Boeing 787s grounded by Japan - Page 3

383LQ4SS · 16th March 2013, 11:33 PM

also from the article:

Quote:

The changes to the two batteries will add 150 pounds to the weight of the airplane — a small addition to the 350,000 pound jet — but enough to offset the weight advantage from using the lighter lithium-ion batteries in the first place.

LTC8K6 · 16th March 2013, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by 383LQ4SS

also from the article:

But not the size. A Nicad or NiMh pack would be larger, and likely would not fit in the spaces designed for the Lithium packs. They would also need different charging and monitoring systems.

BenBurch · 18th March 2013, 09:56 AM

I really doubt that 150 pound number being the amount saved by using LI batteries.

16th March 2013, 11:33 PM	#81
383LQ4SS Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 157	also from the article: Quote: The changes to the two batteries will add 150 pounds to the weight of the airplane — a small addition to the 350,000 pound jet — but enough to offset the weight advantage from using the lighter lithium-ion batteries in the first place.
383LQ4SS Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 157

16th March 2013, 11:53 PM	#82
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,657	Originally Posted by 383LQ4SS also from the article: But not the size. A Nicad or NiMh pack would be larger, and likely would not fit in the spaces designed for the Lithium packs. They would also need different charging and monitoring systems.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break? Last edited by LTC8K6; 16th March 2013 at 11:55 PM.

18th March 2013, 09:56 AM	#83
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,136	I really doubt that 150 pound number being the amount saved by using LI batteries.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!