It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FAA mandates 787s be turned off every so often

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
The FAA has issued an Airworthiness Directive to all 787 operators that they power the aircraft down no fewer than once every three weeks. A situation has been found where if the aircraft is left continuously powered up for 22 days, all three flight control computers can simultaneously reset, resulting in a condition where the flight controls stop responding to input. It's extremely rare for any airline to leave an aircraft powered on for longer than 7 days. The directive covers 99 aircraft registered in the US, although foreign regulators typically follow the FAAs lead on these matters. There are currently 489 787s delivered, and 500 have been built.


The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is issuing a rule requiring urgent attention by operators of Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner to avoid the possibility all three computer modules that manage the jet’s flight-control surfaces could briefly stop working while in flight.

Operators must periodically shut and restart the electrical power on the planes, or the power to the three flight control modules. That will avoid the problem until Boeing has a permanent software fix.

In an airworthiness directive to be published Friday, the FAA said it is reacting to indications that “all three flight control modules on the 787 might simultaneously reset if continuously powered on for 22 days.”

www.seattletimes.com...




posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Wow. Would that likely be some goofy coding logic in the firmware? Seems odd to take until he 2nd quarter of 2017 for a fix, and even odder to have a value of 22 days as some internal threshold in the software.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: peter_kandra

It's not being seen as a high priority software fix right now, just because it's so incredibly rare for any aircraft to be powered up for longer than a week or so. The AD is more of a "Hey, if you leave it on, this will eventually happen" type AD, rather than an immediate action noticed, that some are.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Does it run on windows?

There should build in a reboot script that can be run while the aircraft is being maintained or something.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

Ha! No kidding. I was going to make the same quip! We had a windows print server up for over a year when one day it crashed. Managers were freaking out and when it came back up the server monkey got in and said it was up for 380+ days! They were amazed it lasted that long as MS says to reboot every 30 days to prevent crashes!

 


So they probably use some custom coded back end. Usually the garbage collection and such maintenance is the last thing on the list and the first to rear its ugly head. The same thing happened on the Mars rover. They were able to update the system code, verify it on the one on Earth, then upload the new version to the rover before it got to Mars. A reboot only fixes the immediate issue. A permanent solution is required.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Why would a plane ever be running for 22 consecutive days? Seems a bit excessive.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

There shouldn't be any. The only remotely possible reason would be that it was doing so well they scheduled the flights back to back to back with no down time between them. Which would be the first time ever.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Those times start by the looks of it get to the 64 bit boundaries and could thus depending on signed/unsigned cause all sorts of things when you can flip from +something to a mega negative number.

Probably theres an unsigned number converted to a signed one at some point and at that point all digital hell comes true.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   
An AD must be complied with or the aircraft is no longer airworthy and would be illegal to fly. I'd say every AD is an urgent one.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: CaptainCraig

I wouldn't. An urgent AD would be one requiring an immediate action, such as for the 777 window heaters, or the 747 cargo door after United 811. An AD just saying you have to turn the plane off every three weeks is more of an informational AD than one that requires immediate action.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 05:50 PM
link   
That's going to be a pain in the ass to track and see when and where and by whom each time the AD has been complied with.

Capt Joe Blow turns off Master switch, does he have to log that? And where?

Capt Joe Smoe comes on deck, needs to see if that AD has been complied with before pushback, how does he prove its been done?

BTW, flying any aircraft with an AD not complied with, is an FAA violation and emmediate termination of PIC (pilot in commands ticket) until investigation is over.
edit on 2-12-2016 by 38181 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: 38181

The most likely time the aircraft will be turned off, will be sitting overnight between flights when maintenance will be on board doing any checks. Maintenance comes on, checks everything over, signs off the logbook that they powered it down. When it's ready to go, they power it back up.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Every AD requires an action. The point is they are all very important if you want to fly it.

But in the grand scheme of things, it's not too hard to unplug it and plug it back in again every once and awhile.



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: CaptainCraig

I didn't say they didn't. But there are AD's that require immediate action, and AD's that require action but are more for informational purposes than for immediate action. This is notifying the airlines that if they don't turn the aircraft off, which is something they already do, there could be an issue eventually.
edit on 12/2/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2016 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh no I get what you're saying but I'm not talking about the differences between the types of ADs. I'm saying every AD is urgent because they all need to be complied with to stay airworthy. If my Cessna has an AD on it no matter what tyoe, the first thing I'm going to do before I fly it is make sure we're all set.

That's all. Just a little difference in how we see urgency




top topics



 
5

log in

join