This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/business/boeing-to-propose-battery-fixes-to-faa.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Boeing to Propose Battery Fixes to F.A.A. Boeing to Propose Redesign of 787 Battery to F.A.A.
(about 1 hour later)
A top Boeing executive plans to meet with the head of the Federal Aviation Administration on Friday to propose fixes for the battery problems that have grounded its innovative 787 jets, industry and government officials said Wednesday. Boeing has developed possible fixes for the battery problems in its grounded 787 jets and could have them back in the air within two months, industry and federal officials said Wednesday.
The officials said the company feels confident that it has narrowed down the possible ways that the lithium-ion batteries could fail, increasing the chances that a handful of changes might provide enough assurance that the batteries would be safe to use. The officials said Boeing has narrowed down the ways the lithium-ion batteries on the jetliners could fail, and believes that adding insulation between the cells of the batteries and making other changes would provide enough assurance that they would be safe to use.
The F.A.A.’s top official, Michael P. Huerta, is not expected to approve the changes on Friday when he is scheduled to meet with Raymond L. Conner, the president of Boeing’s commercial airplane division. But the meeting could start a high-level discussion and provide Boeing with early guidance on the mix of changes that would be needed to get the planes flying again. Raymond L. Conner, the president of Boeing’s commercial airplane division, plans to propose the fixes in a Friday meeting with Michael P. Huerta, the head of the Federal Aviation Administration. Mr. Huerta is not expected to approve the changes immediately, but the meeting is likely to start a high-level discussion on the standards Boeing needs to meet as it tests the fixes and seeks to get the planes flying again.
The government and industry officials agreed that Boeing will have to redesign at least part of the batteries to eliminate the risk that a short-circuit or fire in one of the eight cells inside could spread to the others, as investigators have said occurred on a battery that caught fire at Logan International Airport in Boston on Jan. 7. Boeing’s plan could be a pivotal moment in the history of the innovative fuel-efficient planes. Mr. Huerta and regulators around the world grounded the planes in mid-January after a battery caught fire on one jet parked at the Boston airport and smoke forced another 787 to make an emergency landing in Japan.
One important question is how far Boeing will have to go in making the changes before the F.A.A. will let airlines resume flights with the 50 jets that have already been delivered. Investigators have not determined what caused those problems. But Boeing’s engineers have worked closely with the F.A.A. and outside experts to identify ways in which the batteries could have failed, and Boeing is now asking the government to sign off on a calculation that they have now come up with a safer design.
The officials said Boeing might have to take some immediate steps to insulate the cells from one another and then make greater changes over time to further eliminate possible ways that the batteries could fail. Given the risks in moving ahead, federal officials said, the F.A.A. has insisted behind the scenes that Boeing needed to come up with changes to prevent failures at the same time as it proposed further steps to wall off problems with the batteries and vent any smoke or fire outside the planes.
Boeing, based in Chicago, also would have to wall off the battery within a sturdier metal container, add systems to monitor the activity inside each cell and create channels to vent any hazardous materials outside the plane. Boeing officials said they had also hoped to make all the fixes at once rather than dividing them into temporary and longer-term changes. By delaying some changes, Boeing could have been exposed to more problems.
Until now, most of the public statements by regulators have focused on the need to pin down the cause of the battery problems. But investigators, now weeks into their work, have been able to find only limited clues in the charred remains of the battery in Boston and a second one on a jet that made an emergency landing in Japan on Jan. 16 with smoke arising in the battery compartment. As a result, one big change under Boeing’s plan would be to redesign the batteries to place insulation inside and around each of the eight cells to minimize the risk that a short circuit or fire in one of the cells could spread to the others, as investigators have said occurred on the battery that caught fire in Boston on Jan. 7. Boeing might also adjust how tightly the batteries are packed.
As a result, government and outside experts, working closely with Boeing engineers, have been studying the recent problems and research on lithium-ion batteries carried out since Boeing won approval for its batteries in 2007 and, in essence, trying to come up with a safer design. Boeing would make other changes within the batteries to reduce the chance that vibrations, swelling or moisture could cause problems, industry officials said. Boeing has already been testing some of the changes. The plane maker believes it could rebuild the batteries by next month on the 50 jets that have been delivered to airlines. But federal officials are likely to move more slowly and demand more tests and assurances, and the final decision could rest with Mr. Huerta’s supervisors at the Transportation Department.
Aviation experts said the examination of such changes reflected what could end up being a difficult calculation for safety regulators: Will there be a way to ensure the safety of the batteries if they cannot tell for certain what set off the problems on the two planes? Federal officials said that if the fixes check out, the jets could start flying again by April. Boeing will also have to win back the confidence of the flying public.
The F.A.A. and other regulators around the world grounded the new fuel-efficient planes after the two incidents last month. Besides taking more steps to prevent short circuits from occurring, Boeing’s plan would enclose the battery within a sturdier metal container and create tubes to vent any hazardous materials outside the plane. It would add systems to monitor the activity inside each cell instead of just the battery as a whole.
Industry officials said there is enough space in the electronics bay to expand the container and add the vent tubes.
Until now, regulators have focused on the need to pin down the cause of the battery problems. But investigators, now weeks into their work, have been able to find only limited clues in the charred remains of the batteries in the Boston and Japan incidents.
The lithium-ion batteries weigh less but provide more energy than conventional batteries, and the 787s make greater use of them than other planes. The stakes are substantial for Boeing, which will have to pay penalties to some of the airlines that have been unable to use them. Boeing also cannot deliver more of the planes while they are grounded.The lithium-ion batteries weigh less but provide more energy than conventional batteries, and the 787s make greater use of them than other planes. The stakes are substantial for Boeing, which will have to pay penalties to some of the airlines that have been unable to use them. Boeing also cannot deliver more of the planes while they are grounded.
The company has orders for 800 additional planes, which are expected to usher in a new era in aviation. The jets rely as well on lightweight carbon composites and new engines to cut fuel consumption by 20 percent. The company has orders for 800 additional planes. The jets rely as well on lightweight carbon composites and more efficient engines.
Federal and industry officials said Boeing would probably have to spread the eight cells in the batteries farther apart — or increase the insulation between them — to keep a failure in one cell from cascading to the others in the “thermal runaway” that led to the smoke and fire. Boeing awarded the contract for the batteries to GS Yuasa, a Japanese firm, in 2005, and it won approval from the F.A.A. to use the batteries in 2007. Concerned about fires with smaller lithium-ion batteries in cellphones and laptops, the agency placed special conditions on Boeing’s use of the batteries that required containment and venting measures that have proved inadequate.
Battery experts are also looking into whether vibrations in flight could have added to the risks of unwanted contact between the cells. Advances in research have contributed to a better understanding of the risks since then. But Boeing, which was consumed with problems with other parts that delayed the introduction of the 787s by several years, did not significantly update the battery designs before it began delivering the planes in 2011. So Boeing’s plan to fix the problems also amounts to a belated incorporation of what has been learned about how to handle the risks.
But it is not clear how long it will take to make each of these changes and test them to the satisfaction of regulators. So engineers for the F.A.A. and Boeing have been discussing which changes would have to be made immediately and which ones could be added later.
Government and industry officials said that it was still too early to know if Boeing’s current plans would satisfy regulators and the flying public.