Re: Lithium battery fires

In article <SEEej.1974$Xe5.879@trndny09>, ehsjr wrote:
krw wrote:
In <VPbej.8040$cq5.5994@trndny06> ehsjr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says
krw wrote:
In <5JVdj.1617$Ko6.1031@trndny02> ehsjr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says
Richard Henry wrote:
"Martin Griffith" <mart_in_medina@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rvdfn3t34qkn75eq8q8udie2bks3f08sdv@xxxxxxxxxx
Found this
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0UBT/is_29_18/ai_n6280925/print
That's a pretty old report (2004).
Do you have a later report in mind?
If not, what do you have in mind?

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?

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.

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!".

And unless there has been a change since 2004, the FAA
still treats it as a problem worth worrying about:
http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/systems/Lithium-ion_battery_04112006.pdf

You *are* talking about a government bureaucracy.

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)."

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).

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

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

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.

As for FAA to change regs: I have low expectation for that until there
is evidence indicating to a good reliable extent that the problematic ones
have been sufficiently weeded out. This means returned within the recall
process, self-destructed (whether for reason for recall or otherwise), or
died of old age. I surely think that aircraft safety that needs guarding
against recalled batteries will not do well by depending on full
compliance with recalls!

I am aware of the PDF cited in this thread as to some basic and common
fire hazards of lithium batteries in general saying that the bigtime
hazards are of lithium "primary cells" and hazards are much less for
Li-ion. However, it still gets down to what does FAA need to mandate in
order to make air travel "sufficiently safe". The air travel industry has
a need to not lose passengers that can be lost by safety in air travel
slipping down to only slightly exceeding safety of traveling by train or
bus or whatever. If 175-200 passengers die in a vehicle crash, it makes
big news! And when that happens - what is the vehicle???

I am aware that pasengers carrying cell phones are merely required to
turn them off, and that many to maybe now most cell phones have Li-ion
batteries, and that cellphone-carrying passengers are not required to
leave their batteries at home or have them shipped separately. Then
again, I suspect that a battery going KABLOOIE in a pants pocket of a live
passenger is a prime target for good early treatment by fire
extinguishers, as opposed to one in a cargo hold! Also I see very low
chance for an airline passenger to cause a bad experience by recharging a
Li-ion battery unless the passenger does something very unusual (namely
as best example that I can think of so far recharging a cell phone on an
aircraft).

- Don Klipstein (don@xxxxxxxxx)
.