Japan Today
national

Overheating JAL Dreamliner battery hit 660 Celsius

15 Comments

The Japanese government said on Friday the battery in a Dreamliner jet that spewed white smoke last month could have reached temperatures as high as 660 degrees Celsius (1,220 Fahrenheit).

The figure came in an report released by the transport ministry after Japan Airlines (JAL) grounded one of its Dreamliner planes when the smoke was seen outside the cockpit window during maintenance at Tokyo's Narita airport.

It was the latest in a series of problems that have beset the aircraft, including a months-long global grounding over battery problems last year.

According to the report, one of the eight lithium-ion cells in the plane's battery system "swelled and electrolytic solution was sprayed" out of the battery, a ministry official said.

An image released by the ministry showed some blackened electrolyte solution coming from one of the safety valves.

"We estimate that temperatures inside the cell possibly reached 660 Celsius as the aluminium electrode melted," the official said.

It is still unknown what actually caused the overheating, the official said, adding that the ministry would continue investigating the case with the help of Boeing.

The US aviation giant admitted last April that despite months of testing it did not know the root cause of the battery problems, but rolled out modifications it said would ensure the issue did not recur.

The measures comprised redesigning the battery and charger system and adding a steel box to prevent burning.

Since then, Dreamliners have experienced a series of minor glitches, including a fault with an air pressure sensor and the brake system.

© (c) 2014 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

15 Comments
Login to comment

"The US aviation giant admitted last April that despite months of testing it did not know the root cause of the battery problems, but rolled out modifications it said would ensure the issue did not recur."

So, they don't know what the problem could be, but can ensure it won't happen again after happening again and again?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

No other airline that operates the 787 Dreamliner has announced any further problems. I am beginning to think it is the JAL maintenance crews are not properly trained.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

HawaiiVisitorFeb. 22, 2014 - 09:14AM JST

No other airline that operates the 787 Dreamliner has announced any further problems. I am beginning to think it is the JAL maintenance crews are not properly trained.

not true, other airlines have reported problems, really dont want to fly on air canada with them, nothing but ocean........

2 ( +5 / -3 )

@Joeintokyo

"aren't the batteries made by a Japanese company, Yuasa?"

I have said dozen times already but will say it again. Yuasa can only test the product by itself. But final testing has to be done using the entire airplane, which only Boeing can do. And they keep failing to find the reasons or how to stop it.

Boeing is responsible for making sure everything works. Funny how Americans love blaming everything on everybody else but never themselves

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

JAL Dreamliner battery hit 660 Celsius

660C? Boiling Boeing ! Boeing should switch its business and start making boilers !

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@Joeintokyo

Defective product ? I wonder who gave Yuasa the specifications ?

And Boeing should have gone with a different supplier ?

What kind of specifications would they give to the new supplier ? They have admitted they still don't know who to fix the problem How does choosing a different supplier solve the problem ?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Only JAL and ANA seem to have BATTERY related problems. Other airlines have had other problems but not battery problems.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Hide Suzuki

Boeing is responsible for making sure everything works. Funny how Americans love blaming everything on everybody else but never themselves

I think you're projecting...(cough Japan cough). Americans don't tend to blame others for their problems.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Let's face it, if they can lock the reason down to a bad battery from a subcontractor, we'd already be hearing about it.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"some commenters long ago decided that Yuasa is to blame for these mishaps."

The fact that this is Yuasa's first attempt at a such a battery for aviation is a big contributing factor, as well as the politically orchestrated collusion in the divvying up of supplier contracts in Japan for this craft.

"In the court of Japan Today, where glib, easy judgements can be (and frequently are) handed down"

Hello, our early suspicions were proven correct by real subsequent events. The problems didn't go away, as we predicted. Our assessments have been more on the mark than Boeing's. Check the archive if you don't believe me.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The more electric current was streaming in/out from battery the hotter (stress) environment inside battery. They should reduce connecting devices and usage on single battery unit. They must reduce workload of each battery.

I don't think GS Yuasa products are faulty or malfunction but in fact the Plane was using power more than it capability. I believe if they reduce electric current streaming from battery and then battery will get less stress and can resist melting cells in battery.

Otherwise, Boeing should change battery type for sake of passengers’ safety.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites