Originally Posted by craftmaster
I am really not sure why the FAA say that.
Maybe because it works?
Originally Posted by craftmaster
I frankly think they have not studied it enough.
They have studied it enough to produce a persuasive video on their studies some 4 years ago and not to have changed their advice in the interim.
My experience with the FAA fire people at Atlantic City is that they are very good at what they do. They produced a series of series of reports on arc-faulting on the inside of the insultation of wiring in common use in commercial aircraft that well anticipated all the stuff that came to light at and after TWA 800.
Originally Posted by craftmaster
None the less in hobby circles (yea I am a techno geek) water on lithium's and some fire extinguishers are taboo
An airplane is not a hobby club.
Originally Posted by craftmaster
There are guys videos of people cutting open batteries (not in thermal runaway) and dropping parts in water to instant ignition
Oddly enough, one of the least observed reactions to a laptop battery spontaneously catching fire is to take a knife to it and then drop the severed parts in water.
I think you haven't thought the situation through. Let's try again. You are in the situation on an airplane in which someone's laptop has a battery which has caught fire. What do you do?
The FAA has answered this question, many years ago. And they have made films to show people why and how their suggestions work. Now it's your turn to do better. But until you tell us how you do better, how about leaving the current best advice alone and not try to tell everyone it's wrong?
Originally Posted by craftmaster
I would like to see a commission to study the dangers and the alternative containment.
I see. You don't consider the FAA fire people competent to study it, and also not the CAA and their contractors? How about going through the CAA report line by line and telling us where it's wrong?
PBL