After another emergency, FAA grounds Boeing 787s
»Play Video
The federal government grounded Boeing's newest and most technologically advanced jetliner Wednesday, declaring that U.S. airlines cannot fly the 787 again until the risk of battery fires is addressed.
The Federal Aviation Administration's emergency order affects only United Airlines, the lone U.S. carrier to operate 787s. United said it would put passengers on other aircraft and work closely with the FAA and Boeing to review its fleet of six Dreamliners.
The FAA action came on the same day that Japan's two biggest airlines - which fly almost half of the world's 50 787s - voluntarily grounded them pending full safety checks. Air India has also grounded its fleet of six Boeing 787 aircraft.
Boeing said it was working around the clock with investigators.
"We are confident the 787 is safe, and we stand behind its overall integrity," Jim McNerney, company chairman, president and CEO said late Wednesday in a statement.
The FAA decision was another setback for a plane that was supposed to establish a new standard for jet travel but has instead been beset by one mishap after another.
The latest trouble arose when pilots for Japan's All Nippon Airways smelled something burning and received a cockpit warning of battery problems on a flight from Yamaguchi Ube airport in western Japan to Tokyo. They made an emergency landing Wednesday at Takamatsu airport in western Japan, and passengers evacuated using inflatable slides.
An inspection found that a flammable liquid had leaked from the main lithium-ion battery below and slightly behind the cockpit. Investigators found burn marks around the damage.
Japan's Kyodo News agency quoted a transport ministry investigator as saying that the liquid leaked through the electrical room floor to the outside of the aircraft. The transport ministry said the leak could have led to an accident.
That problem followed a Jan. 7 battery fire aboard a Japan Airlines plane parked at Boston's Logan Airport. Both incidents involved the same type of battery, raising worries that the jet's electrical problems could be more dangerous than previously thought.
"Anytime you have a fire on board - whether it's the battery that has caused it or a passenger that caused it or another electrical component - that's a very a serious situation on an aircraft and something not to be taken lightly," said Kevin Hiatt, president of the Flight Safety Foundation.
So far, no one has suggested that the plane's fundamental design can't be fixed. But it's unclear how much will need to be changed.
The remedy could range from relatively quick-and-easy improvements to more extensive changes that could delay deliveries just as Boeing is trying to speed production up from five planes per month to 10.
The 787 is the first plane to make extensive use of lithium-ion batteries, which have been the focus of concerns in the past for their potential to catch fire. The FAA issued a special rule for their use in the 787. The plane has two batteries - the main one near the front and a second one in the rear.
Boeing and the airlines will need to move quickly to determine whether the problem is a flaw in the batteries themselves, in the plane's wiring or in some other area that's fundamental to the plane's electrical system.
Boeing has booked orders for more than 800 of the planes from airlines around the world attracted by its increased fuel efficiency.
The jet's lightweight design makes it more of a fuel-sipper, and it's so lightweight in part because it uses electricity to do things that other airplanes do with hot air vented through internal ducts. So a 787 with electrical problems is like a minivan that won't haul kids. It goes to the heart of what the thing was built to do.
Before it carried paying passengers, the 787 was closely reviewed by inspectors from Boeing and the FAA.
Mike Sinnett, chief engineer on the 787, said last week that the plane's batteries have operated through a combined 1.3 million hours and never had an internal fault. He said they were built with multiple protections to ensure that failures "don't put the airplane at risk."
The lithium-ion design was chosen because it's the only type of battery that can take a large charge in a short amount of time.
Neither GS Yuasa Corp., the Japanese company that supplies the batteries for the 787, nor Thales, which makes the battery charging system, would comment on the recent troubles.
Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways are two of the 787's biggest customers.
ANA was especially proud of its 787 fleet. Its executives' business cards and the top of its website read "787" and "We fly 1st." ANA got the first one Boeing delivered in late 2011, more than three years late.
Other 787s have had problems with certain electrical panels and fuel leaks.
Back on Jan. 9, ANA canceled a domestic flight to Tokyo after a computer wrongly indicated there was a problem with the 787's brakes. Two days later, the carrier reported two new problems with the aircraft - a minor fuel leak and a cracked cockpit windscreen.
Many of the 787's problems are typical of well-established planes around the world, Hiatt said, adding that he would have no qualms about flying aboard a 787.
"That airplane is the most scrutinized plane in the air," he said. "I would get on the airplane tomorrow."
Hours before the FAA announced its emergency order, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood dismissed any doubts about the FAA's diligence in certifying the plane.
"Our people are the best, but we need to work with Boeing and to make sure everything we've done has been done correctly," he told reporters Wednesday at a luncheon in Washington.
The FAA's move canceled plans by LOT Polish Airlines to begin regular 787 service between Chicago's O'Hare Airport and Warsaw. The inaugural flight landed at O'Hare late Wednesday, but passengers said the airline called off the return trip.
Last week's fire, which was also tied to the battery in the back of the plane, prompted investigations by both the National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA.
The NTSB said Wednesday that it would send an investigator to Japan to join the latest probe, and that representatives from the FAA and Boeing were on their way, too.
United frequent flier Josh Feller said he changed his plans to fly a United 787 from Los Angeles to Houston next month because of the 787's troubles.
"I've been following the 787 news closely, and the latest incident finally spooked me into changing my flight," he said by email. "It's an unnecessary risk, and since I was going out of my way to fly the plane in the first place, decided to change flights."
Boeing shares dropped $2.60, or 3.4 percent, to close Wednesday at $74.34, and the selloff continued in after-hours trading.
The Federal Aviation Administration's emergency order affects only United Airlines, the lone U.S. carrier to operate 787s. United said it would put passengers on other aircraft and work closely with the FAA and Boeing to review its fleet of six Dreamliners.
The FAA action came on the same day that Japan's two biggest airlines - which fly almost half of the world's 50 787s - voluntarily grounded them pending full safety checks. Air India has also grounded its fleet of six Boeing 787 aircraft.
Boeing said it was working around the clock with investigators.
"We are confident the 787 is safe, and we stand behind its overall integrity," Jim McNerney, company chairman, president and CEO said late Wednesday in a statement.
The FAA decision was another setback for a plane that was supposed to establish a new standard for jet travel but has instead been beset by one mishap after another.
The latest trouble arose when pilots for Japan's All Nippon Airways smelled something burning and received a cockpit warning of battery problems on a flight from Yamaguchi Ube airport in western Japan to Tokyo. They made an emergency landing Wednesday at Takamatsu airport in western Japan, and passengers evacuated using inflatable slides.
An inspection found that a flammable liquid had leaked from the main lithium-ion battery below and slightly behind the cockpit. Investigators found burn marks around the damage.
Japan's Kyodo News agency quoted a transport ministry investigator as saying that the liquid leaked through the electrical room floor to the outside of the aircraft. The transport ministry said the leak could have led to an accident.
That problem followed a Jan. 7 battery fire aboard a Japan Airlines plane parked at Boston's Logan Airport. Both incidents involved the same type of battery, raising worries that the jet's electrical problems could be more dangerous than previously thought.
"Anytime you have a fire on board - whether it's the battery that has caused it or a passenger that caused it or another electrical component - that's a very a serious situation on an aircraft and something not to be taken lightly," said Kevin Hiatt, president of the Flight Safety Foundation.
So far, no one has suggested that the plane's fundamental design can't be fixed. But it's unclear how much will need to be changed.
The remedy could range from relatively quick-and-easy improvements to more extensive changes that could delay deliveries just as Boeing is trying to speed production up from five planes per month to 10.
The 787 is the first plane to make extensive use of lithium-ion batteries, which have been the focus of concerns in the past for their potential to catch fire. The FAA issued a special rule for their use in the 787. The plane has two batteries - the main one near the front and a second one in the rear.
Boeing and the airlines will need to move quickly to determine whether the problem is a flaw in the batteries themselves, in the plane's wiring or in some other area that's fundamental to the plane's electrical system.
Boeing has booked orders for more than 800 of the planes from airlines around the world attracted by its increased fuel efficiency.
The jet's lightweight design makes it more of a fuel-sipper, and it's so lightweight in part because it uses electricity to do things that other airplanes do with hot air vented through internal ducts. So a 787 with electrical problems is like a minivan that won't haul kids. It goes to the heart of what the thing was built to do.
Before it carried paying passengers, the 787 was closely reviewed by inspectors from Boeing and the FAA.
Mike Sinnett, chief engineer on the 787, said last week that the plane's batteries have operated through a combined 1.3 million hours and never had an internal fault. He said they were built with multiple protections to ensure that failures "don't put the airplane at risk."
The lithium-ion design was chosen because it's the only type of battery that can take a large charge in a short amount of time.
Neither GS Yuasa Corp., the Japanese company that supplies the batteries for the 787, nor Thales, which makes the battery charging system, would comment on the recent troubles.
Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways are two of the 787's biggest customers.
ANA was especially proud of its 787 fleet. Its executives' business cards and the top of its website read "787" and "We fly 1st." ANA got the first one Boeing delivered in late 2011, more than three years late.
Other 787s have had problems with certain electrical panels and fuel leaks.
Back on Jan. 9, ANA canceled a domestic flight to Tokyo after a computer wrongly indicated there was a problem with the 787's brakes. Two days later, the carrier reported two new problems with the aircraft - a minor fuel leak and a cracked cockpit windscreen.
Many of the 787's problems are typical of well-established planes around the world, Hiatt said, adding that he would have no qualms about flying aboard a 787.
"That airplane is the most scrutinized plane in the air," he said. "I would get on the airplane tomorrow."
Hours before the FAA announced its emergency order, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood dismissed any doubts about the FAA's diligence in certifying the plane.
"Our people are the best, but we need to work with Boeing and to make sure everything we've done has been done correctly," he told reporters Wednesday at a luncheon in Washington.
The FAA's move canceled plans by LOT Polish Airlines to begin regular 787 service between Chicago's O'Hare Airport and Warsaw. The inaugural flight landed at O'Hare late Wednesday, but passengers said the airline called off the return trip.
Last week's fire, which was also tied to the battery in the back of the plane, prompted investigations by both the National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA.
The NTSB said Wednesday that it would send an investigator to Japan to join the latest probe, and that representatives from the FAA and Boeing were on their way, too.
United frequent flier Josh Feller said he changed his plans to fly a United 787 from Los Angeles to Houston next month because of the 787's troubles.
"I've been following the 787 news closely, and the latest incident finally spooked me into changing my flight," he said by email. "It's an unnecessary risk, and since I was going out of my way to fly the plane in the first place, decided to change flights."
Boeing shares dropped $2.60, or 3.4 percent, to close Wednesday at $74.34, and the selloff continued in after-hours trading.
It must be a slow news day. I'd fly in one. No problem. This is not a major problem to fix folks. Nothing to see here. Move along folks. Move along.
3 years after schedule, and just a pile of crap!
@WhatdidIsay? Yes, 1.3 million flight hours and we've got some problems. Not exactly good news but far from a pile of crap. There's a lot to celebrate with the 787 - from all accounts it's an amazing machine - but we need to get through these problems and move forward.Â
Â
Of course, who am I? My favorite aircraft to fly in was the DC-10. :-)
 @AuburnGuy The DC 10 is the only commercial airplane fleet other than the 787 that was grounded by the FAA. The type certificate of the DC-10 was withdrawn grounding the aircraft on June 6, 1979 after the crash of flight 191 in Chicago.
None of the 787s from S Carolina are grounded....the ones sold to India.
 @Vince Those sold to India's airlines can not fly to airports in the United States per the FAA Directive.
@Too funny! @Vince And India has issues a directive to ground theirs, from what I've read.Â
@flyskiwindsurf thank you :-)
 @Vince Gee Vince, you sure can dish out the insults in other threads but you sure do get things wrong. Air India has absolutely grounded their Dream Liners. All of them are grounded, and the problem appears to be with an Asian built battery.
Â
http://www.komonews.com/news/boeing/Safety-official-Battery-in-787-swollen-from-overheating-187291991.html
Â
....GS Yuasa Corp., the maker of the lithium ion batteries used in the 787s, said it was helping with the investigation but that the cause of the problem was unclear. "We still don't know if the problem is with the battery, the power source or the electronics system," said Yasushi Yamamoto, a spokesman the company which is based in Kyoto, Japan. "The cause of the problem is not clear," he said. Thales, which makes the battery charging system, has not commented so far. Air India's decision Thursday to ground its fleet of six Boeing 787, under orders from Indian aviation authorities, and similar decisions in Europe and Qatar mean that nearly all of the 50 Dreamliners in use around the world are now out of action.....
Â
But hey, keep that anti-union flag flying baby. I mean globalization and buying from the lowest bidder doesn't have anything to do with it. Right? It was, in Doctor Vince's expert opinion - SABOTAGE!
Â
Dude - put the tinfoil hat - down.
Â
@Vince I am sure that you really feel like the i**** that you truly truly are.
@Vince http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/air-india-grounds-boeing-787-dreamliners-after-us-decision-318528
I read the times of india....they said none of their 87s are grounded and they all came from Charleston
This comment has been deleted
@CIAassassin I think he's been missing since his JAL flight landed in Boston last week. ***POOF***
It's time to ban lithium cobalt oxide type batteries from planes.
If Quality Control gets budget cut because Beoing could see it as pesky and the time-line to stockholders doesn't fit very well at all,these are the results. On the assy. line, it may have been "Let's get 'er done" (and outta here) but it pays well (for now).
@Cityman ???
Quality control, what's that?
 @Cityman That's something that Airbus uses to ensure that all of their planes are worry free when they leave the factory.
@Donkey Kong I guess you never heard of the A380. Well it was nicknamed the A180 because it quite often returned to its departure airport shortly after liftoff. Well and a number of others.
They should change their name to Booing.
I imagine there are a few people at Boeing who aren't going to get much sleep for a few days...
I'm not sure the media will ever pick up on this at this juncture, but the battery chemistry itself should receive extensive scrutiny. These type of GS Yuasa batteries are a lithium cobalt oxide type used in laptops, not hybrid cars. There is a very good reason that auto manufacturers are NOT using this chemistry. There are other safer chemistries. Too bad that Boeing didn't think that their 787 deserved the same level of safety as that of a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt.
Just check out the wikipedia page for these types of batteries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery
 Right towards the top, it says: "Handheld electronics mostly use LIBs based on lithium cobalt oxide (LCO), which offers high energy density, but have well-known safety concerns, especially when damaged. Lithium iron phosphate (LFP), lithium manganese oxide (LMO) and lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) offer lower energy density, but longer lives and inherent safety. These chemistries are being widely used for electric tools, medical equipment and other roles."
What really burns me is that Boeing had plenty of warning when one of these batteries caught on fire during flight testing in 2010, forcing an emergency landing in Texas. That was their golden opportunity then to fix this problem by just going with a better lithium ion battery. I sure hope that after that 2010 incident they at least hatched a Plan B if, and sadly now when, these batteries continued to have problems.
@battery_guy AuburnGuy 130 pts @battery_guy I don't believe that was a battery issue. It was electrical arcing believed to have been due to foreign object debris in an electrical panel. Due you know differently?
Do boeing jets suck? They're always in the news for some kind of problem
@sirgavin7 Ya, that uncontained engine failure that almost took out a plane load last year in Singapore. That demonstration flight last year that flew into a mountain. The narrow body check flight that crashed into the Mediterranean. The wide body that plunged into the Pacific off Brazil. The flight that careened off a runway last week in Moscow. The repeated landing gear collapses in Scandinavia. The fiery wide body crash in Libya. ......... Oh, my bad. NONE of those were Boeing aircraft.
This comment has been deleted
 @Blindman Your mom needs a better keyboard lock and you need a really early bedtime.
 @al_wa  @Blindman Wow....
 @AuburnGuy  @Getov I get paid a six figure salary by the Koch Brothers to sit here making Righty comments and disparage the Progressives.Â
If KOMO makes a fraction of cent off my bloviating, so be it...
Â
Oops! I wasn't supposed to say that.
@Getov Mylon. That was the OLD Komo. The NEW Komo is about advertising dollars, which comes from site visits, which is spurned on by inflammatory comments like Blinmans which draw people like you and me to respond which puts money in Komos pocket. .... I guess that makes us the morons. Ironic. :-)
 @Powderhound  @al_wa  @Blindman Wow is right. I guess they let anyone keep a KOMO account nowadays. They used to 86 maroons like that left and right.
Didn't the FAA just tell us it was safe to fly in the 787? Â Now they are grounding them all?
@Landshark If Kerry can support a war before he is against it, and if Obama can be against raising the debt ceiling before he is for it, then we shouldn't be surprised that the FAA was for the 787 before they were against it. :-)
Must be McNerney......he thought Boeing was making cars before !
 @scychan Actually they used to make furniture.
@scychan Maybe they should have been?
Look for that union label! a sign of a lemon!
Most of that plane is made by non-union labor, it is only assembled by union labor.
Once again the media shows how much it hates American manufacturing. Time to do a hatchet job on the only large aircraft manufacturer left. Airbus has to be loving this.
Â
With that said when you buy a bunch of foreign built parts from the lowest bidder, you're going to have some crap.
Change the name to the 786, because airlines will be 86-ing this turkey.
Not likely, batteries can be changed; it is not a design flaw.
One thing that's clear is that there is a certain level of PR hysteria going on with the 787 right now. While it deserves the close scrutiny, the media doesn't help by highlighting every glitch as if they are somehow exclusive to the 787. Cracked windshield? Faulty indicators? Why are we even discussing these things, other than they have the numbers "787" associated with them. These things happen countless times over the course of the week, all across the globe, in all types of aircraft. Just yesterday an Airbus A330 landed in Tokyo with smoke in the cabin. Did we hear about that? Nope.Â
Â
Time to throttle it down a bit, let the FAA et al figure things out, and stop piling on the 787 like it's a piece of trash. It's a highly sophisticated piece of equipment that is going through a process called Type Introduction. While I won't downplay the incidents, I also am not going to pander to people's uneducated fears by trash-talking the aircraft, the program, or the company.Â
@AuburnGuy hey those were built by union labor. Non of the ones built in SC have had this problem.
 @Exiled_Patriot  @AuburnGuy You left out 'yet'. These planes all have the same battery. I have no problem bashing unions, but this is not a union issue.Â
 @Exiled_Patriot  @AuburnGuy Yes, but very few 787 have come out of SC compared to Evt and they both use the same batteries. My money is on the batteries. Airplanes don't get built like dishwashers, not even close.
Â
 @Exiled_Patriot  @AuburnGuy How much you know !?
Many S.C. workers and managers were trained in Evt before they
went back.
Â
@scychan @Exiled_Patriot @AuburnGuy I'm not clear on what your point is? We still don't know the cause of these problems. If it's a battery issue, that is a company in Japan. If it's the battery charger, that's a company in France.Â
Â
If you want to bash on Unions, that's your business. I'm just not_quite_ready to point fingers in the culprit here. I'm sure you are more than happy to oblige, though.Â
 @AuburnGuy Rational thought.....refreshing.
I suspect sabotage by some union guys in WA. How is it that none of the 787s from S Carolina are defective?
 @Vince Source please that no South Carolina planes are involved...
@Howard Beale @Vince It might not matter anyhow. It could be a recent software download that impacts how the batteries are utilized. It seems wierd to go 1.3 million hours, and for the ANA bird one full year in service, just to have the same types of things suddenly surface in a few days time.
 @AuburnGuy The battery charger is an embedded processor and the algorithm for charge/balance is software. Something as simple as a single line of code could be the problem. They WILL figure this out. A lot of really talented people from the FAA, NTSB, Thales, GSYuasa and Boeing are working very hard to establish exactly what happened, and how to correct it.
@Vince Uh, maybe they are? Or do you know something nobody else does?