It makes sense, I guess you kids would say "Boeing dun'goofed"?
Edited by SwitchFX, 18 July 2013 - 08:33 PM.
0
Another 787 fire...
Started by
Jonay
, Jul 12 2013 11:38 AM
23 replies to this topic
#21
SwitchFX
-
- Members
-
- 30,764 posts
formerly TeleFarsi_Airlines818
Posted 18 July 2013 - 08:32 PM
Lithium battery technology isn't new by any means, but the way these batteries are designed are new and outside the scope of traditional manufacturing, according to a Boeing rep I spoke to a couple weeks ago.
It makes sense, I guess you kids would say "Boeing dun'goofed"?
It makes sense, I guess you kids would say "Boeing dun'goofed"?
#22
Cactus
-
- Members
-
- 9,168 posts
Orville Reincarnate
Posted 19 July 2013 - 01:43 PM
SwitchFX, on 18 July 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:
the way these batteries are designed are new and outside the scope of traditional manufacturing, according to a Boeing rep I spoke to a couple weeks ago.
It makes sense, I guess you kids would say "Boeing dun'goofed"?
It makes sense, I guess you kids would say "Boeing dun'goofed"?
Not just the airframe mfr, but the entire system that is in place to prevent such component failures from happening... especially the regulator (FAA) and component mfr (Honeywell/Yuasa)
#23
SwitchFX
-
- Members
-
- 30,764 posts
formerly TeleFarsi_Airlines818
Posted 19 July 2013 - 03:06 PM
Apart from that. When the plane was first developed and entered testing, were they using a legacy battery system or the Lithium ones?
#24
Cactus
-
- Members
-
- 9,168 posts
Orville Reincarnate
Posted 22 July 2013 - 11:09 AM
SwitchFX, on 19 July 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:
Apart from that. When the plane was first developed and entered testing, were they using a legacy battery system or the Lithium ones?
Probably using the same Lithium ones. This should have queued the Jaws music!!
787 battery blew up in ’06 lab test, burned down building
