U.S. aviation safety officials are probing an electrical fire that hit a three-week-old Boeing Co.
BA -2.63%
787 Dreamliner on Monday just after passengers and crew had left a Japan Airlines Co.
9201.TO -0.40%
flight at Boston's Logan International Airport.
The blaze comes at a sensitive time for Boeing, which is ramping up production to work through a backlog of almost 800 of the jets, which are made mostly of carbon-fiber composites rather than aluminum and have a more complex electrical system than most existing passenger planes.
The fire was in the aft electrical equipment bay, where electrical problems and an earlier in-flight Dreamliner fire have been reported. In 2010, an electrical fire in the same bay forced a Boeing test plane to make an emergency landing in Texas. More recently, a power panel in the bay prompted an emergency landing in New Orleans by a United Continental Holdings Inc. UAL -0.19% 787.
"This [incident] goes to the heart of the innovative side of the 787," said Hans Weber, president of TECOP International Inc., an aviation consulting group that specializes in aircraft certification. Mr. Weber remained concerned that spate of electrical issues aboard the 787 could make it more difficult for the plane to fly extended missions far from diversion airports.
Boeing traced the cause of the 2010 fire to a stray item left inside a power panel, which—along with electrical software—was redesigned to prevent any repeat. It is still trying to determine what caused the panel problem in the United 787.
Glitches are common for new aircraft, but the 787 has faced a number of problems with its engines and electrical system in recent months. Boeing and airlines recently replaced power panels inside the bay on at least five Dreamliners stemming from the New Orleans emergency. A Qatar Airways 787 was grounded the same month for repairs after power panel issues.
The Massachusetts Port Authority said the jet, carrying 173 passengers and a crew of 11, had arrived safely in Boston at about 10:06 a.m. Monday local time after a 13-hour flight from Tokyo. The agency received a call about smoke in the cabin from a worker at 10:30 a.m., after passengers had already left the plane.
JAL spokeswoman Carol Anderson said in an emailed statement, "the smoke was traced to a fire from the battery used for the auxiliary power unit."
Richard Walsh, a Massport spokesman, said the jet's auxiliary power unit battery, which is housed in a small compartment known as the aft electrical equipment bay, exploded after crews believed the fire was extinguished. One firefighter suffered minor injuries from exposure to a fire suppressant, he added.
The auxiliary battery, made with lithium ion components, may have been damaged by a fire ax, exacerbating the situation, said a person familiar with the incident.
Boeing and JAL, which flies 787s from Tokyo to San Diego, Moscow, Singapore and Beijing, said they were investigating the incident.
The National Transportation Safety Board has not yet opened a formal investigation, but has dispatched personnel to the scene in Boston, according to spokesman Eric Weiss.
"We are aware of the event and are working with our customer," said Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel. He declined further comment.
The 787 was designed for long over-water routes between midsize cities that couldn't profitably accommodate a larger jet with more seats. It has had to meet a stringent set of regulations to ensure the jet can still fly safely in the event one of its two engines fail.
Those regulations include strict guidelines for the lithium ion batteries on the 787 because of concerns about the batteries' potential flammability.
During the 787's development, Boeing repeatedly affirmed that it complied with the expanded safety standards for the batteries, which are part of the aircraft's emergency power system.
Safety concerns about lithium ion batteries as cargo recently prompted some airlines to begin isolating shipments and enhancing fire suppression. The batteries are suspected of contributing to two jumbo-jet 747 freighter crashes since 2010.
The 787, the first jetliner made from a majority of lightweight carbon fiber composites, eliminates hot, heavy and hard-to-maintain pneumatic systems that power key parts of the jet.
Boeing's design is considered "more-electric," controlling parts of the aircraft such as the starting of the engines to the anti-ice system.
The aircraft was part of a group of seven Dreamliners delivered to six Boeing customers during a 25-hour period in late December, a record touted by the plane maker.
Video images of the affected plane and records from Flightaware.com indicate it was delivered to JAL on Dec. 20.
Boeing shares slid in the wake of reports of the incident, and were off 2%, or $1.56, at $76.13 in 4 p.m. New York Stock Exchange trading on Monday.
—Andy Pasztor contributed to this article.
Write to Jon Ostrower at jon.ostrower@wsj.com and Jack Nicas at jack.nicas@wsj.com
Corrections & Amplifications
The National Transportation Safety Board hadn't opened a formal investigation as of Monday into the incident that caused an electrical fire on a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Boston's Logan International Airport. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said a formal investigation had been opened Monday.
The blaze comes at a sensitive time for Boeing, which is ramping up production to work through a backlog of almost 800 of the jets, which are made mostly of carbon-fiber composites rather than aluminum and have a more complex electrical system than most existing passenger planes.
The fire was in the aft electrical equipment bay, where electrical problems and an earlier in-flight Dreamliner fire have been reported. In 2010, an electrical fire in the same bay forced a Boeing test plane to make an emergency landing in Texas. More recently, a power panel in the bay prompted an emergency landing in New Orleans by a United Continental Holdings Inc. UAL -0.19% 787.
"This [incident] goes to the heart of the innovative side of the 787," said Hans Weber, president of TECOP International Inc., an aviation consulting group that specializes in aircraft certification. Mr. Weber remained concerned that spate of electrical issues aboard the 787 could make it more difficult for the plane to fly extended missions far from diversion airports.
Boeing traced the cause of the 2010 fire to a stray item left inside a power panel, which—along with electrical software—was redesigned to prevent any repeat. It is still trying to determine what caused the panel problem in the United 787.
Glitches are common for new aircraft, but the 787 has faced a number of problems with its engines and electrical system in recent months. Boeing and airlines recently replaced power panels inside the bay on at least five Dreamliners stemming from the New Orleans emergency. A Qatar Airways 787 was grounded the same month for repairs after power panel issues.
The Massachusetts Port Authority said the jet, carrying 173 passengers and a crew of 11, had arrived safely in Boston at about 10:06 a.m. Monday local time after a 13-hour flight from Tokyo. The agency received a call about smoke in the cabin from a worker at 10:30 a.m., after passengers had already left the plane.
JAL spokeswoman Carol Anderson said in an emailed statement, "the smoke was traced to a fire from the battery used for the auxiliary power unit."
Richard Walsh, a Massport spokesman, said the jet's auxiliary power unit battery, which is housed in a small compartment known as the aft electrical equipment bay, exploded after crews believed the fire was extinguished. One firefighter suffered minor injuries from exposure to a fire suppressant, he added.
The auxiliary battery, made with lithium ion components, may have been damaged by a fire ax, exacerbating the situation, said a person familiar with the incident.
Boeing and JAL, which flies 787s from Tokyo to San Diego, Moscow, Singapore and Beijing, said they were investigating the incident.
The National Transportation Safety Board has not yet opened a formal investigation, but has dispatched personnel to the scene in Boston, according to spokesman Eric Weiss.
"We are aware of the event and are working with our customer," said Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel. He declined further comment.
The 787 was designed for long over-water routes between midsize cities that couldn't profitably accommodate a larger jet with more seats. It has had to meet a stringent set of regulations to ensure the jet can still fly safely in the event one of its two engines fail.
Those regulations include strict guidelines for the lithium ion batteries on the 787 because of concerns about the batteries' potential flammability.
During the 787's development, Boeing repeatedly affirmed that it complied with the expanded safety standards for the batteries, which are part of the aircraft's emergency power system.
Safety concerns about lithium ion batteries as cargo recently prompted some airlines to begin isolating shipments and enhancing fire suppression. The batteries are suspected of contributing to two jumbo-jet 747 freighter crashes since 2010.
The 787, the first jetliner made from a majority of lightweight carbon fiber composites, eliminates hot, heavy and hard-to-maintain pneumatic systems that power key parts of the jet.
Boeing's design is considered "more-electric," controlling parts of the aircraft such as the starting of the engines to the anti-ice system.
The aircraft was part of a group of seven Dreamliners delivered to six Boeing customers during a 25-hour period in late December, a record touted by the plane maker.
Video images of the affected plane and records from Flightaware.com indicate it was delivered to JAL on Dec. 20.
Boeing shares slid in the wake of reports of the incident, and were off 2%, or $1.56, at $76.13 in 4 p.m. New York Stock Exchange trading on Monday.
—Andy Pasztor contributed to this article.
Write to Jon Ostrower at jon.ostrower@wsj.com and Jack Nicas at jack.nicas@wsj.com
Corrections & Amplifications
The National Transportation Safety Board hadn't opened a formal investigation as of Monday into the incident that caused an electrical fire on a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 Dreamliner at Boston's Logan International Airport. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said a formal investigation had been opened Monday.
A version of this article appeared January 8,
2013, on page B1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with
the headline: Another Fire Hits Dreamliner.
No comments:
Post a Comment