NTSB to question whether 787 batteries adequately tested
»Play Video
WASHINGTON - The National Transportation Safety Board planned to publicly question at a news conference on Thursday whether the FAA and Boeing adequately tested the batteries, ABC News has learned from a government source.
The use of lithium ion batteries to power aircraft systems isn't necessarily unsafe despite a battery fire in one Boeing 787 Dreamliner and smoke in another, but manufacturers need to build in reliable safeguards, the nation's top aviation safety investigator said Wednesday.
Chairman Deborah Hersman said she doesn't want to "categorically" rule out the use of lithium ion batteries to power aircraft systems, even though it's clear that safeguards failed in the case of a Japan Airlines 787 that had a battery fire while parked at Boston's Logan International Airport last month.
"Obviously what we saw in the 787 battery fire in Boston shows us there were some risks that were not mitigated, that were not addressed," Hersman told reporters in an interview. The fire was "not what we would have expected to see in a brand new battery in a brand new airplane," she said.
The 787 is the first airliner to make extensive use of lithium batteries. Aircraft makers view lithium batteries, which are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, as an important way to save on fuel costs. The Airbus A350, expected to be ready next year, will also make extensive use of lithium ion batteries. Manufacturers are also looking to retrofit existing planes, replacing other types of batteries with lithium ion.
But lithium batteries are 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.
The board is still weeks away from determining the cause of the Jan. 7 battery fire, Hersman said.
Investigators are also looking into the special conditions the Federal Aviation Administration required Boeing to meet in order to use lithium ion batteries to power the 787's electrical systems, she said.
A government-industry advisory board that works closely with the FAA issued testing standards for lithium batteries used in aircraft operations several months after the agency had approved a separate testing regime for the 787's batteries.
"What happens is that when an aircraft is certified it basically gets locked into the standards that were in existence at the time," Hersman said. Oftentimes tougher standards will come along later, but aren't applied to already-approved aircraft designs. "Those are issues we do look at regularly in our investigations and it is something I'm sure we will be focusing on with the battery," she said.
Investigators have been working very closely with the FAA on a review the agency has under way of its sanctioning of the 787's certification for flight, Hersman said. The FAA awarded the certification in August 2011.
"We are evaluating assessments that were made, whether or not those assessments were accurate, whether they were complied with and whether more needs to be done," she said. "I think that is important before this airplane is back in the air, to really understand what the risks are and that they're mitigated effectively."
Nine days after the battery fire in Boston, another battery overheated on an All Nippon Airways 787, leading to an emergency landing in Japan. The same day, FAA officials ordered U.S. carriers with 787s - there's only one, United Airlines, with six planes - to ground the planes. Aviation authorities in other countries swiftly followed suit. In all, 50 planes operated by seven airlines in six countries are grounded.
The 787 is Boeing's newest and most technologically advanced plane. The groundings have become a nightmare for the company, which has about 800 Dreamliner orders from airlines around the globe.
Boeing was already spending more money on each 787 it built than it collected from airlines who bought it. On Wednesday, UBS analyst David Strauss estimated that Boeing will spend some $6 billion in cash this year on the plane, while an "extended 787 grounding would result in an even bigger cash burn," he wrote.
"As long as (the) 787 remains grounded, Boeing is faced with the choice of either slowing production or building physical inventory. It will build inventory for now," he wrote. Boeing already has about 46 787s that have been built but not yet delivered. Many of those were built early on and require more work before they can be handed over to customers.
Boeing currently builds five 787s per month. After the groundings it reiterated its plans to boost production to 10 per month by the end of the year, and said it planned to deliver at least 60 of the jets this year.
___
AP Airlines Writer Joshua Freed in Minneapolis contributed to this report.
The use of lithium ion batteries to power aircraft systems isn't necessarily unsafe despite a battery fire in one Boeing 787 Dreamliner and smoke in another, but manufacturers need to build in reliable safeguards, the nation's top aviation safety investigator said Wednesday.
Chairman Deborah Hersman said she doesn't want to "categorically" rule out the use of lithium ion batteries to power aircraft systems, even though it's clear that safeguards failed in the case of a Japan Airlines 787 that had a battery fire while parked at Boston's Logan International Airport last month.
"Obviously what we saw in the 787 battery fire in Boston shows us there were some risks that were not mitigated, that were not addressed," Hersman told reporters in an interview. The fire was "not what we would have expected to see in a brand new battery in a brand new airplane," she said.
The 787 is the first airliner to make extensive use of lithium batteries. Aircraft makers view lithium batteries, which are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, as an important way to save on fuel costs. The Airbus A350, expected to be ready next year, will also make extensive use of lithium ion batteries. Manufacturers are also looking to retrofit existing planes, replacing other types of batteries with lithium ion.
But lithium batteries are 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.
The board is still weeks away from determining the cause of the Jan. 7 battery fire, Hersman said.
Investigators are also looking into the special conditions the Federal Aviation Administration required Boeing to meet in order to use lithium ion batteries to power the 787's electrical systems, she said.
A government-industry advisory board that works closely with the FAA issued testing standards for lithium batteries used in aircraft operations several months after the agency had approved a separate testing regime for the 787's batteries.
"What happens is that when an aircraft is certified it basically gets locked into the standards that were in existence at the time," Hersman said. Oftentimes tougher standards will come along later, but aren't applied to already-approved aircraft designs. "Those are issues we do look at regularly in our investigations and it is something I'm sure we will be focusing on with the battery," she said.
Investigators have been working very closely with the FAA on a review the agency has under way of its sanctioning of the 787's certification for flight, Hersman said. The FAA awarded the certification in August 2011.
"We are evaluating assessments that were made, whether or not those assessments were accurate, whether they were complied with and whether more needs to be done," she said. "I think that is important before this airplane is back in the air, to really understand what the risks are and that they're mitigated effectively."
Nine days after the battery fire in Boston, another battery overheated on an All Nippon Airways 787, leading to an emergency landing in Japan. The same day, FAA officials ordered U.S. carriers with 787s - there's only one, United Airlines, with six planes - to ground the planes. Aviation authorities in other countries swiftly followed suit. In all, 50 planes operated by seven airlines in six countries are grounded.
The 787 is Boeing's newest and most technologically advanced plane. The groundings have become a nightmare for the company, which has about 800 Dreamliner orders from airlines around the globe.
Boeing was already spending more money on each 787 it built than it collected from airlines who bought it. On Wednesday, UBS analyst David Strauss estimated that Boeing will spend some $6 billion in cash this year on the plane, while an "extended 787 grounding would result in an even bigger cash burn," he wrote.
"As long as (the) 787 remains grounded, Boeing is faced with the choice of either slowing production or building physical inventory. It will build inventory for now," he wrote. Boeing already has about 46 787s that have been built but not yet delivered. Many of those were built early on and require more work before they can be handed over to customers.
Boeing currently builds five 787s per month. After the groundings it reiterated its plans to boost production to 10 per month by the end of the year, and said it planned to deliver at least 60 of the jets this year.
___
AP Airlines Writer Joshua Freed in Minneapolis contributed to this report.
Duh, clearly the answer is NO. I bet they thought they did enough testing, but this is pretty new ground for aircraft. Cessna tried and went back to conventional batteries.
This comment has been deleted
@NicholeGibbs10 You have been reported spammer.
I can see one problem straight away. I draw your attention the person pointing the right hand index finger at the black charcoal briquette that used to be a battery in the photo. This person is wearing the wristwatch on the wrong wrist. Did you notice how I was not gender specific, oh my, how politically correct. Next, when I was a kid and I bought a great battery operated toy, I was constantly disappointed because the toy always came 'Batteries Not Included'. I suggest Boeing subscribe to the same logic and sell the 787 'Batteries Not Included', problem solved. Don't bother showing me, I know where I can find the door.
@semprecoraggio: Why is "This person is wearing the wristwatch on the wrong wrist?" What is wrong about it?
I saw another article indicating the planes would be allowed to fly again, but it did not detail what battery(s) it will use.
 @oldster70 It will still be the lithium-ion battery with a better casing and ventilation. You just can't switch to a different battery. Boeing has to show/prove to the FAA/NTSB that the redesigned/improve safeguards work as designed.
@Too funny!
That is why I have stated in earlier posts that they should have been conducting certification tests with the older batteries. If the plane was certified with both lithium-ion and NiCad they would have a viable plan âBâ. I have written many FAA data submittals regarding flight safety for passenger cabin installed equipment. They often were nothing but an argument showing similarities with earlier equipment. It should not take a lot of effort to certify this aircraft for use with pre-existing batteries and charging-monitoring equipment used on say 747-757-767 aircraft.  Â
 @oldster70 Once again...Its not that simple. If it was, they would have done it by now. The 787 batteries are 32vdc where a 747-757-767 batteries are 28vdc. Also the 747-757-767 batteries don't have as much amps as the Lithium Ions do.
Â
I remember the good old days when "thermal runaway" meant you couldn't get to the outhouse fast enough in your long johns.Â
dah
If they must use the Lithium Cobalt Oxide they need to assume it will fail and the resultant fire must be contained.
"NOTÂ NECESSARILY?!?!"
@Getov Mylon That statement should be read as "not dangerous unless they get to hot"Â hence the need for better cooling of them so they don't go into thermal runaway..
 @Mr. H  @Getov Cooling will do nothing for an internal cell failure. Containment of each cell could prevent propagation to other cells.