Back to Squawk list
  • 27

787 Could Face Temporary ETOPS Ban

As Boeing works to regain permission for its 787 Dreamliner to resume flights, the company faces what could be a costly new challenge: a temporary ban on some of the long-distance, trans-ocean journeys that the jet was intended to fly. ( और अधिक...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Paul Smith 13
The FAA is just saying this as a PR stunt. Most of the public knows nothing about the plane and they would be the first to say "hey I think the plane should be grounded because its unsafe". Most people are uninformed on nearly everything about the Boeing 787 and the media makes it worst with their over sensationalized news reports. This is literally just something so people won't start complaining and saying they are not doing their job to keep everyone safe. The APU battery (which is the problem battery) doesn't even get used in flight, which makes it really hard to believe that ETOPS is threatened. Since the FAA has been called out on "under-regulating" alot of things in the past, they are gonna "over-regulate" the crap out of the Boeing 787 and this case now just to prove a point.
Chip Hermes 5
Your story is compelling, but considering ANA had an in-flight smoke indicator, I'm not sure it's accurate.


Five minutes earlier, at 8:26 a.m., flying at 30,000 feet, an alarm went off in the cockpit signaling that something was wrong with the battery, according to ANA. The alarm was marked “smoke,” according to ANA. No one on board was able to see smoke, according to Mr. Kawamura and ANA. The main battery circuitry is located in a separate compartment beneath the jet’s cockpit. But soon after a “burning like smell” began to waft through the cabin and cockpit, said ANA during a hastily arranged press conference in Tokyo on Wednesday.

“It came from the front. It smelled like burning plastic,” said Mr. Kawamura, a 36-year-old aide to a Japanese politician.

At 8:41 a.m., the pilot called the control tower at Takamatsu airport, a local airport located on the southern island of Shikoku, according to the transportation ministry. He requested for permission to make an emergency landing — about 400 miles from Haneda International Airport in central Tokyo, the flight’s scheduled final destination.

Then the pilot’s voice streamed through the cabin intercom. “There is smoke coming from the aircraft. But there is nothing abnormal with the mechanics. We will make an emergency landing at Takamatsu airport,” said the pilot, according to Mr. Kawamura.

Courtesy of Kenichi Kawamura
The pilot of the All Nippon AIrways flight that made an emergency landing in Takamatsu on Jan. 16 talked to passengers after everyone had safely evacuated from the aircraft via emergency slides.

After the announcement, “you could feel the mood was uneasy,” said Mr. Kawamura. “Everyone pushed down their fears and sat in their seats in silence.” The cabin crew moved around briskly but with calm.

Six minutes later at 8:47 a.m. the plane landed safely. When the emergency door flew open Mr. Kawamura said he could see a burst of white smoke, but didn’t know where it came from. Seven of the plane’s eight emergency evacuation slides shot out of the exits.
Paul Smith -1
While I do not doubt what you are saying there is still a Public Relations side to all of this. It was made apparent when Boeing received a letter from the NTSB basically chastising them for their press conference in Japan.
Kenneth Schmidt 3
When one wants to become a party to an NTSB investigation, you sign an agreement that requires all parties to not comment on any part of that investigation. That agreement has been around for decades, in all modes of transport incidents that NTSB has jurisdiction over.

Not too many years ago, a Union official commented on one facet of an NTSB investigation, and was removed as a party with as little as a bat of an eye. They are quite serious about their processes and procedures. You either follow their lead, or get out.

It is not PR, it is about the credibility of any investigation or finding of the Board, and it's Congressional charter (read law).
honza nl 2
ETOPS are always given to a plane that has PROVEN in REALITY to be EXTREMELY RELIABLE. If you can say with dry eyes that the 787 is a) proven in reality, and b) to be extremely reliable; than I wonder if you forgot to take your pills this morning
FedExCargoPilot 4
Your don't need ETOPS from the U.S to Japan or Europe, you can fly where you are never 2 hours away from an airport or land, the east coast to Japan is mostly over land anyways.
How much ETOPS u guys got at FedEx?
riddfly 2
APU dependabity is essential towards ETOPs certification.
If one component related to ETOPSis not 100% this can jeopardize such certification
joe johnson 3
Short of structural failure, NOTHING is worse than fire on an aircraft. Especially one you can not suppress. If you're going to have 320 minute ETOPS, you better have your s*** together.

Boeing doesn't have an engineering problem. They have a management problem. If they ever get that fixed, the 787 will be fine.

I hope they do.
mrbill767 3
Its really about payback. If you recall Boeing had issues with the government regarding right to work laws. Now that the feds have something to hang their hat on, i.e. the potential for future problems regarding batteries, they have Boeing in their cross hairs. Never, I repeat, never cross the feds because if you do, payback is just around the corner!!! The Airbus fleet has far greater problems with its composite tails cracking and even breaking off. Imagine the feds grounding all Airbuses. AA's crash involving an A300 was swept under the table. Too big a problem for the airline industry if all Airbuses were grounded.
mrbill767 2
Federal government retaliates with 787 limitations. That ought to be the headline. "The 787 was conceived and planned over much of the past decade, and the decision to add capacity in South Carolina (a “right to work” state) drew anger from unionized workers at Boeing’s main commercial jet manufacturing complex, in Everett, Wash. The International Association of Machinists sued Boeing over the opening of the South Carolina plant, and the federal National Labor Relations Board charged Boeing with retaliation against the union on the same point."

The Obama administration and the federal government along with its minions in unions have Boeing right where they want them due to the above story. Unions both in the "free market" and in the federal government are huge contributers to the left. When a company goes up against this gang, they better have deep pockets!!!
Roland Dent 1
riddfly 1
The thing is that most 787 customers are non US carriers, for instance here at Lan Airlines we have 3 Dreamliners grounded, and several ETOPs routes were plenned for these aircraft like SCL-LAX Santiago easter island is a 4 hr+ trip with nothing in between.
Tom Bruce 1
ETOPs yeah, but how many available serviceable runways? wouldn't care to land on any of the aleutian sites during winter...
ETOPS ban is not as bad as "flying" ban...
Tom Bruce 1
Hey, you see where the manufacturer of the 787 battery is also having trouble with their lithium batteries on electric cars...yep, two batteries overheated, one of them flamed...
Lionel Inniss 1
I wonder if they are looking at the composite material's ability to store static electricity and compromise electrical systems on the787. Such materials do not dissipate static as metals do. What if thos contributes to something not analyzed as yet. At 600mph therr is lots of static generated. Is the fuel not properly injected with dissipator additive..,

Check this folks
Faulty thinking "The APU battery (which is the problem battery) doesn't even get used in flight," presumes safe when not in use.......
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
787 Could Face Temporary ETOPS Ban
ETOPS Ban ... Extended Twin Engine Operations ban !
This the price one has to pay if and when you fail miserably to identify your enemy and yet jump into a battle . And hope to win , unequivocally .
You do not what weapons to use , what force to apply , what strategy to adopt , what tactics to employ , and so on .
And yet guarantee to find a black cat in a dark room WHICH IS THERE and you choose to stay blind folded and with tied hands .
What are the options available for FAA who are entrusted to ensure utmost safety of men and machines ? They too have a job to do to earn daily bread and butter for their families .
Objectives of Boeing , like their peers may be to generate profits some how but a public institution like the FAA work for safety at any cost .
And Boeing and all others have to understand this and learn lessons from this Battery episode that identification of the cause/s of any problem is/are of prime importance , irrespective of the nature of the problem . Whether it is a small 25 mm 8M bolt to clamp the cabin seat or the engine !
Safety can never , never be compromised .
Or can it be ?
I could almost hear the Twilight Zone music playing...
I even saw Rod, just for a second...
Tom Bruce 0
yes...public relations... but they better get it right! been through the DC10 freight doors and improper connection of wing engines.... after that, DC10 a great airplane... hope Boeing gets it right...
anthony delmonaco 0
Meant to have this in the headline description but it didn't post:

There seems to be a lot of media hype over this and with only 1 test flight down it is very premature to say it's going to lose the ETOPS status. If after some longer haul flights there are issues then bust it out.
Tom Bruce 0
I've flown for years... on almost everything imaginable, but, I'd be reluctant to board a 787 on a long over water flight with only the Aleutians and Russia as alternates.... until they figure out what really happened...
Toby Sharp 0
I'd like to see you board one till they do figure out what happened.
Tom Bruce 0
Toby Sharp 2
they are grounded....unless you are one of Boeing's Top Test Pilot' won't! ha
justin martin -3
I understand they want safety first. But hasn't just about every plane made had issues?
honza nl 2
yes, and that is why any other plane got ETOPS only after they had proven it was a reliable mature plane; but because of commerce the FAA and Boeing thought they could just give ETOPS from day one.....
Bill DiCecca 0
What does "thin" mean in the phrase, "long, thin intercontinental routes"? Is it the opposite of "wide", referring to a route that doesn't have the demand to support wide-body craft?
Andrew Taylor -2
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

FAA may clip 787′s wings — report

While Boeing says a test flight of its troubled 787 Dreamliner has gone according to script, the aircraft could face a new setback as the FAA reportedly mulls limiting the 787’s ETOPS limits.
Bill DiCecca 0
What does "thin" mean in the phrase, "long, thin intercontinental routes"? Is it the opposite of "wide", referring to a route that doesn't have the demand to support wide-body craft?


क्या आपका कोई खाता नहीं है? अनुकूलित विशेषताओं, फ्लाइट अलर्टों,और अधिक के लिए अब(नि:शुल्क) रजिस्टर करें!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.