Heathrow fire: Ethiopia Dreamliner fleet to stay flying

BBC ^ | 13 July 2013 Last updated at 08:53 ET

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Smoke was detected from the aircraft after it had been parked at Heathrow for more than eight hours

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Dreamliner catches fire at Heathrow

• Boeing shares fall after 787 fire

• Dreamliner flights resume after problems

Ethiopian Airlines says it is to continue operating its fleet of Boeing 787 Dreamliners after one caught fire at London's Heathrow airport on Friday.

Investigators are trying to find the cause of the blaze, which took place months after the aircraft was grounded worldwide over a battery problem.

Heathrow's runways were closed for 90 minutes on Friday, and some evening flights delayed by more than six hours.

Ethiopian Airlines took delivery of four Dreamliners in 2012.

The company said its plane had been parked at Heathrow for eight hours before smoke was spotted.

"We have not grounded any of our aircraft," the carrier said in a statement.

"The incident at Heathrow happened while the plane was on the ground... and was not related to flight safety."

The Dreamliner has been moved to a special hangar away from the terminals to allow the investigation to take place.

[BwanaNdege]

Airbus temp employee smoking in the lavatory?

[Gay State Conservative]

Boeing had better get this aircraft sorted out...soon.And completely.Otherwise one of the only US companies left that commands respect and makes money could be in *very* serious trouble.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Careful investigations take some time....and it is a very new aircraft.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Airworthiness Directive, AD, for 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–200F, 747–300, 747–400, 747– 400D, 747–400F, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes; Model 767–200, –300, –300F, and –400ER series airplanes; and Model 777–200, –200LR, –300, and –300ER series airplanes dated 9 July 2013.

When is Boeing going to get these aircraft sorted out?

[citizen]

I rarely fly but I would not book on a 787.

[catnipman]

They probably quickly realized some ground crew employee was cooking goat in the back and the cooking fire got away from him, and it was likely that wasn’t Boeing’s fault.

Take away lesson? Issue instructions to the rest of their employees to be more careful with their cooking fires and the rest of the fleet should just be fine to continue flying.

[Robe]

More likely a International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers sapper...

[Born to Conserve]

Old airline commercial with first class and steerage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yulxnzAsWEM

[deoetdoctrinae]

Would you like the fish or the chicken?

[volunbeer]

Did’nt they proclaim the new batteries were more environmentally friendly? I get that better mileage is good for the customer and the environment, but I know there are many “green” things that are put into service before they are ready for prime time - hope this is not one of them!

Just my .02.

[fireman15]

My next door neighbor is an engineer who works for the FAA. He worked for Boeing to begin with and there is nothing that gives him more joy than making them jump through hoops. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have some role in the AD you have cited. Of course it affects urethane foam that has become less fire retardant over time and has nothing to do with the 787.

We own a small airplane as well and often ADs are almost completely nonsensical. The manufacturers used to fight the stupid ones, but not these days. We had one issued a year or so ago because they found that two planes in the 1970s had some lock washers or something installed “backwards” during manufacture. Forgive my ignorance on the details. There were no incidents resulting from the “problem”. The FAA ordered nearly every other airplane from that manufacturer over a 20 year period disassembled and inspected.

Never mind that pulling apart assemblies that have been working fine for over 40 years was difficult, expensive and resulted in the destruction of equipment that were presented only a theoretical safety problem... something akin to preventing global warming. The aviation community has gotten quite used to government over regulation mostly by bureaucrats that appear to be working mostly to preserve their own job security.

The effect has been to stimey true progress on general aviation airplanes for decades. The 40 year old engine in our airplane is almost identical to the engines put in airplanes today, and it was 30 year old technology when it was manufactured. The only bright spot is "experimental aircraft" where tinkerers are still allowed to fly their own creations, but even good ideas from that area are generally not allowed to make there way into general use.

[RedMDer]

Freepers, your Contributions make every difference!
Please keep ‘em coming! Thank you all very much!

[null and void]

Ah yes, I had the lasagna...

[A.A. Cunningham]

has nothing to do with the 787.

I'm well aware of that.

[Cyman]

Someone got caught roasting a goat.

[deoetdoctrinae]

LOL

[batterycommander]

I once got onto a C-47 in Korea that was flying to one of the outer islands and there were goats and other critters on it, as well as kimchi.

[Gay State Conservative]

And where's the compendium of reports on Airbus products? Perhaps you'd start with the A380,a nice aircraft to be sure (I've flown it once,Dubai->JFK non-stop) but one that after about 2 years in service is already showing cracks in the airframe.And then there's the near catastrophe caused by an A380 engine *exploding* somewhere over Indonesia.

If,by chance,you work for Airbus just let us know and we'll understand your concentration on Boeing.

[PAR35]

Aren’t battery fires on parked 787s a known problem?