Boeing: No plans to drop lithium-ion batteries on Dreamliner
SEATTLE - Boeing officials said Friday the company is sticking with lithium-ion batteries on the 787 Dreamliner, despite an announcement that its competitor Airbus is abandoning the trouble-prone battery for its new A350 airplanes.
Airbus said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350. The plane is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year.
Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, and manufacturers view them as an important way to save on fuel costs.
But the batteries are also more likely to short circuit and start a fire than other batteries if they are damaged, if there is a manufacturing flaw or if they are exposed to excessive heat.
Federal officials grounded the 787 last month because of problems with its lithium-ion batteries that caused a fire on one jetliner and forced another plane to make an emergency landing.
Despite those incidents, Boeing officials said they are "confident in the safety and reliability of lithium-ion batteries."
"Our years of experience and deep expertise confirm that, like other technologies, when the appropriate battery, system and airplane protections are in place, lithium-ion batteries deliver significant benefits," Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel said in a prepared statement.
"We are deeply involved with the appropriate investigation authorities in developing a full understanding of two recent battery events on 787s and are working tirelessly to create the solutions that will allow the 787 fleet to return to full flight status. There's nothing we've learned in the investigations that would lead us to a different decision regarding lithium-ion batteries," he said.
By contrast, Airbus said it is abandoning plans to use lithium-ion batteries because the source of problems remains unclear.
Airbus decided to make the switch "to optimize program certainty," spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said.
Airbus is a unit of Netherlands-based EADS NV.
Airbus said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350. The plane is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year.
Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, and manufacturers view them as an important way to save on fuel costs.
But the batteries are also more likely to short circuit and start a fire than other batteries if they are damaged, if there is a manufacturing flaw or if they are exposed to excessive heat.
Federal officials grounded the 787 last month because of problems with its lithium-ion batteries that caused a fire on one jetliner and forced another plane to make an emergency landing.
Despite those incidents, Boeing officials said they are "confident in the safety and reliability of lithium-ion batteries."
"Our years of experience and deep expertise confirm that, like other technologies, when the appropriate battery, system and airplane protections are in place, lithium-ion batteries deliver significant benefits," Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel said in a prepared statement.
"We are deeply involved with the appropriate investigation authorities in developing a full understanding of two recent battery events on 787s and are working tirelessly to create the solutions that will allow the 787 fleet to return to full flight status. There's nothing we've learned in the investigations that would lead us to a different decision regarding lithium-ion batteries," he said.
By contrast, Airbus said it is abandoning plans to use lithium-ion batteries because the source of problems remains unclear.
Airbus decided to make the switch "to optimize program certainty," spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said.
Airbus is a unit of Netherlands-based EADS NV.
The head line is misleading. To me it reads that Boeing has no plans on dropping batteries onto 787's or to pick up a battery and dropping it on a plane. Dropping a battery onto a plane would damage the plane. The head line should have been "Boeing has no plans on not using lithium-ion batteries on Dreamliner"
So.
The Bleeding edge of Technology...The wound gets deeper
It's all about airline revenue....the LI batteries are lighter. The plane can carry more payload. But in this case, Boeing should do the smart thing and retrofit a proven NiCad system until the LI problems are solved. Airbus planes are making their owners money. Boeings planes are renting space on the tarmac.
It sounds like BOEING knows something that Airbus doesn't.
@Landshark Or Boeing is just too arrogant to admit to possibly making a premature decision on this type of battery.
Having worked for Boeing for more than a quarter of a century I'm going with the arrogance.
I don't plan to fly on a Dreamliner anytime soon. Boeing needs to own up to their mistake. If enough people refuse to fly on the 787, then they will have to make the changes. Money talks.
@Serendipity How are they not owning up? They're doing every thing the FAA and the NTSB is asking of them and more. I personally know people working on this issue and they're putting in 70 hrs a week working on making this a better plane for all their customers. I don't think anyone will miss you on the flights.
@jkdrummer @Serendipity To me it is just a lot of PR stuff. Everything is ok, despite several batteries burning. I might not make much of a difference by not flying, but if you have enough people who do not trust the plane, then perhaps it would be a problem to Boeing don't you think?
 I like Boeing overall, and there are many great people who work there, but I just feel there have been some really bad decisions lately. I don't think you can sugar coat the problem and say everything is just fine. I just don't want to see another fire while a plane is 30,000 feet in the air and risk people's lives.
Would probably change some important spec's on the 787. Weight, etc. and leave them open to lawsuits by buyers of misrepresentation. The heck with safety.
I would rather see the smirking barefoot bandit than another picture of the fried battery on here... We get it! It's fried! That's what was nice about newspapers, not every story had to have a picture.Â
Scarebust, always on the cutting edge of technology -- NOT!
This is another example of âstupid is as stupid doesâ.Note Airbus has dropped them.Boeing is in deep dog dodo, and the only sensible answer is to return to proven technology to buy some time to recover their reputation.
This will take months for a fix.
Our years of experience and deep expertise confirm that, like other technologies, when the appropriate battery, system and airplane protections are in place, lithium-ion batteries deliver significant benefits," Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel said in a prepared statement.
That's rich! For all of their alleged "deep expertise", they didn't seem to be able to develop a system that wasn't a fire or possibly an explosion hazard in the first place.
This comment has been deleted