Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Jan 2013 21:11

It wont be easy for the Chinese to penetrate the civil aviation market as it is so dominated by Boeing , Airbus , Bombardier , Embrarer ,Russians. They have Innovation , Technology and Marketing Muscle to easy out the new players.

Hence most the aircraft even the new promising one like C919 has been sold locally to government customer or local private players probably with government sweeting and subsidising the deal for them but they can always try for the South American market or in SE Asia even if they can sell in small numbers it will be a small but significant step for them.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 20 Jan 2013 15:50

You forgot INDIA.....and as it is for civilian purpose dont be surprised if we do end up buying them

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 20 Jan 2013 21:01

SriKumar wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:APU batteries should not increase weight. More than likely these batteries were not pressure-depressurization cycle tested.
This is quite unlikely since wiki aunty says the aircraft has gone through 4800+ hours of flight testing where the plane would have flown high in the sky and landed, many many times; and this problem did not show up there (am assuming problem did not happen, because if it did, it would have been fixed). This article says something about the Li-ion battery itself (and the fact that some laptop batteries have caught fire). http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... re-burning

It is indeed funny that this problem did not show up in a year+ of testing, and yet it shows up within 3 months of commercial flying in brand new planes.

Testing with initial or first production batteries may have passed, but as the manufacturer starts full-scale production, manufacturing processes may have changed - this despite all of the ISO 9000 type quality assurance.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 20 Jan 2013 21:07

Boeing 787 Dreamliner: NTSB rules out excess battery voltage in Boston incident

The aviation/defense industry uses 28 VDC as very common for electrical systems. These newer batteries provide 32 VDC.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jan 2013 21:56

btw airbus A350 has the same kind of next-gen electrical systems and batteries as the 787. IOC is 2014. they are watching this from behind the bushes and actually hoping its nothing very serious needing design changes.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 20 Jan 2013 22:43

yup although the 350 needs it for half the amount the 787 needs -

airbus must be praying half and half - enough problems to delay the 787 deliveries for another year

but not enough for their plane to have certification issues

and hope some frustrated 787 guys switch to 350

the 350 is scheduled for first flight in june July

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 20 Jan 2013 23:23

Boeing 787 Dreamliner: NTSB rules out excess battery voltage in Boston incident

The NTSB findings is interesting. From the web, it seems that the Boston 787 battery was on fire well after it had landed, but it was being charged during the time of the fire (per an unauthorized statement). Here is a picture of of the JAL 787 battery for the flight that had an emergency landing in Japan (from Denver Post)- you can see the lid bulged outward from the pressure build-up inside. There is some charring on the outside in one small area, but overall the paint outside it unburnt!
http://financialpostbusiness.files.word ... attery.jpg (link updated later to a more relevant picture)

Here is a picture of the 787 battery that caught fire in Boston (Businessweek): http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... re-burning The battery box is a lot more charred andeven bulges outward. Lid not shown. (if anyone wants to inline ze images....).

Trans-atlantic sniping has begun: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013 ... r-grounded H'nable 'Guardian' blames outsourcing.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 21 Jan 2013 02:27

over the years in every industry the regulators and regulated have had an increasingly incestous relationship

this maybe the result of that -

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 21 Jan 2013 08:55

Mort Walker wrote:
SriKumar wrote:{quote="Mort Walker"}APU batteries should not increase weight. More than likely these batteries were not pressure-depressurization cycle tested.
This is quite unlikely since wiki aunty says the aircraft has gone through 4800+ hours of flight testing where the plane would have flown high in the sky and landed, many many times; and this problem did not show up there (am assuming problem did not happen, because if it did, it would have been fixed). This article says something about the Li-ion battery itself (and the fact that some laptop batteries have caught fire). http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... re-burning

It is indeed funny that this problem did not show up in a year+ of testing, and yet it shows up within 3 months of commercial flying in brand new planes.

Testing with initial or first production batteries may have passed, but as the manufacturer starts full-scale production, manufacturing processes may have changed - this despite all of the ISO 9000 type quality assurance.

Actually, for an aerospace supplier, the applicable standard would be AS 9100 Rev C

manish · Post by **manish** » 21 Jan 2013 10:43

Meanwhile back home, the the govt run by baba-log and their babudom goes into CYA mode over the already forgotten IX-812 crash at Mangalore:

Mangalore air crash: panel formed to implement preventive steps

New Delhi: Thirty months after India’s deadliest plane crash in a decade left 158 people dead in Mangalore, the aviation ministry has formed a group to fast-track implementation of the recommendations made by a panel that investigated the disaster.

The panel has been constituted ahead of a petition coming up for hearing in a Mangalore court seeking to press criminal charges for negligence against regulatory authorities and the airline. The petition has being filed by the 812 Foundation, a Mangalore-based trust, acting on behalf of those who lost their lives in the 22 May 2010 crash.

The crash, which was blamed by an inquiry committee on pilot error, killed 152 of the 160 passengers and six crew on board Air India Express flight 812 when the plane overshot the runway at Mangalore airport and fell off a cliff.

A DGCA official, who declined to be named, confirmed that the matter was coming up for hearing in the court and that there has been some discussion at the agencies named in the petition whether they should seek anticipatory bail for their top officials ahead of the hearing on 28 January.

Well I for one know for sure that the IXE runway hasn't been extended, although it was the first promise that the sarkari ministers and babus made in the immediate aftermath of the crash.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Jan 2013 13:46

krishnan wrote:You forgot INDIA.....and as it is for civilian purpose dont be surprised if we do end up buying them

No it wont be surprising because its an open market and Chinese can compete and win on lower price grounds specially if their latest aircraft are ceritifed by DGCA and FAA , there are many private players in Indian market that could opt for chinese aircraft.

Kannan · Post by **Kannan** » 23 Jan 2013 10:45

Surya wrote:over the years in every industry the regulators and regulated have had an increasingly incestous relationship

this maybe the result of that -

Very likely. They've gone from being the police for the aviation sector to trying to be the therapist. Can't help that the funding is tight - good thing the NTSB is independent.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Jan 2013 13:15

Boeing and Airbus has become too big to be reigned in by their own regulators and when the stakes are high regulators would be under intense pressure to toe their line finally.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 24 Jan 2013 03:20

Thanx for the posts guys. This thread is extremely informative and easy to read for those curious but ignorant.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 24 Jan 2013 09:24

Kannan wrote:
Surya wrote:over the years in every industry the regulators and regulated have had an increasingly incestous relationship

this maybe the result of that -
Very likely. They've gone from being the police for the aviation sector to trying to be the therapist. Can't help that the funding is tight - good thing the NTSB is independent.

The NTSB is independent on paper only. There are only a few hundred employees in the board and most of them are administrative or legal experts. At most the NTSB has less than a hundred actual technical experts and they must cover all modes of transportation. Aviation, highway, rail, marine and pipeline. Often they rely on industry, airline and civil aviation experts who may have vested interests.

Civil aviation authorities regulatory powers are limited by law in the developed economic countries. They make standards for certification of pilots, technicians and aircraft and if a new aircraft meets existing standards, then it is approved air worthy. When new problems, such as the battery issue on 787 arise, new battery standards will be implemented.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 25 Jan 2013 08:00

well things are getting a little uncomfortable

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/busin ... .html?_r=0

we are looking at least a couple of months of grounding for the 787. As of now no one has a clue what happened

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Jan 2013 13:44

Building the Superjet , a nice video that sums up the test they do with Civilian Flight Certification progam EASA and how they build it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_uYgzho04I

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 Jan 2013 01:14

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi ... 189887.cms

Air India has been rated the world's third-most unsafe commercial airline by a German airline safety think-tank in a ranking that was debunked by the national carrier.

Wonder what Air France was rated. Or perhaps it does not matter if pilots don't actually know how to fly an aircraft if they are European.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 27 Jan 2013 12:11

Not sure if this video has been posted here before, but a superb animated presentation about Mumbai's new T2 Terminal.

http://youtu.be/8G8VyFz8e-8

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 29 Jan 2013 08:22

Zynda wrote:Not sure if this video has been posted here before, but a superb animated presentation about Mumbai's new T2 Terminal.

Why is it taking so long to complete? According to a youtube video they did not want to close a Shivaji temple on the airport premises even temporarily and so had to come up with some complex arrangements for construction. I wonder if there was a demand for it not to be closed or if the management went overboard. I think they could have shaved a few hundred crores of rupees off the construction cost and a year or two of the time needed if they closed the temple.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Jan 2013 08:36

hanumadu wrote:
Zynda wrote:Not sure if this video has been posted here before, but a superb animated presentation about Mumbai's new T2 Terminal.
Why is it taking so long to complete? According to a youtube video they did not want to close a Shivaji temple on the airport premises even temporarily and so had to come up with some complex arrangements for construction. I wonder if there was a demand for it not to be closed or if the management went overboard. I think they could have shaved a few hundred crores of rupees off the construction cost and a year or two of the time needed if they closed the temple.

The airport unions are heavily shiv sena dominated. Very risky to piss off these guys in Mumbai.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 01 Feb 2013 09:04

Some new news....turns out that ANA had the need to replace batteries several times prior to the fire (in Boston)/smoke (in Japan) events. ANA has around 36 B787s.

ANA said it changed 10 batteries on its 787s last year, but did not inform accident investigators in the United States because the incidents, including five batteries that had unusually low charges, did not compromise the plane's safety, spokesman Ryosei Nomura said on Wednesday.

from http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/ ... 7V20130130

NY Times gives some specifics on the battery caused the emergency landing in Japan (pilots noted a sudden discharge of charge during flight, plus some smoke): http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/busin ... ]According to investigators in Japan, the battery on the jet that made the emergency landing showed a stable reading of 31 volts, near its full charge capacity, until 15 minutes into the flight when pilots detected a strange smell. About that time, sensors detected a sudden unstable discharge of the battery to near zero for reasons that Japanese investigators still cannot explain. [/quote] A note from a researcher specializing in the area of battery technology (opines that one slightly safer though less powerful technology was not adapted). http://www.luxresearchinc.com/blog/2013 ... r-its-787/ The comment is that auto industry moved away from the Lithium Cobolt oxide batteries (to some other variant of Li) for safety reasons.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Feb 2013 13:49

Jet has sold 24% stake to Etihad abu dhabi who will step it upto 49% in phases and get 50% seats in board. so its effectively a JV now.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 280373.cms

so Jet makes it out of the woods with a oil money funded backer.

spicejet is allegedly on breakeven, while Indigo at a slight profit.

paramount is dead. liked their paint scheme and emb jets.

air india continues to rip our pockets with annual bailouts. latest being sale and leaseback of all its 787 to cut costs .. so why did u buy in the first place morons!

only the king of good times is left holding the bag for now....no PE fund probably wants to touch his airline hence no news of any bailouts or revival deals.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 01 Feb 2013 13:55

per SSC thread, T2 optimistic opening is Sept 2013, realistic Dec 2013.

that way BIAL has a smooth runway for expansion...no slums..no temples..no masjids...the work on T1 expansion was going on smoothly

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 02 Feb 2013 01:03

Tesla CEO: Boeing Batteries Needed Better Cooling

"The electrical system that manages the battery is not a complete battery management system," he said. "In my view, a complete battery management system includes the dispersion of any heat that is generated by the operation of the battery. Just having protective circuits is fine, but it is absolutely insufficient."

I think the problem lies in the fact that the battery system manufacturer specified the cells to be used and ordered them from another company - as opposed to designing the cells specifically for the particular battery system and understanding the physics of how individual cells interact. We don't know what Boeing's requirements were for the battery system manufacturer. Battery systems are most complicated in satellites where they go through many cycles of deep discharge and re-charge and must be very reliable. There is cost associated with designing an entire battery system from the ground up using specifically designed cells for the application.

My guess is Boeing has a handle on this and is probably changing the battery charging system and to use cells that don't have a Li-Co cathode. It will take time though.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 02 Feb 2013 01:46

The issue with the 787 is that it is probably the only passenger jet flying today which does not use bleed air for pressurizing the cabin, in the anti-icing system and a bunch of other places. Boeing did away with the bleed air system to improve engine efficiency. But now all the systems that were earlier using engine bleed air, are electrically powered, including the cabin pressurization system which uses electrically powered air compressors. My guess is that this need for a lot of extra electrical power is the reason that the 787 uses these huge batteries and why other aircraft don't seem to suffer from the same issue.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 02 Feb 2013 03:30

Not having the bleed air probably reduces weight as well. The batteries though are for powering up the avionics, back and auxillary power.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 02 Feb 2013 03:41

oh boy, that dude who invented Internet Payment HAS to jabber on this topic too? Despite large lettering on the sides of that N-U-M-M-I assembly plant, this guy is yet to have a production line going. And that contract with the angreji-thaamara-phool for frames have lapsed.

Yet he has no qualms in offering paki like help to Boeing, with its incredible mass production history of highly demanding engineering products.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 02 Feb 2013 10:19

^^^

Arrey yaar let the Jovan Mu*k guy have his fun . He is a fundoo from what I hear. Quite the magnet plus visionary plus crazy that the USofS tends to attract.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Feb 2013 17:12

bay area self declared geniuses are generally absolutely confident of solving any problem in the world!

realists like billG tend to live off in the woods elsewhere.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 02 Feb 2013 21:00

Hmm! I'm pretty sure the 787 engines do have a very minimal bleed air component. I think for anti-ice functions maybe. I could be completely wrong.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 03 Feb 2013 09:19

the articles I had posted at the beginning of this discussion mentions the bleed air component removal and use of some other options for de icing

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 03 Feb 2013 10:23

Singha wrote:per SSC thread, T2 optimistic opening is Sept 2013, realistic Dec 2013.

Thanks GD.

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 04 Feb 2013 01:54

This is a page from the NTSB website dealing with the 787 battery investigation. Several press releases are listed in this page. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013 ... g_787.html

Below is a pdf from the the above page that shows some details of the investigation underway. Easy to understand for a non-technical audience. The above link also has a PPT file of the same.
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/2013 ... -24-13.pdf

Slide 9 shows the battery of cells used in the plane- after the fire. Slides 10 and later have some battery/cell specifications.

Kannan · Post by **Kannan** » 12 Feb 2013 04:32

Boeing answers quite a bit in their own article

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeroma ... _02_4.html

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Feb 2013 23:03

Russian "Air Force One" Il-96 Takeoff at Berlin Tegel Airport

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN9nJiEvEWE

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Feb 2013 06:36

surprisingly quiet engines???

thats one plane I have not had read life dekho at any airport

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Feb 2013 11:11

Surya wrote:surprisingly quiet engines???

If these are older built IL-96PU ( PU stands for Command Aircraft ) then they are most likely using the PS-90A1 engine and perhaps they sound quiter because of "The aero engine is equipped with a thrust reverser in a fan duct and noise suppression system."

http://www.avid.ru/eng/products/civil/PS-90A1/

There are 3 more being built for State serive most likely they would opt for more modern Civil variant PS-90A2 or PS-90A3 and reengine the existing one.

thats one plane I have not had read life dekho at any airport

These are equivalent of A-340 built during last days of Soviet but subsquent events ensured that they wont be sold and at later stage it became uncompetitive in many aspect to late model A-330/340.

Wiki says only 18 are flying mostly with Aeroflot and Cuban Airlines .....so the only hope is the new 3 IL-96PU being built for the Presidential Fleet , which surprisngly would make a total of 5-6 IL-96PU since all were built in late 90's and largest presidental fleet type buring money Russian style

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Feb 2013 11:39

is the A340 considered dated and uneconomical? the world seems shifting enmasse to twin engines for bulk of long haul - 777, 787, 330, 350.... the 4 engine and medium size idea did not take off?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Feb 2013 12:32

Singha , these days its all about fuel economy , cost saving and low maintenance on ground which means you can put an aircraft more time in air ( which means more profit for the operator )

Twin Engine which are more powerful and highly reliable with much better SFC are the norm these days for any new aircraft being built or on drawing board ..engineering pov we have reached those stage.