boeing dreamliner\\\'s lithium-ion battery fails on united …

Note: This story has been updated, including comments from Boeing.
A Boeing 787 of United Airlines
On the way to Charles de Gaulle airport on November 13, ion batteryfailure.
United Airlines Flight 915 ends at 7: 00
When the pilot received a warning that the main battery was overheating, he took off from Washington Dulles Airport for an hour.
Joint Aviation spokesman Charles Hobart confirmed the incident.
When landing, technicians found the battery \"empty liquid\", the forward empty system, the steel box installed by Boeing after the plane stopped flying in 2013 and the titanium pipe dripping liquid.
Hobart will not answer other questions, but the airline reports that the plane stayed in Paris for four days and was taken to Denver, where it stayed for two days before returning to service.
Paul Bergman, a spokesman for Boeing, said that \"the plane had experienced a single battery failure,\" adding that it was not a flight safety issue.
It\'s not the plane\'s first runaway dreamy battery in three and a half years since it was released four years ago. month, fleet-
In 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration conducted a wide range of safe ground connections.
This is after two Japanese battery failures.
Operating 787 in two weeks of destroying each other\'s bread boxes-
The size of the battery and the area in which they are located triggered three safety investigations.
The Dreamliner was allowed back in the air only in April 2013 when Boeing was approved to move the battery into a home designed to contain lithium-
The ion battery goes into a state of heat out of control.
The housing did not change the nature of the battery, and the incident in the most recent joint flight was a clear sign that it still flew with an undiagnosed and unresolved problem.
On January 2014, a battery on another Japanese airline flight 787 was released when it landed at Narita airport.
Later in October of the same year, Qatar Airlines was forced to transfer 787 due to battery failure.
Although I was told that in the first 18 months after the plane started flying again, there were two other reruns due to the deterioration of the battery in the flight, neither Boeing nor the FAA had
When I asked Boeing again today if it would provide a list of battery failures since Flight 787 was restored, Bergman declined. \"More than 2.
\"About 7 billion 600 dreamplanes currently in service flew 787 miles of revenue,\" he said in an email . \".
Boeing only knew about the battery failure of the 600 aircraft because the FAA had previously said it did not need notice;
It\'s not Boeing, nor is it the operator of Dreamliner, because the steel housing eliminates the security threat from heat loss.
Battery experts disagree.
After the Qatar transfer, Jeff Dane, a physics professor at Dalhousie University in Canada, told me that the battery failure indicated a problem inside the battery.
\"Usually, they don\'t do anything unless they are mechanically abused or electronically abused.
Because they are in the box, they may not be mechanically abused, so something has happened to these cells.
Now the Dreamlinerbattery fault has been considered \"non-
\"The aviation safety authorities report that the scale or scope of the problem is impossible and that\'s what some people seem to want.
The question is, \"Why?