Detroit about six months ago. It’s only about a four-hour flight, and I was sitting in an aisle seat. There was a guy sitting in the window seat who got up to use the restroom. I didn’t think anything about it. But then he got up again, and then again, and he kept getting up to use the facilities about every 15 minutes until we landed. It was crazy. I looked around the plane thinking Ashton Kutcher was on it and I was being Punk’d. I felt really bad for the guy, but there was nothing anyone could do for him. On the upside, the flight attendant realized what was going on and gave me some bonus miles.

I get a huge kick out of people recognizing me at airports. I’m just a guy from Indianapolis who was introverted and heavy, and now I have people coming up to me and saying, “Hey, Jared,” or, “Hey, aren’t you that Subway guy?”

Flying is still very magical to me. Since I was about 8 years old, I had a dream about getting a job where I could fly a lot. Not only am I doing that, but the job also has a lot of perks. Being from Indianapolis, I’m a huge Colts fan, and I got to meet Peyton Manning when he was with the team. He knew who I was. I mean, seriously, how cool is that?

I don’t mind talking to seatmates. People who do want to talk know my story about losing weight, and it’s always amazing to me that people feel comfortable talking to me about their own battles. People’s struggles with the scale are very personal. If it were easy to lose weight, everyone would be in shape. But it’s a very complicated issue. What works for one person may not work for another. So it’s humbling when people feel comfortable enough to talk about their own issues or tell me their success stories.

Even though I get recognized, I never get any special treatment from the security agents at the airport. Occasionally, an agent will ask if I can do anything to get a Subway opened in their airport. I wish I could. It would help me, too.

If there’s not a Subway at the airport I’m at, or someplace where I can sit down and eat a nice dinner, I stick to trail mix. I really do try to eat healthy. And let’s be honest, everybody has cellphone cameras. If someone snapped a picture of me stuffing myself, it would be a nightmare and up on YouTube in about three seconds. My airport rule is, stay away from the junk.

By Jared Fogle, as told to Joan Raymond. E-mail: joan .raymond @nytimes .com

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/business/jared-fogle-subway-guy-on-being-recognized-in-airports.html?partner=rss&emc=rss