Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

Lithium ion Battery on Airplanes

I don't believe attached to a Red Camera or Battery charger is "installed in a device

Stephen

Why not? I think having a Red Battery installed into any battery plate would suffice according to the wording.

Merriam Webster is quite clear...
"a piece of equipment or a mechanism designed to serve a special purpose or perform a special function <an electronic device>"
 
Okay.....so here is the real kicker.....

Who trumps who:

TSA or IATA?

Unfortunately, it is the IATA. They have world wide authority on air transportation of dangerous items.

No one in the US likes to bow to international standards, if you're flying out of the US go with TSA if you're flying international go IATA.
 
JDB: Yes that wording does seem to imply otherwise.

Also from: http://www.iata.org/html_email/4490403-dgr_newsletter/dgr_newsletter_newl.html

Special Provisions.There will be a number of new and amended special provisions that will come into effect from 1 January 2009. These include:

A45 has been significantly revised to reflect decisions taken by the UN Subcommittee requiring that lithium batteries and equipment containing lithium batteries be provided with greater protection from damage, short circuit and accidental activation. Reference to “lithium equivalent content” for lithium ion batteries has been removed and instead the watt/hour (W/hr) rating of a lithium ion battery will be used, with 100 W/hr being the trigger point beyond which a lithium ion battery will become fully regulated. It is very likely that A45 will be further revised by the ICAO Dangerous Goods Panel prior to adoption into the 2009 edition.
 
Well, Red batteries are 140W/hr so they are "fully regulated" but what does that mean, carry on only?

Stephen Williams/ said:
Very easy, it can fall off if it's attached.

Stephen

That seems to me to not be the intention of the wording. From the other content in the paper the purpose of having the battery attached is to simply protect the contacts. Plus, if we were to really get into semantics parts of the battery do indeed penetrate the battery plate, which would constitute "In" the charger. You can use "In" and "On" interchangeably here, otherwise no device that doesn't completely encapsulate the battery internally would be allowed in check and they wouldn't be "Spare" batteries as is stated in the text.
 
Well, Red batteries are 140W/hr so they are "fully regulated" but what does that mean, carry on only?



That seems to me to not be the intention of the wording. From the other content in the paper the purpose of having the battery attached is to simply protect the contacts. Plus, if we were to really get into semantics parts of the battery do indeed penetrate the battery plate, which would constitute "In" the charger. You can use "In" and "On" interchangeably here, otherwise no device that doesn't completely encapsulate the battery internally would be allowed in check and they wouldn't be "Spare" batteries as is stated in the text.

Hi Evin,

Do you believe Red to be a consumer device for personal use?

I believe any smaller batteries that may be checked have to be encapsulated in a consumer device that is intended for personal use.

Edit Spare batteries are carry on only
Stephen
 
According to the new wording...
"Consumer electronic devices containing lithium or lithium ion cells or batteries, such as watches, calculating machines, cameras, cellular phones, lap-top computers, camcorders, etc., when carried by passengers or crew for personal use."

The Red batteries are definitely for professional not personal use, so they would not fall under this restriction, we should try to find the professional device regulations.
 
PDF doc of Laptops that caught on fire

PDF doc of Laptops that caught on fire

Here is a link to a PDf doc showing Laptop Comptuers with Lithium ion that caught fire on airplanes with pictures.

http://safetravel.dot.gov/alpa.pdf
 
From the IATA site:

http://www.iata.org/html_email/4490403-dgr_newsletter/dgr_newsletter_newl.html

The 49th edition of the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations, available in late September 2007, will take effect 1 January 2008. This edition of the DGR will consolidate changes introduced by ICAO through an addendum to the 2007-2008 edition of the Technical Instructions, as well as changes agreed to by the IATA Dangerous Goods Board.

Section 4.4 – Special Provisions

SP A154 has been added in reference to UN 3090 (lithium batteries and UN 3091) lithium batteries contained in equipment and packed with equipment. A154 states lithium batteries subject to safety recall by the manufacturer, or lithium batteries that have been damaged are forbidden for transport. This additional provision reflects the concerns of regulatory authorities about recent battery recalls following fires.

Appendix I – Impending Changes:

Consumer electronic equipment powered by lithium batteries. Reference to lithium equivalent content for lithium ion batteries has been revised to reflect a maximum Watt/hour rating of 100 W/hr. The watt/hour rating is already marked on consumer type lithium ion batteries. This change reflects the amendments to SP A45.


Link to UN3090 / 3091
http://www.unece.org/trans/doc/2007/ac10c3/ST-SG-AC10-C3-2007-43e.pdf

Still not clear nor have been able to find "Definitions" of Consumer electronics as called out in the Document Anders refers to.
_______
Edit
Best definition I can come up with is electronic items used day to day with a planned obsolescence.
________


Short History of episodes from the UN:

http://www.unece.org/trans/doc/2006/ac10c3/ST-SG-AC10-C3-2006-97e.doc
 
I've flown many places in the world in the distant past with tons of NiCad film camera batteries, and in the recent past with Dionic 90's.
I own a bunch of Dionic 160's as well, but even before these new rules it was illegal to fly with them.
Under the new rules it may prove smarter (for me anyway) to simply buy some different Anton Bauer batteries.
Pro Pac 14? That will mean back to the world of NiCad (memory issues) AND they're heavy (5 lbs., even heavier even than my Dionic 160's) AND 65 watts is pretty wimpy.
Or Hytrons. 140 watts like the Red batteries. Even heavier than the Pro Pac. But likely the best choice given the flight constraints.
I do have a bunch of Victory 14 amp-hour NiCad film batteries. Maybe someone WILL make a RED power cable that just ends in the old generic 4-pin XLR (pin 1 neg, pin 4 pos)
BTW, Why can't Red just whip these up??? :)
Or perhaps there might be some kind of fireproof metal container that would pass muster with the authorities, allowing us to ship large LiOn batts... not likely to happen I imagine... although Sony, IDX, and Anton Bauer could spearhead development there...
Any way you slice it though, it is a real issue for us all...
Cheers,
Harry
 
.
I do have a bunch of Victory 14 amp-hour NiCad film batteries. Maybe someone WILL make a RED power cable that just ends in the old generic 4-pin XLR Harry

I'm already making these... PM Me for details
 
NiCads seem pretty old-fashioned now in terms of power density, but they're still very high-performing batts. Heavier, smaller capacities, BUT they can withstand a LOT more current draw than lithiums, and don't require proprietary chargers matched to the specific controllers within. Plus, they're legal to check in your luggage. Red draws approx. 55 watts, without accessories - once you start adding focus motors, etc... NiCads might not be such a bad idea.

Harry - as for memory, good chargers can easily prevent memory altogether. Back in the day, we didn't have PAG chargers, but now we do and they're pretty amazing. A NiCad will definitely outlive a lithium many times over when using a good charger.
 
AND NiCads are fairly cheap to recell once they finally do die.
But sadly I think A/B no longer does this. You simply send them your dead battery for recycling... it seems to me the chips, displays, case, gold pins, are all worth enough that they should go back to the practice of putting new cells in old battery cases.
No problem with the cine manufacturers like Victory and Lentequip.
But I think 4 A/B Hytrons will do it for me. I WOULD consider the A/B NiCads, but I think 65 watts is too wimpy for serious work.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Rathbone Energy does a nice job recelling, and can substitute modern cells for what was originally in there. Oftentimes you can find someone offloading a whole ton of dead NiCad AB's, and pick up the cases for next to nothing. I agree about the power density being...low compared to LiIon but NiCads are so much more durable when it comes to loading. I'd imagine RED with an accessory or two would shred a Dionic 90 pretty quickly. Hytron route may be the way to go....until something newer and better comes along.
 
Sorry, but I personally think you are overreacting.
Todays Pro Lithium-Ion batteries are pretty safe.
If you plan to fly with them Getting them under 100 Whr's which will place them in another class.

NiCd's are terrible for the environment as are Lead Acid cells as they both contain heavy metals.

The only thing NiCd has going for them is dealing with peak current draws. This makes a lot of sense when dealing with filmcameras in the cold, but when dealing with electronic cameras the current draw is whil high, very even.
With the Red camera a maximum powerhandling of 70W-80W should be adequate.
Most Li-Ions are capable of this.

If flying the cells are a problem I would rather rent some Li-Ion batteries locally than carrying around the load of a dozen NiCd's.
 
Hi,

One thing to remember is you have to count the battery in your cell phone, laptop & still camera. Many people will already have 3 Lithium ion batteries so wont be able to take any for their Red camera.

Stephen
 
Back
Top