UKC

What a pile of crap that plane is! Catches fire without anybody even on it.

If I was an airline waiting for some to be delivered I'd strongly consider cancelling the order and switching to A350s...

In reply to KingStapo:

it would be a curious design decision to build it with a check to disable fire suppression if people were on board.

In reply to dissonance: a more curious design decision appears to be the use of lithium
batteries...

In reply to KingStapo:

An Aircraft that's actually flown about six times? It's still very early days for the A350XWB and whilst everything is going to plan I wouldn't expect a smooth transition from the flight test stage to serial production. Order an A350 now and it will be about 8-10 years delivery.

In reply to jim jones:

Indeed - but compared to the constant delays of the Dreamliner and the fact that the engines on the XWB do what they said they'd do in terms of efficiency (neither engine choice for the Dreamliner currently fulfils Boeing's brief) Airbus would have to be mighty incompetent to get even close to the level of crud that Boeing are in with this.

You'd like to think that Airbus have learnt some pretty big lessons after the A380 and having had the benefit of watching Boeing screw their shit up?

In reply to KingStapo: They'll be double double checking to make sure their plane doesn't have any glitches once they start selling it, I'm thinking, the contrast with Boeing would be great for their reputation.

In reply to KingStapo: Whats caused this one then? Doesnt look like the same battery issue as the scorch marks were around the bottom of the tail at the leading edge. APU intake fire?

In reply to drunken monkey:

Are there not a a few different battery locations, front and rear?

To be honest my money's on something in-related to batteries, but it's defo a PR disaster for Boeing!

In reply to KingStapo: Doesnt look like the fire was in the correct location according to boeing website.

A lot of airliners have the APU intake in that area. Unless it was a problem in the galley perhaps. Severely burnt toast!

http://787updates.newairplane.com/787-Electrical-Systems/Batteries-and-Adva...

In reply to KingStapo:

Guess what, kids?

Nothing to do with the batteries.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23302722

In reply to stewieatb:

Thanks, but it's hardly a burning issue. Do you think there'll be any direct charges in this case? Any leads? Connections with other cases?

In reply to KingStapo:

Or is there perhaps competitors, finding, exaggerating , and feeding bad press to the Mail , and others.

In reply to abseil: Not sure but it'll be an electrifying bit of news when we find out.

In reply to Jim C:

Dunno about that. Heathrow being shut is pretty major. Needing to call fire crews out, airlines losing wads of cash due to delays/groundings and passengers being unwilling to fly on the thing.

Its a pity as I love the idea of travelling on a 787; the big windows, humidified environment, lighting and cabin pressure would seem to add immensely to the comfort.

In reply to drunken monkey:

The APU is aft of the rear pressure bulkhead and is contained in a fire resistant compartment. The Intake is also in this area know as the empenage. If there was any fire related to this it would be extinguished by the apu's fire bottle.

In reply to chris fox: Burnt toast then!