Boeing warns airlines of danger of Li-ion batteries

[Foreigner]

Bulk shipments can cause fires capable of destroying airplanes:

Boeing to airlines: Flying with batteries in cargo can destroy planes

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This announcement surprises me... I woulldn't have expected any airline to still be accepting bulk shipments of these batteries on passenger aircraft... regardless of whether Boeing has issued a directive or not.

Reading the article it looks like the FAA can't issue a directive banning them... it has to go to the international organisation... the international organisation is 'meeting sometime soon'.

How long do these things take?

If a major incident was to happen tomorrow, would some airline try and hide behind the 'oh well, it wasn't officially banned' excuse?

Mobile phones were banned in flight with almost no evidence to support the ban, but when it comes to batteries there is a camp out there saying catastrophic accidents can't absolutely be linked to the carriage of batteries (although they are a suspected cause).

Why the difference between the two (mobile phones and batteries)?

 

[Foreigner]

Interestingly Boeing has warned its 'passenger airline customers'. what of its cargo airline customers?

 

[toowongman]

Interestingly Boeing has warned its 'passenger airline customers'. what of its cargo airline customers?

Good question. We import the equivalent of 132 Ah of LiPo batteries every week from the US, usually ship with UPS. The supplier puts a large infographic sticker on the package which translates to "Don't ship on passenger planes!". I probably owe a cargo pilot a drink, what with Boeing treating them as second-class citizens.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Good question. We import the equivalent of 132 Ah of LiPo batteries every week from the US, usually ship with UPS. The supplier puts a large infographic sticker on the package which translates to "Don't ship on passenger planes!". I probably owe a cargo pilot a drink, what with Boeing treating them as second-class citizens.

well i guess that's the thing.. it comes down to risk acceptance. A pilot ultimately knows their cargo (or could find out if they wanted to) and decide if they want to fly.

Passengers don't have that luxury. We have to take whatever the airline gives us, and hope for the best. Boeing is potentially trying to avoid lawsuits from passengers in the event of a mishap.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

We cannot get Li-Ion batteries uplifted ex China on any aircraft - all shipments vis sea cargo.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

We cannot get Li-Ion batteries uplifted ex China on any aircraft - all shipments vis sea cargo.

That's reassuring! Profits (fast uplift by air) should never come before the safety of aircraft.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

That's reassuring! Profits (fast uplift by air) should never come before the safety of aircraft.

I doubt profit would be a reason for wanting air freight of batteries. Sea freight would win every time I would imagine. Customer demand would direct the air freight desire IME but that to me, is simply poor order management on behalf of the AU clients.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I doubt profit would be a reason for wanting air freight of batteries. Sea freight would win every time I would imagine. Customer demand would direct the air freight desire IME but that to me, is simply poor order management on behalf of the AU clients.

Except that the customer would ultimately pay the higher price for air freight... and profits would go to Company A who has the batteries in stock 'now' (by air freight) than in 3 weeks time by Company B using sea.

 

[moa999]

So a bulk shipment of batteries only - not OK due to fire risk.

But what then about a crate of mobile phones or laptops

Potential to seriously disrupt a few supply chains

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So a bulk shipment of batteries only - not OK due to fire risk.

But what then about a crate of mobile phones or laptops

Potential to seriously disrupt a few supply chains

I'd probably be arguing at this stage, that unless proven to be absolutely safe, the shipment of a crate of mobiles should also be voluntarily banned on passenger aircraft. There are alternatives... better supply control (advance ordering), or better packing (in special containers) and shipment only on dedicated cargo planes where pilots have assessed and accepted the risk (something which passengers don't have the ability to do).

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Except that the customer would ultimately pay the higher price for air freight... and profits would go to Company A who has the batteries in stock 'now' (by air freight) than in 3 weeks time by Company B using sea.

I'd buy from company C who used wise stock management strategies and had them in stock and cheaper because they sea freighted them!

 

[UP4014]

That's reassuring! Profits (fast uplift by air) should never come before the safety of aircraft.

I don't think anyone here will disagree, it's some airline management that's the problem. They don't walk their own talk.

 

[gaz0303]

At least this battery was in carry-on.

Incident: Qantas A388 over Pacific Ocean on May 16th 2016, mobile phone battery smoking
​

Incident: Qantas A388 over Pacific Ocean on May 16th 2016, mobile phone battery smoking

Apologies if already posted

 

[Deleted member 29185]

At least this battery was in carry-on.

Incident: Qantas A388 over Pacific Ocean on May 16th 2016, mobile phone battery smoking
​

Incident: Qantas A388 over Pacific Ocean on May 16th 2016, mobile phone battery smoking

Apologies if already posted

Scary story. I'd like to know how they cooled the battery. Are airline crew trained in how to cool an overheating li-ion battery, mid air? Did they submerge it? Blow on it? Pack it in ice? Also, how does an airline stop this? They can't refuse people carriage if they have a mobile phone with them.

 

[marki]

Developing story considering those "hover boards" sic! are banned