Airbus is reverting to tried and tested nickel cadmium batteries for its A350 XWB family, following Boeing’s problems with lithium ion technology on the 787. (atwonline.com) More...
Encore ! my friend . Well said . With this kind of brain waves , we may land , may be in a few decades , back into stone ages . With no inflation or wars ! ha , ha .
It has to be costing Boeing a large fortune to test the Li batteries and charging systems while keeping the 78s grounded. Why can't they retrofit the grounded aircraft with the tried and true NiCads and get the grounded aircraft back in service. Would they have to reapply for new certification just to change the battery type to a proven design
They'd have to apply for a new certificate (Nicad), sure, but it could be a quick certification.The problem is can the NiCads deliver the huge power requirement of the B78 (over 1400)?
I'm sure there are some reasons to use LI power storage. I assumed that they settled on Li for the even power discharge they offer. Batteries are a mystery to me and beyond my current understanding whether they are lead-acid, gel, NiCad or LI. They all have a little different charging equipment requirement, but they all share the the fact that if wired in series they increase circuit voltage while wired in parallel the amperage is increased giving the power you're talking about. I would think that NiCads could supply the power storage, given enough of them in a gang, but I'm also confident they can solve the fire hazard problem and they would only be substituted temporarily until the LI is made safe. Meanwhile, I also have to assume that owners of grounded 78s will look to Boeing for restitution of huge costs for loss of use and "warrantee for particular use". (No. I'm Not)
Quick certification ? I doubt . What if the cause in NOT the batteries but elsewhere . In the electrical and/or control system of the aircraft ? But , you may be right considering how myopic people in authority can be !
Right U are my friend . But what about the fate of makers of these batteries ? And about the future of Li-ion batteries in general ? We can not just discard them . Can we ? Development occurs through learning from mistakes . Or though insufficient out put or results as planned . Whether for a product or for services . No ?
I'm no engineer and know little about batteries other than what I've learned by using them. I'm told that the discharge characteristics of Li batteries are more akin to the old deep cycle lead acid battery used primarily in marine applications. I've never seen the schematics of an "airliner" but, the battery demands seem very similar to a marine application in that, they are used more for the even power draw of the avionics then for starting, making LI battery storage ideal. Disposal is always an issue. I'm told that LI batteries can't be disposed of in any state but I have no confirmation of that. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at Boeing or wherever they are researching the short circuit and fire problem. I'm sure it's solvable, but they are not talking about the causes. LI batteries are being used in all sorts of rechargeable devices from cell phones to lawn tools and now aircraft. This is the first I've heard of a fire risk.
Why risk it? This way, they have plenty of time to make sure the Li batteries work, while having a proven and reliable option at launch. Since they've begun development and testing and approvals on the Li battery, it'll be relatively easy for them to offer it as a post-launch option.
Bet they're keeping the Li battery technology in their hip pocket to see what comes of the Boeing situation, while announcing this change as much for the PR advantage for now.
While that may be true, what is the cost of insurance associated with the risk? I am sure they can find 7.5 gallons of water to eliminate to compensate for the added weight of safer batteries.
Um, if that plane gets seats for people to sit in, it will be full of Li batteries - being used - anyway... the traveling public isn't going back to NiCd....
Wednesday 02-20. I read in a article from AP this morning that ANA may have stumbled on to the problem. If they are right it seems a gang of batteries was wire in wrong. Maybe we need one more computer on board
If one were to examine the types of cells being used on the aircraft versus what most electronics have, you will notice a difference in package type and size. Yes, the electrolyte is the same (flammable). Size alone dictates that a laptop or small device will explode on short circuit, and has the potential of the same temperature, said device however can be easily disposed of. It is not the same as something the size of an aircraft battery.
For all the right reasons, I believe Airbus did make a correct choice.
I read an article about that too. I find it really hard to believe it takes this long to figure out the batteries are mis-wired. Isn't that where you start with an electrical problem?
Good gravy. How can you talk about massive power needs one day and then compare it to cell phone power the next? I really hope you're not serious, but there is no way to tell. Big power big heat. My cell phone hasn't burned me yet never mind caught fire. 250 cell phones won't generate enough heat to warm the cabin. As long as the companies don't provide charging power they should be safe from mid air cell phone explosions and fires. If you were kidding then LOL :-)
Only if you apply KISS theory. From what I've been reading "they" ll assumed either the battery holders were too close or the cells had to be redesigned to add space. Somebody over at ANA noticed the lights flickering strangely in a video, I guess. There was scant information , so a lot of assumptions have to be made.
I seem to remember lots of cars burning up from laptop batteries. I think that has all past. This battery thing must be very serious to be where we are today. A lot of time has passed and far as I know the planes are still hugging the earth. I wish Boeing the best.
No LI-Ion batteries, no bleedless engines, in one word an aircraft which claims to be ahead but actually out of date. Frenchies are better in cheese manufacturing. When i book a ticket i always avoid flight operated with an Airbus, everybody in US should do the same.
Airbus announced it would change plans and not use lithium-ion batteries in its forthcoming A350 airplane. The move follows weeks of uncertainty during which the Boeing 787 Dreamliner has remained grounded after the batteries apparently caused fires in the aircraft.
