FAA issues warning on Li-On batteries
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Slaving away in front of multiple LCDs, somewhere in the USA
Age: 69
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA issues warning on Li-On batteries
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering that most cellphone and laptop batteries are now li-ion, I suppose this could be the next hot potato in carryon vs checked luggage.
(On a less serious note, and with the risk of being a spelling nazi, could this be considered lion battery?)
(On a less serious note, and with the risk of being a spelling nazi, could this be considered lion battery?)
Considering that most cellphone and laptop batteries are now li-ion, I suppose this could be the next hot potato in carryon vs checked luggage.
The statement addresses the bulk carriage of lithium batteries as cargo. Individual batteries carried by passengers or crew are not an issue.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No it is not.
"Investigation of the crash is still underway, and the cause of the crash has not been determined," the FAA says.
Of course the FAA would not say that their rules for DG shippment are weaker than IATA/ICAO.
I wonder what the UPS SMS is like, if they have one.
"Investigation of the crash is still underway, and the cause of the crash has not been determined," the FAA says.
Of course the FAA would not say that their rules for DG shippment are weaker than IATA/ICAO.
I wonder what the UPS SMS is like, if they have one.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No it is not.
"Investigation of the crash is still underway, and the cause of the crash has not been determined," the FAA says.
"Investigation of the crash is still underway, and the cause of the crash has not been determined," the FAA says.
If "finding" = cause of Dubai crash, the above is true.
Mine was "finding" = FAA's motivation for the Li-Ion's are dangerous notice.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GtE - very interesting. What are they doing instead.
Guppy - Where do I start?
Guppy - Where do I start?
- The UPS aircraft was US registered so the FARs apply no matter what its departure point.
- Its true FedEx has put a lot of effort into fire protected freight containers and I did not comment on their SMS, which I am actually very familiar with.
- However the number of US cargo accidents is actually pretty high.
- I won't comment on the irony of your statements after an accident
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guppy - Where do I start?
You don't.
The UPS aircraft was US registered so the FARs apply no matter what its departure point.
While US operators are never permitted deviation from US regulation save for an emergency, US operators are always obligated to the legal requirements of every jurisdiction through which they pass, per convention.
Shipping out of Dubai isn't established or regulated by the US HMR, but is done in accordance to international convention. When a shipper places cargo aboard a US aircraft while operating internationally, the cargo carrier is not responsible for ensuring that the shipping has been done correctly, and will not open overpacks to verify or correct labeling packing, etc. That packaging will have been done in accordance with the local requirements. Therefore, when a US carrier picks up freight internationally, don't start whining about DOT regulation...it only paints you in your true light, as one who hasn't a clue whence he or she speaks.
Its true FedEx has put a lot of effort into fire protected freight containers and I did not comment on their SMS, which I am actually very familiar with.
Those in this industry know and understand this. You don't, which further reinforces the fact that you really have no idea what you're talking about. This should really go without saying.
However the number of US cargo accidents is actually pretty high.
The US holds a very high standard in aviation operations. Then again, where a pilot in the US might require 5,000 hours of experience to be competitive for a position, many European pilots might require 250 hours to be competitive for the same...you really want to talk about standards?
US cargo operations are greater in scope, number, hours, and reach than any other, to say noting of hours flown, cargo carried, etc. US cargo operations are not the issue here. Lithium batteries are.
I won't comment on the irony of your statements after an accident
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll bite; it's your funeral, after all. Which regulation is it that you find "weak?"
Be specific. Can you do that?
I said nothing about US regulation being weak.
The cargo in Dubai, as you're clearly unaware was packaged and shipped under regulations other than the "FAR," and the HMR.
I'm quite secure in "my nation," incidentally. It would appear to be you that has both the misunderstand, and the misapprehension.
Be specific. Can you do that?
I said nothing about US regulation being weak.
The cargo in Dubai, as you're clearly unaware was packaged and shipped under regulations other than the "FAR," and the HMR.
I'm quite secure in "my nation," incidentally. It would appear to be you that has both the misunderstand, and the misapprehension.
Running on aircraft power supplies, with UPS systems on the most critical instruments and their computers.
Nobody however has really addressed the problem of AVAPS, which various research aircraft use and contains a lot of Li-Ion batteries.
G
Nobody however has really addressed the problem of AVAPS, which various research aircraft use and contains a lot of Li-Ion batteries.
G
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis - I think we all know who has more atomospheric research aircraft experience
I am surprised though that NASA would rather run off aircraft power. AFAIC the real issue in PED is the possibility of an uncontained thermal runaway, which are very rare for an uninstalled battery and can be countered fairly simple cooling procedures (on a normal airliner by cooling with ice). Of course not a option with a pallet of them!
SNS
As the FAA say:
Thats one shortcoming of US regs. Plus, if as you claim, US operators don't have to meet US DG regs when departing overseas thats another big failing in US regs. Are US security regs so lax too? I think not.
As you said elsewhere (after saying here how great the US carriers safety record is):
I am surprised though that NASA would rather run off aircraft power. AFAIC the real issue in PED is the possibility of an uncontained thermal runaway, which are very rare for an uninstalled battery and can be countered fairly simple cooling procedures (on a normal airliner by cooling with ice). Of course not a option with a pallet of them!
SNS
As the FAA say:
Lithium batteries are currently classified as Class 9 materials under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) (49 CFR 180 185). Nonetheless, most lithium batteries
As you said elsewhere (after saying here how great the US carriers safety record is):
Sure, downplay the whole thing. After all, the UPS flight didn't really crash and burn, did it? All a hoax?
Or is it possible that one can't take this thread seriously enough, and that the threat is real, and the hazard is real? Could it be
Or is it possible that one can't take this thread seriously enough, and that the threat is real, and the hazard is real? Could it be
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plus, if as you claim, US operators don't have to meet US DG regs when departing overseas thats another big failing in US regs.
As you said elsewhere (after saying here how great the US carriers safety record is):
When you are able to contain comments in context, and confine your commentary to the thread at hand, perhaps we can have a discussion. Then again, you are ssg, the imposter who returns again and again under different names, and there is no having a discussion with you. You have no relevant experience upon which to stand, and any meaningful discourse on any subject aviation related is, therefore, a waste.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SNS your posts are anything but consistent.
To be accurate, can you just clarify the EXACT names you think I'm posting under as I'd like a really good laugth at you paranoia.
To be accurate, can you just clarify the EXACT names you think I'm posting under as I'd like a really good laugth at you paranoia.
