tech

FAA warns Boeing 787 bug could shut off aircraft power

30 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

30 Comments
Login to comment

I really don't want to fly in a 787.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Okay, important safety tip.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The beta version lemon liner is back in the news with a new bug :)

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

and the "anything American-hating Euros" like ebisen somehow get enjoyment out of a non-incident brought to our attention by.... Boeing.

With the successful proliferation of the 787s all around the world, its very possible ebisen has enjoyed a flight on one already, and inevitable that he will in the near future. (I don't need a smiley face to complete this sentence, Im over the age of 13)

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

"anything American-hating Euros"

The controversy of the plane is clearly not limited to Europe. In America, aerospace workers and machinists raised questions from way back on the outsourcing of the plane's production, including to foreign companies like Yuasa that had no experience supplying components that went into the 787 (and which later failed).

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Is it 284 days or 248 days? Both are mentioned above so let's hope they know which one it is!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Better late than never.....

1 ( +1 / -0 )

the if "its not Boeing im not going" phrase is looking a little shaky about now, might be time to take that Airbus

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

It seems like a pretty stupid programming mistake or is it that the programmers don't really know how the planes operate, or the significance of the counter going into error or doesn't the programmer consider that error handling should be better than just shutting something down. Did the same guy work on windows 95, it had a similar bug. Maybe its an outsourcing problem.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

No airplane in the fleet experienced that condition.

No nuclear power plant in the fleet experienced that condition.

No AVE in the fleet experienced that condition.

No Comet in the fleet experienced that condition.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Perhaps someone can explain this to me as I don't fully understand the situation; I assume that the 787 has two main engines which drive generators plus the APU which provides power when the main engines are shut down. Surely neither the main engines or the APU will run continuously for 284/248 days?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'd rather fly in a WW2 era Dakota with a one-eyed pilot and a dog for a co-pilot than fly in a 787. All of these bugs should have been ironed out in the prototype phase, not wait until production aircraft start acting up.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Thunderbird2: Been trying to post a comment that agrees with you and why I think this is a modern problem with all sorts of mass produced products (ship before testing, let the first users be the lab rats), but apparently it is "potentially offensive" despite one containing a single offensive thing. I went through and tried to change almost every word, but not worth the effort.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I'd rather fly in a WW2 era Dakota with a one-eyed pilot and a dog for a co-pilot than fly in a 787. All of these bugs should have been ironed out in the prototype phase, not wait until production aircraft start acting up.

I guess all those crashes (0) since it entered service 4 years ago have put you off eh?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Oh whippee. Boeing identifies a highly unlikely risk in a lab environment and promptly takes action to address. What about all the post-production issues Airbus has had with electrical faults, control failures, metal cracks etc etc which it has similarly had to address? I'd still fly Boeing over Airbus given the choice.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

clamenza: "I guess all those crashes (0) since it entered service 4 years ago have put you off eh?"

How many flights were forced to land due to batteries catching on fire and/or other malfunctions again? They needn't have crashed to make the point that they should have been tested completely BEFORE being mass shipped. It could have, however, just as easily happened while at more than 10,000 ft. and resulted in a serious accident instead of just costing all the companies an arm and a leg in groundings.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Any new plane will have bugs. Anything complex software. The next new Airbus, whenever it may be, will have them too. That's why there are updates.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

smith - thats the nature of a new aircraft. Airbus has, and will have them, too.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Clamenza, you're totally wrong in all your assumptions. I've been forced to fly on a787 and it was a very eerie feeling, trust me. Jefflee, document yourself before hitting GSYuasa. Guess which company makes almost all the LiIon cells flown in space and on military aircraft? If you guessed Yuasa you were right. And for your education, before the 787 troubles, Yuasa aerospace batteries had no troubles whatsoever, with hundreds of millions of combined hours flown...so yeah, the system in which the Yuasa components were used was produced by Thales and certified by guess who? BOEING!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Clamenza, you're totally wrong in all your assumptions. I've been forced to fly on a787 and it was a very eerie feeling, trust me.

Oh, I believe you, ebisen.

Once while flying in an A330, I had the "willies". This can only confirm that the plane was not in proper working order and I thank god to this day that I made it to my destination alive.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

@clam ther most terrifying flight Ive been on was a Boeing, coming to land at Kansai just before a typhoon hit, it was daylight visibility was minimal due to the heavy rain, but the turbulance was terrifying, sudden drops, big drops every 20-30seconds or so. there wasnt a person on that plane that wasnt crapping themselves. women crying, guy beside me was actually praying. when we eventually touched down everybody applauded. captain came on the pa and apologised for the rought flight and even his voice was a little shaken. 5 minutes later they closed the airport.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Beta programs, yes. Beta airplanes, no.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Dreamliner's computers need a rest? How ironic.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Boeing 10 years ago dumbed down there employees in a effort to save money and turned more to the computer generation for all aspects of business, this has followed threw with there planes operations and that whole mind set is the problem. They need plane people not just computer people.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Perhaps someone can explain this to me as I don't fully understand the situation; I assume that the 787 has two main engines which drive generators plus the APU which provides power when the main engines are shut down. Surely neither the main engines or the APU will run continuously for 284/248 days?

Commercial aircraft are rarely taken all the way to the "cold and dark" condition unless they're taken off the schedule for maintenance. The first flight crew into the cockpit in the morning is usually staring at a plane still powered up, electrically, from the previous flight. While the generators in the engines aren't running, the electronics (including, presumably, the counters) have been on continuously via "ground power" - a cable from the terminal or from a wheeled generator parked near the front of the plane. While it can be used to power the plane's electronics if no ground power is available, the APU is generally used only during engine start-up (it provides the "bleed-air" that starts turning the turbines) and during the critical phases of flight (takeoffs and landings) for "back-up" power generation in case of a main engine failure.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Harry_Gatto ... and besides Fadamor's comment, even assuming the maintenance staff is going to shut off the systems every 120 days, there still remains a path in the code that allows all the power units to automatically go to sleep all at the same time "regardless of flight phase". That's why this off/on procedure is only meant to reduce the "immediate danger". It might not be easy to prove that the only event leading to this software path is the counter overflow reported in the article. It is also quite hazardous to assume that no unexpected situation will ever generate the overflow condition, or (mis)lead the system into detecting an overflow condition even when the objective conditions leading to the overflow under normal circumstances are not fulfilled. In a few words, what really needs to be done to fix the issue is to eliminate the possibility of such an outcome.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

By coincidence, I will be flying on a 787 to Japan tomorrow. Not worried in the slightest.

Many of you seem to be nervous Nellies...there is a bigger chance of expiring in a car crash than a 787 crash (and there have been, let me see..zero, repeat zero deaths on 787's)

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I guess all those crashes (0) since it entered service 4 years ago have put you off eh? im guessing theyve been lucky so far, smoke in the cabin (Swissair Flight 111), and power outings have brought planes now on many occassions in the past

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It is also quite hazardous to assume that no unexpected situation will ever generate the overflow condition, or (mis)lead the system into detecting an overflow condition even when the objective conditions leading to the overflow under normal circumstances are not fulfilled. In a few words, what really needs to be done to fix the issue is to eliminate the possibility of such an outcome.

The software code causing this bug should be relatively easy to fix. What will probably take much MORE time is getting the updated software installed on the planes already flying. Do they have torrent servers on 787's? ;-)

2 ( +2 / -0 )

A 31-bit counter, incremented 100 times a second, overflows after 248 days 10.76 hours.

Should have used a longer counter.

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