Another type of battery caught fire earlier this year, prompting the F.A.A. to ground the plane for several months. On Thursday, a Japan Airlines 787 was forced to return to Boston shortly after takeoff. The airline said an indicator had suggested maintenance might be needed on the fuel pump, and the pilots, who were headed for Japan, turned back as a precaution.

The British findings stirred up an immediate debate, as various players in the aviation community sought to determine if the emergency transmitters posed enough of a safety threat to temporarily dismantle or remove them.

Although Britain is still investigating the cause of the fire at Heathrow, Boeing said it supported the recommendations as “reasonable precautionary measures.” Honeywell Aerospace, which makes the 6.6-pound transmitters on the 787, said the proposals were “prudent,” though it remained “premature to jump to conclusions” about the cause of the fire.

Thomson Airways in England said it would remove the batteries from its 787s. Other carriers that use similar transmitters, from major airlines to corporate jets, were left to decide whether it was safe to keep using them. The F.A.A. decided it needed more time to evaluate the proposals, which could conceivably lead to the removal of the batteries or the transmitters from most of the planes made by Boeing, Airbus and the smaller companies that make regional and business jets.

Federal officials said the lack of definitive evidence about the cause of the fire — and the fact that none of the transmitters had been known to cause a fire in more than 50 million flight hours — suggested they should take more time in reviewing the matter.