We should remember this auxiliary battery failed after the passengers had disembarked. As the experts explain it, the battery is an auxiliary. This particular failure wouldn’t be likely to happen in the air, which technically makes it non-life threatening, although a tech or firefighter who was injured when the fire was extinguished might feel differently. I’m not trying to minimize the problem, but passengers’ lives were not threatened.
Nevertheless, I’m looking forward to Boeing’s solution to this. All the experts tell me this is what happens with new planes. Just a matter of getting the kinks out. While it’s not unexpected that new approaches (replacing the hydraulics with high powered electrics) need some ironing out, we’ll all sleep a lot better, and fly a lot easier when the situation is addressed.
NTSB Provides Second Investigative Update on Boeing 787 Battery Fire in Boston
January 14, 2013
WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board today released a second update on its investigation into the Jan. 7 fire aboard a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 at Logan International Airport in Boston.
The lithium-ion battery that powered the auxiliary power unit on the airplane was removed and transported back to the NTSB Materials Laboratory in Washington on Jan. 10. The battery is currently being examined by NTSB investigators, who plan to disassemble it this week.
In advance of that work, under the direction of the NTSB, radiographic examinations of the incident battery and an exemplar battery were conducted this past weekend at an independent test facility. The digital radiographs and computed tomography scans generated from this examination allowed the team to document the internal condition of the battery prior to disassembling it.
In addition, investigators took possession of burned wire bundles, the APU battery charger, and several memory modules. The maintenance and APU controller memory modules will be downloaded to obtain any available data. Investigators also documented the entire aft electronics bay including the APU battery and the nearby affected structure where components and wire bundles were located.
The airplane’s two combined flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder units were transported to NTSB headquarters and have been successfully downloaded. The information is currently being analyzed by the investigative team.
The airport emergency response group documented the airport rescue and firefighting efforts to extinguish the fire, which included interviews with first responders. Fire and rescue personnel were able to contain the fire using a clean agent (Halotron), however, they reported experiencing difficulty accessing the battery for removal during extinguishing efforts. All fire and rescue personnel responding to the incident had previously received aircraft familiarization training on the Boeing 787.
In accordance with international investigative treaties, the Japan Transport Safety Board and French Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile have appointed accredited representatives to the investigation. The NTSB-led investigative team is comprised of subject matter groups in the areas of airplane systems, fire, airport emergency response, and data recorders and includes experts from the Federal Aviation Administration, The Boeing Company, US Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Carderock Division, Japan Airlines (aircraft operator), GS Yuasa (battery manufacturer), and Thales Avionics Electrical Systems (APU battery/charger system).
United Airlines flight UA-972 had to divert and make an emergency landing at Shannon Airport, Ireland, on February 12th.
TUI Airways flight BY-2677 made an emergency landing in Manchester, England, on January 20th.
Condor flight DE-1762 had to return and make an emergency landing in Dusseldorf, Germany, on May 24th.