|
Fedex - Lithium batteries
I just carried about 75 lbs. of these batteries from Asia to the U.S. I've heard of guys carrying much larger shipments. I’m not real happy about that but I don’t think we really have the option to refuse at this point.
I’d like some opinions on our current procedures (or lack of as the case may be) and observations from the line. We currently ID these batteries as Misc-9 and they’re considered IDG (for the non-purple: they don’t have to be accessible to the crew). Unless you dig into the position summaries and actually look at all your Misc-9 DG, you’ll never even know you’re carrying a pallet of L-I batteries. Since they’re IDG, I guess we can carry them anywhere on the aircraft (belly or main deck). The current issue of Air Ops has a small article that basically says they’re working on addressing battery shipments (the check’s in the mail) and the FSS can put out a fire in a shipment of laptops with L-I batteries. It doesn’t specific main deck FSS or lower cargo FSS, so I assume both. It implies that the FSS will not put out a pallet of batteries.
|
Submit a safety report....spin around three times....count to twenty, and wait for VP of Safety to commission someone to investigate. He will eventually get promoted to SVP, and we'll still be carrying LI batteries because the company makes too much $$ carrying them......."we haven't lost an aircraft yet........" :)
|
I asked to have it listed on the ADG like the "Lives on Board in F2" but never heard anything back.
I think that would get your attention to see "Lithium Batteries on Board in Position 3". Would that be acceptable to everyone? If so, I say we push for something like that. Maybe refuse a couple pallets to get their attention??? That's usually the only way things get fixed around here. |
Wrote my US senators about this subject after the UPS and Asiana accidents. Suggested that laws be passed prohibiting lithium battery carriage by US carriers. Both senators refused to initiate any legislation in this regard. It's all about the money and profit margins. Sad that our congressional leaders won't do anything about lithium batteries and airplanes.
|
not a cargo guy but I saw some sort of "expose" article regarding exploding cell phone batteries from China on 20/20 or 60 minutes type show a few months ago.
|
Originally Posted by satpak77
(Post 1100662)
not a cargo guy but I saw some sort of "expose" article regarding exploding cell phone batteries from China on 20/20 or 60 minutes type show a few months ago.
|
lol.........
|
Originally Posted by Left Coast MD11
(Post 1100615)
I think that would get your attention to see "Lithium Batteries on Board in Position 3". Would that be acceptable to everyone? If so, I say we push for something like that.
I like it ... :D |
Originally Posted by Left Coast MD11
(Post 1100615)
I asked to have it listed on the ADG like the "Lives on Board in F2" but never heard anything back.
I think that would get your attention to see "Lithium Batteries on Board in Position 3". Would that be acceptable to everyone? If so, I say we push for something like that. Maybe refuse a couple pallets to get their attention??? That's usually the only way things get fixed around here. |
I hate to say this but had UPS or Asiana ploughed into a town or school killing people on the ground, the rules would be changed. The speed of the change would be directly connected to how many 'innocent' people died.
You as a pilot are not innocent and you are an evil money grabber who barely works and you all make +$250k a year. That unfortunately is public opinion. As long as the general public is not affected nothing will change. Even the Chevy Volt review will be completed before cargo aircraft. Look at the Buffalo crash, stalled for years because of big money. If it had been a large aircraft with 300 on board and crashed into a school or a church full of people the rest rules would have changed rapidly. They won't. The laws are written in blood, the amount of blood and your blood does not count. My opinion is if it's not safe enough to go on a passenger plane it's not safe for cargo either. But no one cares about my opinion now do they? |
lithium batteries
I registered to clear up some misconceptions to the Lithium battery topic.
I work w Lithium batteries everyday. They are NOT inherently dangerous. If they were, the world / iindustry would still be using NiMh or older carbon types...that was the dark ages of batteries and modern devices / cell phones would not be possible. No, the danger lies in the PACKING of the cells. No one will ever know exactly the cause of how the fire started in the 2 flights, but, my guess is, the cells were repacked after they left china where all cells originate. I deal in secondary - rechargeable cells. They do not spontaneously ignite by themselves. The only way cells become volatile is if 2 or more are shorted across each other somehow. This would mean a very sloppy packing job. All boxes I get from china to USA are VERY well packed and inspected. each cell isolated from one another. I also pay extra attention when I reship them. The knee jerk reaction is that of the uninformed. Dont let a couple incidents, while tragic, stop u from flying batteries. and if so, yes, it would kill all electronic devices as we know them today. so, all of you on china to US flights, I would not worry about it on bulk shipments. Other flights elsewhere, there should be an inspection to assure safety. Its not that complicated. |
Battman,
No disrespect intended ... seriously. Your professional observations and opinions while quite educational do not make me feel especially safe. I have no way of confirming that they have been properly packed and they could be loaded in a position that I am unable to fight the resulting fire. We have special procedures for all sorts of other Dangerous Goods shipments, why not LI batteries also? How about if we put these lithium batteries on the flights you are on? Regards ... Mark |
ok
To that I would say. It is not up to the pilot to inspect all packages, naturally. It is the job of the shipper and those who handle the shipment on the ground before it ever gets to the aircraft. Load the lithium in the unpressurized section of cargo and isolate it , only thing i can think of. Li batteries are not dangerous with proper packing. This is a shipper issue. I suppose any dangerous thing is possible other than with batteries. Accidents happen for all sorts of reasons. If I knew there was a lithium shipment ?? yes, I would go look at the boxes. give them a good shake, see if anything moves around inside, especially if these are originating from outside china or USA, Anybody in their right mind engaged in commerce sending these batteries is not going to just dump them all together in a box. |
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100964)
ok
To that I would say. It is not up to the pilot to inspect all packages, naturally. It is the job of the shipper and those who handle the shipment on the ground before it ever gets to the aircraft. Load the lithium in the unpressurized section of cargo and isolate it , only thing i can think of. Li batteries are not dangerous with proper packing. This is a shipper issue. I suppose any dangerous thing is possible other than with batteries. Accidents happen for all sorts of reasons. If I knew there was a lithium shipment ?? yes, I would go look at the boxes. give them a good shake, see if anything moves around inside, especially if these are originating from outside china or USA, Anybody in their right mind engaged in commerce sending these batteries is not going to just dump them all together in a box. |
Review the ditching procedure and cross your fingers you don't have a real bad day. If those things cook off at 170W you're going to get wet--one way or the other.
With the $$ and politics involved, hard to see this changing. |
ok
If a lithium pack or cell is damaged by outside fires from something else, or penetration / crushing or brought together someway to cause a short....the resulting chemical reaction will take place in a few minutes. Long before it reaches the ramp. In the case of LiFepo4 type, it will be a little smoke, no fire. Lithium batteries do not ignite by themselves. UPS pilot lost steering control before plane crash - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com Even IF the shipment was labeled as hazardous, that would not have changed anything. The plane caught fire for other reasons. the batteries just added to it. Since the pilots had no time even for an emergency landing, that says it was an explosion, and, batteries dont explode. Also, the type lithium battery was not cleary indicated, just a big wide brush saying ALL lithium batteries are now suspect. That should answer all your Q's. |
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1101023)
The plane caught fire for other reasons. the batteries just added to it.
Since the pilots had no time even for an emergency landing, that says it was an explosion, and, batteries dont explode. Also, the type lithium battery was not cleary indicated, just a big wide brush saying ALL lithium batteries are now suspect. That should answer all your Q's. The plane caught fire for other reasons ... HUH ? ... :confused: Have you surmised on your own that the flight "exploded" ? |
This is only the interim report ...
http://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/ePublicati...%20Rev%201.pdf -------------------------- The investigation has centered on a probable uncontained fire on the cargo main deck as the primary significant factor. The probable location of the fire has been determined through analyzing the available data in conjunction with onsite investigation of debris and assumptions based on investigative engineering judgment. The investigation is focusing on several possible ignition sources, primarily the location in the cargo of lithium and lithium derivative batteries that were onboard. ---------------------- |
And here is a synopsis of that report:
Report on UPS B747F in-flight fire accident: captain likely incapacitated Aviation Safety Network's News Battman, you may know about Li batteries, but you evidently haven't familiarized yourself with all of the issues related to aviation and what has already happened with these batteries. |
battman
You’re entering this discussion at a disadvantage. You know plenty about batteries and how they should operate, their limits, etc. You appear to know very little about freighter aircraft operations and how that might affect these batteries. Presenting us with theoretical data on how these batteries are supposed to work is really meaningless.
The simple fact is that self-sustaining fires caused by these batteries or exacerbated by their presence have brought several freighters down. Existing fire suppression systems installed in our freighters are not effective in dealing with L-I battery fires. We operate our aircraft many hours away from any suitable runway and it’s likely an aircraft and crew in that position would be lost in the event of a battery fire. Even crews who were very close to suitable runways were unable to recover in time.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100940)
I work w Lithium batteries everyday.
They are NOT inherently dangerous.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100940)
No, the danger lies in the PACKING of the cells.
The only way cells become volatile is if 2 or more are shorted across each other somehow. This would mean a very sloppy packing job. All boxes I get from china to USA are VERY well packed and inspected. each cell isolated from one another.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100940)
The knee jerk reaction is that of the uninformed.
Dont let a couple incidents, while tragic, stop u from flying batteries. and if so, yes, it would kill all electronic devices as we know them today. so, all of you on china to US flights, I would not worry about it on bulk shipments. Other flights elsewhere, there should be an inspection to assure safety. Its not that complicated. We do worry about these batteries, ESPECIALLY in bulk shipments. That’s the point. A large quantity of these has all the more potential to become dangerous as a result of mishandling or poor packing.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100964)
To that I would say.
It is not up to the pilot to inspect all packages, naturally. It is the job of the shipper and those who handle the shipment on the ground before it ever gets to the aircraft. Your view on this is too rooted in theory and absolutes.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100964)
Load the lithium in the unpressurized section of cargo and isolate it , only thing i can think of.
Li batteries are not dangerous with proper packing. This is a shipper issue.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100964)
ok
If I knew there was a lithium shipment ?? yes, I would go look at the boxes. give them a good shake, see if anything moves around inside, especially if these are originating from outside china or USA,
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100964)
Anybody in their right mind engaged in commerce sending these batteries is not going to just dump them all together in a box.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1101023)
If a lithium pack or cell is damaged by outside fires from something else, or penetration / crushing or brought together someway to cause a short....the resulting chemical reaction will take place in a few minutes. Long before it reaches the ramp.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1101023)
In the case of LiFepo4 type, it will be a little smoke, no fire.
Lithium batteries do not ignite by themselves.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1101023)
Even IF the shipment was labeled as hazardous, that would not have changed anything. The plane caught fire for other reasons. the batteries just added to it.
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1101023)
Since the pilots had no time even for an emergency landing, that says it was an explosion, and, batteries dont explode. Also, the type lithium battery was not cleary indicated, just a big wide brush saying ALL lithium batteries are now suspect.
That should answer all your Q's. As I said earlier – don’t really care what type of batteries. If they can do this to a 747, then they can stay on the ground until someone is willing to require them to be handled commensurate with the potential threat they pose. |
That just might be the best post I have ever read on this site.
|
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
(Post 1101096)
You’re entering this discussion at a disadvantage. You know plenty about batteries and how they should operate, their limits, etc. You appear to know very little about freighter aircraft operations and how that might affect these batteries. Presenting us with theoretical data on how these batteries are supposed to work is really meaningless.
The simple fact is that self-sustaining fires caused by these batteries or exacerbated by the presence of them have brought several freighters down. Existing fire suppression systems install in our freighters are not effective in dealing with L-I battery fires. We operate our aircraft many hours away from any suitable runway and it’s likely an aircraft and crew in that position would be lost in the event of a battery fire. Even crews who were very close to suitable runways were unable to recover in time. Neither are firearms, automobiles or even aircraft. People die every day using these “not inherently dangerous” things because of misuse, inattention or recklessness. Sh!t happens so you need to have a plan, redundancy and logical procedures/restrictions to deal with it. There’s no guarantee every packing job is going to be accomplished effectively. Just because you get well packed boxes doesn’t mean everyone does. Someone gets lazy or a bad package slips through and we pay – not them. ?Knee jerk? Dude, you’re losing credibility fast with comments like that. Putting these batteries on a ship isn’t going to “kill all electronic devices”. They just get where they’re going a little slower. We do worry about these batteries, ESPECIALLY in bulk shipments. That’s the point. A large quantity of these has all the more potential to become dangerous as a result of mishandling or poor packing. I really don’t care what kind of inspection the shipper performs. That package has the potential to be damaged or mishandled any time after it leaves the shipper’s custody. Once it does, those who are handling the package at Fedex don’t have the option to open the package and inspect each battery or evaluate how well they are packed and separated. Damage to shipments isn’t always evident from an outside inspection and mishandling may go unreported. Your view on this is too rooted in theory and absolutes. There is no “unpressurized section of cargo” on an MD-11 or any other freighter or passenger aircraft I’ve operated – but thanks for the suggestion.:rolleyes: Once an improperly packed shipment leaves the shipper, it becomes a pilot issue – no longer a shipper issue. “a good shake”??:confused: Welcome to Fantasy Island. You do realize that some of these shipments are THOUSANDS of pounds? You’re suggesting pilots interrupt their normal duties to go back as the loading crew loads 180,000 lbs. of freight and shake some batteries? Are you going to shake the whole 3-4,000 lb. pallet at once or remove the tie downs, take off all the shrink wrap plastic and pull out each package of batteries separately? Just wondering. Ahh – now I feel so much better. I didn’t realize that the battery business had such stringent criteria for entry into the market place. The only unscrupulous business people in China are involved in producing baby formula – those low life types would never try to make a quick buck in the battery trade. More theory. So, what if the damage happens during loading onto the aircraft? – long after the shipment has left the ramp. What if the damage is unnoticed? What if the damage isn’t a problem until the aircraft and all its contents encounter some severe turbulence over the north pacific, 4 hours from any possible landing site? I don’t know what a LiFepo4 is and I really don’t care. If the batteries I’m carrying ignite and do a “china syndrome” through the floor of my aircraft because they were poorly packaged, damaged or mishandled in some way, I’m not going to care that they didn’t ignite by themselves or they did it with little smoke and no fire. There is nothing in the article that says the aircraft caught fire for other reasons. The investigation is focusing on the batteries as the cause of the fire and ultimate loss of the aircraft. A hazardous label wouldn’t have changed anything, but the procedures that go along with that label might. If L-I batteries had restrictions placed on their carriage similar to other hazardous material, it most certainly would change things. We carry explosives, corrosives, toxic and a bunch of other pretty scary cargo. They are inspected by the pilots prior to takeoff to ensure they are secure, things that are incompatible have proper separation and a number of other safety related criteria have been met. Flights within the US have this type of cargo placed inside special sealed containers with dedicated halon fire extinguishers attached to each one. There are limits to the amounts of certain items and all such cargo must be accessible to the crew. Currently these restrictions do not apply to L-I batteries. So, yeah – a hazardous label might have made a difference because of the restrictions that go along with that label. Re-read the article. An “initial report” of an explosion is quite different than a confirmed explosion. There was no explosion. The aircraft had an uncontrolled fire and the first officer was attempting to fly it until he lost control cables, was overcome by smoke or could no longer see to operate it. As I said earlier – don’t really care what type of batteries. If they can do this to a 747, then they can stay on the ground until someone is willing to require them to be handled commensurate with the potential threat they pose. |
Not to jump on the bandwagon here, but, WOW, very nicely written Adlerdriver.
|
Yeah ... what he said!
That's so good that I say we nominate Adlerdriver as the ALPA safety committee rep on this issue ... I wish I'd said that. :D
|
Thanks guys........:o
I'll get right on the ALPA rep thing right after I fight a couple of windmills I have a beef with (please tell me someone gets that). |
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
(Post 1101250)
Thanks guys........:o
I'll get right on the ALPA rep thing right after I fight a couple of windmills I have a beef with (please tell me someone gets that). |
Originally Posted by Brad4est
(Post 1101268)
How Quixotic of you. :rolleyes:
|
This thread should be cut and pasted and sent to Senators, Congressman, FAA, NTSB, and leaked to the Washington Post. Maybe, then just maybe, someone will listen.......
|
Originally Posted by flextodaline
(Post 1101447)
This thread should be cut and pasted and sent to Senators, Congressman, FAA, NTSB, and leaked to the Washington Post. Maybe, then just maybe, someone will listen.......
Lots of tilting at windmills, plenty for everyone. Colonel Cargill, General Peckem's troubleshooter, was a forceful, ruddy man. Before the war he had been an alert, hard-hitting, aggressive marketing executive. He was a very bad marketing executive. Colonel Cargill was so awful a marketing executive that his services were much sought after by firms eager to establish losses for tax purposes. Throughout the civilized world, from Battery Park to Fulton Street, he was known as a dependable man for a fast tax write-off. His prices were high, for failure often did not come easily. He had to start at the top and work his way down, and with sympathetic friends in Washington, losing money was no simple matter. It took months of hard work and careful misplanning. A person misplaced, disorganized, miscalculated, overlooked everything and opened every loophole, and just when he thought he had it made, the government gave him a lake or a forest or an oilfield and spoiled everything. Even with such handicaps, Colonel Cargill could be relied on to run the most prosperous enterprise into the ground. He was a self-made man who owed his lack of success to nobody. Catch-22 |
Originally Posted by battman
(Post 1100940)
I registered to clear up some misconceptions to the Lithium battery topic.
Battery-Fire Crashes Seen Every Other Year - Bloomberg |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:31 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands