Problem found in Japan Airlines 787 jet: NHK

It seems like the Boeing crews did a shoddy job of "fixing" the problem. Apparently, they left a piece of tape over a couple of holes of the battery case, disrupting the sensor. Last time it was a failure to tighten a screw, causing "burning." What will it be next time?

I guess this is what one should expect when you take the decision to resume commercial flight "A.S.A.P* (sooner than original planned schedule). Despite the "did not endanger safety" report made by who ? "the closed office on week-end not available for comment" ? I will continue to think that a sensor broken or malfunctioning related to some piece of equipment that could ignite a fire is not to be considered lightly.

Classic! So the ultimate solution to the battery problem is to throw away any indication they have a problem? I hope they are checking all the sensors in the other 787s, but it's more likely less 'checking' than 'hiding and hoping'.

As for 'not endangering safety', I'm sorry but if you have a switch which won't indicate overheating of batteries that have proven to be faulty in the past and nearly cause fires, that's endangering safety.

No, Jeff Lee has it right: The Boeing maintenance crew unbelievably forgot to remove the tape covering the sensor, which made the sensor indicate there was a problem when there really wasn't one. It was a case of the sensor giving a false alarm; it was NOT a case where the sensor was taped up to prevent any sort of warning whatsoever.

a sensor is just like a light bulb.

a sensor is just like a light bulb.

A sensor is a piece of hardware which vary voltage based on analog inputs signal - I can imagine probably sensing the temperature inside the case in this present situation - try to sense the temperature with a light bulb.

I have to believe Boeing will, before very long, replace the lithium ion batteries with lead-acid. At least until they get a real handle on this problem. It's the only way people are going to have any trust in this aircraft.

Umm, weren't JAL and ANA the ones performing the modifications/installations on their planes - with only a few Boeing techs available for consultation if necessary? Doesn't this mean JAL was the one who goofed?

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_04_22_2013_p0-571748.xml