Hover boards
 

With the well documented evidence of spontaneously combusting hover boards I have to ask the obvious question why are we even contemplating transporting these items in an aircraft . Even worse is that we carry them in bulk thereby exponentially expanding the threat .
There have been several cases of boards bursting into flames at shopping malls in the USA whilst still in their original packaging . So what causes that ? Vibration or unstable battery packs both situations that occur in an aircraft

I will answer my own questions . There is money in transporting these boards so despite the risks we continue to fly them around the world . I guess we will continue to do so until tragedy strikes and we loose an aircraft it's crew and the insurance rates go through the roof . Perhaps then management will have a belated change of policy Sometimes the money just isn't worth the risk

Completely agree, cargo holds should first be able to fight a lithium ion/metal fire. This means water, which would present significant engineering challenges.

I have also noticed that the the batteries seem to be scattered randomly around the cargo hold, as opposed to sop to put it in the aft. What does the loader care?

Didn't kal cargo have a supposed hull loss due to batteries? Oh wait, who cares about cargo....

How about CX organise a major shipment of hover boards and then invite all senior management to fly on that aircraft. Would be interesting to see what their excuses are.

The problem isn't batteries carried on one's person. Those can at least be dealt with when they start to misbehave. A little water is usually all it takes.

Not ideal, true, but better than those hundreds of batteries stacked away under the floor, all together in one neatly packed pallet in which will help trigger a chain reaction, where no one can access them, and with a fire fighting system that will do absolutely squat to quell burning lithium...

The killer is in the cargo hold, not in your pocket.

Asiana 991:

http://s28.postimg.org/ysimqp5zh/asiana_991.jpg

That's 17 minutes from fire detection to crash. 17 minutes!

Silber

You raise a very very important issue. In reality this should be top priority for all aviation safety agencies around the world. As to whether it will or not, I remain sceptical, for all the reasons mentioned.

The simple fact is that halon is no use on class D fires, regardless of concentration.

It is effective for class A,B and C fires but only if the gas can get to the fire, and quickly. This is not guaranteed in cargo compartments of a/c where there is invariably a mix of ULD containers, pallets and the like.

The only solution is an aircraft-based foam system.

In addition there needs to be a quicker way of recognising the danger. Smoke detection systems can be fickle and take sufficient time to guarantee a catastrophe. Certification is done in an empty compartment.

Infra-red thermal detection is the gold standard, providing the additional few minutes that can possibly save the day.

T&C's are one thing but they won't kill you as quickly as a main deck or belly-fire over Siberia or the North Pacific. Or on second thoughts, anywhere once airborne.

FWIW

It doesn't have to be bulk lithium battery carriage . Half a dozen hover boards with batteries in equipment .( For which we no longer get a NOTOC obviously because it's not dangerous cargo . ) Would be enough to produce an uncontained Fire . There have simply been too many hover boards bursting into flames to be so cavalier about carrying them. But then in this company money is the driver of all evils
Crew they aren't important , passengers we can afford to loose a few and aircraft are insured so where is the problem ?

Only one of them needed to burn a house down in London this week.

According to our GMO, it's not different than transporting a Tesla.
I haven't seen Teslas spontaneously catching fire yet, but alright, if that's the case, let's ban the transport of electric cars as well!