Despite talk of progress, investigators still don't know what
caused the dangerous Dreamliner mishaps.
As the probe of burning batteries aboard Boeing Co.'s (BA) 787
jets stretches into its second month, an international team of
air-accident sleuths remains stumped about the underlying cause,
according to people familiar with the details. This has fueled
pessimism about how quickly the planes can resume flying.
Investigative activity remains intense, and a breakthrough could
still come. But in the past few days, industry and government
officials familiar with the probes on both sides of the Pacific
have stressed the lack of progress. At a recent Department of
Transportation briefing, according to one of these officials,
government experts acknowledged "they may not be any closer to
identifying root cause than they were" at the start of the National
Transportation Safety Board's high-profile investigation.
After painstakingly dissecting a number of batteries, examining
associated electronic parts, and analyzing information from
flight-data records, NTSB experts and their Japanese counterparts
haven't been able to pinpoint any specific component, automated
subsystem or software application that appears to offer hope of
finding answers.
With no apparent, clear-cut theory, investigators are now
delving into additional parts of the plane's electrical grid. They
also are seeking help from technical experts outside the aviation
industry, including scientists and electronics engineers from the
U.S. Navy and Department of Energy.
The initial probe began Jan. 7, after a lithium-ion battery
aboard a Japan Airlines Co. (9201.TO) 787 parked at Boston's Logan
International Airport ruptured and burst into flames. Nine days
later, an All Nippon Airways Co. (9202.TO) Dreamliner on a domestic
flight made an emergency landing and evacuation due to an
overheating battery, prompting swift world-wide grounding of
Boeing's flagship jets.
Initially, some involved with the investigation hoped finding a
solution might take mere days. Now airlines and others are bracing
for a delay that could stretch additional weeks, or even months.
Barring a breakthrough, some pessimists predict that designing and
installing a new battery system could take as long as a year.
United Continental Holdings Inc. (UAL) has slotted in other
planes for its 787 routes through late February, and Japan Airlines
has postponed the start--originally scheduled for the end of this
month--of a new Tokyo-to-Helsinki route using the Dreamliner.
A spokeswoman for NTSB on Friday said "our investigators are
moving swiftly and we are making progress," but she declined to
elaborate. The Federal Aviation Administration's press office also
declined to comment.
The NTSB has said it found short-circuits and evidence of
uncontrolled overheating inside the fire-ravaged battery of the
Japan Airlines 787. But what they still can't decipher is cause and
effect.
"The short circuit, the fire, these are all symptoms that
something is wrong," Deborah Hersman, the safety board's chairman,
told reporters late last month. "These events should not happen as
far as [the] design of the airplane."
Boeing has assigned hundreds of its own technical staff to work
with the loosely coordinated U.S. and Japanese probes. The
company's efforts using simulators to recreate battery-system
malfunctions on the ground haven't provided significant new leads,
according to one person close to the effort. Analysis of battery
operating trends before the planes were grounded hasn't yielded
major findings either, according to others closely tracking that
data.
Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel says the company is "working around
the clock with the sole focus of resolving the issue and returning
the 787 fleet to flight status. Everyone is working to get to the
answer as quickly as possible and good progress is being made."
Boeing Chief Executive Jim McNerney said last week that hundreds
of experts are narrowing down possible explanations but haven't
found a root cause. "When we know the answer," he said, "then we'll
act on it."
Meanwhile, the Chicago plane maker is mulling potential
contingency plans, according to people familiar with those options.
One possible interim fix Boeing engineers have considered would
place the 63-pound battery inside a containment box that would both
protect nearby equipment and vent smoke overboard in the event of a
failure, according to one person familiar with the proposal.
Boeing faces an uphill battle to get such a system approved,
however, because federal investigators have sketched out a
zero-tolerance approach when it comes to aircraft fires. So far,
FAA officials have balked at engaging in any detailed discussions
of potential interim fixes, according to people familiar with the
matter, until experts succeed in recreating battery malfunctions
under laboratory conditions.
The FAA appears poised to approve some flight tests, after a
Boeing request emphasizing that there hasn't been a breakthrough
from ground testing, according to people familiar with the
request.
If the probes linger and pressure builds to get the planes back
in the air, regulatory precedent could work in Boeing's favor. FAA
safety rules account for fan blades of a jet engine possibly
failing under extremely rare circumstances, but the casing that
surrounds the front of the engine must contain all internal parts
that break off without damaging the rest of the aircraft.
Write to Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com and Jon Ostrower
at jon.ostrower@wsj.com
Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires
