Lithium battery fires

Found this

formatting link

martin

Reply to
Martin Griffith
Loading thread data ...

This explains why TSA has new guidelines on your bringing spare Li-Ion batteries on flights. They either have to be in original packaging or have the ends taped off with electrical tape, or each individual battery in a sealed plastic bag.

This applies to both checked and carry on.

Reply to
T

Even more

formatting link

martin

Reply to
Martin Griffith

That's a pretty old report (2004).

Reply to
Richard Henry

Do you have a later report in mind?

If not, what do you have in mind?

Ed

Reply to
ehsjr

A lot of these batteries have been recalled and replaced. Perhaps something more recent would show that it's still a problem worth worrying about?

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

The fact that the TSA is going to give me a full body cavity search looking for spares makes me worry.

Everything I own can take standard form factor disposable batteries in place of the rechargeable ones, except for my laptop. The only reason I carry spares for that is because the stinkin' airplane seat power outlets are on the fritz more often than not. On long flights, I've either got to plug in or carry spares. Want me to leave the spares home? Fix the damned outlets!!!

--
Paul Hovnanian     mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Paul Hovnanian P.E.

You sure store your spare batteries in a funny place.

Or you could sleep.

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

Don't worry too much about TSA. On my most recent trip I had to go through the standard TSA searches at T.F. Green (PVD) and Norfolk (ORF). In one place (PVD) I was ID'd when I got the bag tags, then again at the entrace to the x-ray and metal detectors, then once again during the x- ray process my boarding pass was compared to ID.

At ORF they only checked my ID when I entered the secure area, all they wanted to see when you went to the metal detector was a boarding pass.

No consistency. That is what you call a poor security system.

Reply to
T

That reminds me. I had my Xacti, iPod, and all their assorted cables in my backpack. Took the laptop out and sent that through separately but they took a good long time looking at my backpack. They didn't bitch about the 1lb bag of peanut M&M's either.

Reply to
T

rint

text -

Imagine you had to create a large organization of thousands of people from scratch, complete with an administrative bureacracy, in a period of a few weeks. Imagine also that you were not able to pay very much to the people in the bottom levels. How good do you think that organization would turn out to be?

Reply to
Richard Henry

On Dec 30, 10:03 pm, Richard Henry wrote: [...]

text -

Now imagine you spent the money on improving security instead.

There were security systems in place before the creation of the TSA. It is typical, they invent a new TLA and claim that it solves a problem. The TSA isn't about really doing something it is appearing to do something.

Reply to
MooseFET

I too had similar experiences when flying this fall, after many years of not flying. It was the only way to get home over a long weekend and then pick up the wife and cats.

The TSA's crap didn't bother me much, but on the last trip (CAK to BTV) I had a stop at LGA. The flight from there to BTV was supposed to be 1:45 (it's only 250mi., by car), but that's another issue. I ended up having to fly from there to DCA to get home, because there weren't "enough air corridors available". DCA isn't exactly the right direction from LGA.

Oh, well. I made it, only four hours late.

I disagree. Not that it's at all secure, but consistency would make it less secure. Keep the bad guys thinking.

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

formatting link

Yikes! That's from 2004 too!

Last night or this morning they announced on the TeeVee Nooz that they're banned from checked baggage, not just cargo.

This one's a little more recent:

formatting link

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

A standard bureaucratic cluster-f*ck.

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Richard the Dreaded Libertaria

Perhaps. Is that what Richard had in mind? We'll never know, unless he replies.

But regarding needing a new report to confirm the previous one, that seems like backwards logic. In the absence of evidence that a solution to the problem has been implemented and verified to be effective, assuming the problem no longer exists is not a logical conclusion.

And unless there has been a change since 2004, the FAA still treats it as a problem worth worrying about:

formatting link

Personally, I have no inside information on lithium battery fires. Whatever information I have is just what I've read. But I find the information in the url in Martin Griffith's post far more compelling than the rebuttal, if that's what it was, that Richard Henry posted: "That's a pretty old report (2004)."

Thus the questions does Richard have a later report or something else in mind.

Ed

Reply to
ehsjr

I wouldn't expect a "non-report". If it were still a serious problem I'd expect to see it on the "nightly news" with the headlines "Sony Kills Three Hundred In AirBus 380 Crash!".

You *are* talking about a government bureaucracy.

The only information I have was the recall notice that said I had nothing to worry about since mine (though Sony batteries) weren't affected. The problem was well known and fixed by a manufacturing process change (crimps of the Li foil applied incorrectly, IIRC).

Again, I wouldn't expect a report of an event that doesn't happen.

--
Keith
Reply to
krw

.
5/print
s
n
I

me?

.
e

ted text -

One of the first things they should have done was create their=20 operations manual. They've had plenty of time to do so as of this date=20 yet as I said, there are wide disparities between airports.=20

Reply to
T

See comp.risks for more information.

JosephKK

Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Gotter selbst vergebens

--Schiller from "Die Jungfrau von Orleans"

Reply to
Joseph2k

Right - there can't be and analysis of an event that doesn't happen. What is needed is what you got at the consumer level, but at a much more detailed level, to get the FAA to change regs. Something covering the investigation done into the failures/ cause(s)/corrective actions taken/tests performed etc at a detailed level sufficient to address all the FAA concerns.

And for Richard's post, had he presented the kind of information you presented, those original questions would not have occurred. There's meat in what you say; Richard's post leaves questions as to what he has in mind.

Ed

Reply to
ehsjr

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.