Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Introducing Switronix batteries for the RED One

Yes, carried on. Divided among crew members. I'm aware of the fine. And yes, exploding laptops have killed people. But you can't make a battery explode by crushing or puncturing it. You need alot of heat.

Every time I go through security they inspect my Red drives or my Red bodies. They never once looked at the batteries.

I have lots of Switronix products, including battery plates, dual battery plates, and two of their 4 mount chargers. All of the stuff is great. I'm sure their batteries are great too. The notion that Red batteries are not fit to travel is all I want to dispell. My apologies Mitch.
 
paul engstrom said:
That's the point of the SWIT 2 part batteries that Dan is referring too--they break apart into 2 halves, each of which is less than 100wh. Pretty ingenious solution actually. And with a D-tap built into the battery!

p
Click to expand...

But do they communicate with the Red? That's the big deal about the batts for which this thread started
 
See, all well with in the regulations.
 
What could possibly be so much more dangerous about a 140WH battery Vs. a 95W battery that the FAA/TSA would allow me to take 20+ 95WH batteries together in a checked cardboard box, but no more than one 140WH battery installed in a device?

I call bullshit. Either Lithium Ion batteries are inherently dangerous or they're not. If they were the FAA/TSA would ban them all, not just the big ones. This is political, they need to ban something to show they are capable of action and the film/broadcast community is a small niche compared to business travelers.

I've never once heard of a camera battery igniting on a plane but there seems to be many reports of regular laptop batteries installed in a device going up, but you can still pack that in your luggage.

Again I don't mind TSA/FAA trying to keep us safe, I just can't stand it when our community gets thrown under the bus to keep Joe Shmo business traveler deluded into thinking his broken laptop in the cargo hold is safe because I couldn't pack my 4 red bricks, installed on the chargers, into a hard airtight pelican, in the belly of the plane.

Bullshit, cough, cough.

I'll follow the rules, but I don't have to agree.
 
I'm really surprised Red hasn't addressed this head one by either making 95wh batteries themselves or in making big batteries of a different unbanned material
 
Please note that Swit and Switronix are two different companies.
 
Evin Grant said:
What could possibly be so much more dangerous about a 140WH battery Vs. a 95W battery that the FAA/TSA would allow me to take 20+ 95WH batteries together in a checked cardboard box, but no more than one 140WH battery installed in a device?

I call bullshit. Either Lithium Ion batteries are inherently dangerous or they're not. If they were the FAA/TSA would ban them all, not just the big ones. This is political, they need to ban something to show they are capable of action and the film/broadcast community is a small niche compared to business travelers.

I've never once heard of a camera battery igniting on a plane but there seems to be many reports of regular laptop batteries installed in a device going up, but you can still pack that in your luggage.

Again I don't mind TSA/FAA trying to keep us safe, I just can't stand it when our community gets thrown under the bus to keep Joe Shmo business traveler deluded into thinking his broken laptop in the cargo hold is safe because I couldn't pack my 4 red bricks, installed on the chargers, into a hard airtight pelican, in the belly of the plane.

Bullshit, cough, cough.

I'll follow the rules, but I don't have to agree.
Click to expand...

There you go putting logic into the conversation Jeff! Remember, common sense/logic and government will never meet. It's just not possible. But anyway, I had the same thought as you. Just because one battery has less crap in it doesn't mean it won't start a nasty fire....especially if 10 other batteries are sitting next to it.

Matthew
 
Shawn Nelson said:
I'm really surprised Red hasn't addressed this head one by either making 95wh batteries themselves or in making big batteries of a different unbanned material
Click to expand...

Those good ol' Nickel MH battery blocks power a Red for a nice, long time. Just like they do with film cameras. I find it really surprising how many rental houses won't just buy the freakin' batteries that work and can be shipped!

Given the choice of carrying 30 pounds of batteries thru every airport in the world or needing to plug the camera into a block (like any other camera) guess which I would choose?

And Ian, you didn't say you were carrying them on. That makes a difference since at least they can put out the fire.
 
Brent J. Craig said:
That makes a difference since at least they can put out the fire.
Click to expand...

Maybe, only the very latest fire extinguisher aboard aircraft can put out a Li Ion fire. It needs to be Co2(2) or N2.
 
Just because a government bureaucracy makes a rule doesn't make it reasonable or rational. When they actually do what they were originally set up to do it is only incidentally and as a support to their primary function of expanding as much as possible, perpetuating the belief that they are indispensable and building the case that they should get a bigger budget next year. I'm not saying that they can't get it right... just that it is not a statistically significant occurrence.

Honestly, I'm not as bitter and angry as you would think from what I write. I just like to keep a clear eye on how things work.
 
Abel sells and rents NiMh as well as Lion battery technologies. In general many clients prefer Lion because they weigh less. But for the very reasons noted above we offer both.
 
Simply not true. There is an Italian firm which makes great batteries called BLUESHAPE. These are 100% compatible with Red one - no viewfinder issues whatsoever. You get the same thing with Blueshape as with a Red brick.
Moreover, Blueshape make a 210W brick which is also compatible with Red one and 10% more capacity than SWIT's best.
Given the choice, I'd get an original Red brick anytime, which after all costs more or less the same bucks. Failing that I'll go for Blueshape cause I know it's made in Europe. I've heard many collegues speak highly of these batteries. They seem to come from a very experienced manufacturer. I don't think I'll ever fancy going Chinese and buying SWIT
 
Sorry, didn't know about the Blueshape. Never heard of 'em, but then I'm in the US.

Switronix batteries are what are being discussed here, not Swit. Switronix is based in Long Island, New York, USA. These are not Chinese batteries.
 
I believe the issue is volume versus singular failure. The volume of lithium is proportionate to the watt hours of the battery. I believe they set their standards based on:

If the 1 battery fails, what is the threshold of lithium that takes the situation from exciting to dangerous.

Then what is the likely hood of that fire enticing a neighboring battery to ignite. Base on those numbers I am sure they decided the number of batteries allowed in one's carry on luggage.

I believe we are often "over protected." However I have no problems doing simple common sense things, that only marginally impact my convenience, in preventative measures for an occurrence that will likely never happen but if did would cause tragedy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top