Posts about: "Water Ingress" [Posts: 23 Pages: 2]

EDLB
2025-06-29T06:55:00
permalink
Post: 11912826
Leaking lavs are a matter of poor design, as in a nuclear power plant you can design piping to be robust and failure proof. The US home installation and piping is on the low end of engineering and quality, so that should not be the reference point. However if water ingress was involved it is only a matter of engineering and commercial will to make that bullet proof in an airliner. Looking with German eyes through an US Home Depot was always some fun for an engineer.
If you are stuck with the location then improve the quality. If a 10th of the engineering involved in a new furbo fan jet engine goes into a lav...

Last edited by EDLB; 29th Jun 2025 at 07:05 .

4 users liked this post.

TURIN
2025-06-29T10:57:00
permalink
Post: 11912953
Originally Posted by MaybeItIs
If that's so true, why the ADs about leakage from the lavs, listed earlier?
Because it has happened on almost all aircraft types. A320 and B737s in particular have had their fair share of events caused by water spillages from the forward galley. In my 12 years working on the 787 I can't remember a single time I've been called to action a water leak large enough to cause a problem below. Dripping tap or Bev maker being the sum of all.


Didn't I just say that? "with the required fireproof casings and exhaust ports etc." Ok, didn't mention thermal runaway, but that's the purpose of the fireproof boxes and exhaust ports. But the whole risk/ danger of thermal runaway is another issue, isn't it? There are safer batteries that are not lead-acid whales. Are the any other planes out there that need fireproof boxes and vent pipes to contain and purge burning battery fumes etc to the outside? It's not just the fumes that are the issue, of course.
A quick search on PPrune will uncover several lengthy discussions on the early service problems with the batteries and why this particular type are necessary.

​​​​​​​
Good to hear, hope you know them inside out and catch every issue. Please keep an eye out for trickles down walls in the EE Bays though.
Water does trickle down the 'walls' on most aircraft due to condensation which is why we have sump drains in the belly.
The 787 being of CFRP construction and using an entirely different air conditioning system that mitigates the problem does not seem to suffer from excess condensation

4 users liked this post.

TURIN
2025-06-30T22:49:00
permalink
Post: 11913931
Grounded Spanner
There's an awful lot of ifs and buts in that opus.
A water spillage from a galley or lavatory would have to be huge to cause the type of total electrical failure you describe. The Power Electrics panels are yards apart, for both main systems to fail simultaneously due to water ingress would take gallons and gallons of water. Sorry but I don't buy it!

Do they still use Bowsers in India? I thought most airports used underground pipes feeding pots on the stands.

Re: settled fuel. As soon as the boost pumps are running, fuel is being recirculated. When we do water drain checks we have to leave the aircraft for a good hour after any refuelling, boost pump operation or aircraft movement before taking the samples. Otherwise any water will remain suspended in the fuel.
Generally speaking flight deck preparation that I have witnessed will have the boost pumps on many many minutes before take off. This will agitate the fuel and any contamination sufficiently to render your theory moot .
I'm also not quite sure how the aircraft could have got so much contaminated fuel on the previous sector and it not be scavenged out during that flight.

1 user liked this post.