Voting for Acceptance in Airplanes

[marc]

EUCs can be transported with every transport unit: car, train, tram, bus, ship, at the hand,... but not in airplanes since it is "dangerous" even if the probability of exploding is 0,000001%. I asked to certain airplane companies. They did not accept motorised instruments with battery.

However the most important thing that you miss when you go somewhere with an airplane is your car, bike or EUC. Holidays would be much cheaper and much efficient if we could take our EUCs with us in the airplane.

Would you vote yes if I open a request for change of these regulations worldwide towards IATA, organisation of worldwide airplane companies: I propose to use the site change.org

Or do you have other suggestions to change this regulation?

However I know a friend who has taken the EUC with him in the cabin. The stewardesses were more busy with being surprised (with a big smile) with this new instrument than thinking about the fact if this instrument is allowed in the airplane or not. I am sure that there is no regulation specific for EUCs but we can vote for the first regulation so that it becomes in our advantage. Besides there is no danger of exploding since you are not charging the EUC. Even if you charge it, the probability is negligible. This voting is necessary to avoid to throw your EUC in the trash to enter the airplane

[US69]

8 minutes ago, marc said:

EUCs can be transported with every transport unit: car, train, tram, bus, ship, at the hand,... but not in airplanes since it is "dangerous" even if the probability of exploding is 0,000001%. I asked to certain airplane companies. They did not accept motorised instruments with battery.

However the most important thing that you miss when you go somewhere with an airplane is your car, bike or EUC. Holidays would be much cheaper and much efficient if we could take our EUCs with us in the airplane.

Would you vote yes if I open a request for change of these regulations worldwide towards IATA, organisation of worldwide airplane companies: I propose to use the site change.org

Or do you have other suggestions to change this regulation?

Thing is you can ask for changes as Long as you want....as Long as Lithium Ion batteries in fact ARE or better CAN be dangerous, you will definitly just waist your time!

See good examples as the New Samsung Note Phone, there are now even reports that the customers are not able to send their phones back to Samsung, as it is even more forbidden to Transport defective batteries!

Or see the Problems that occured with the new Boing Dreamliners, that have at least 3-4 exploded/blown out Lithiums batteries and ALL dreamliners have been put to the ground!

 

So this is not a Thing of what we "want"...it's a Thing of real safety.....

[Greg Spalding]

We live in an era when I still cannot bring more than 3 ounces of liquid on a plane, which makes absolutely no sense at all

concern about the transport of lithium batteries will never change. As long as there are examples of exploding batteries

and......

think of THIS for a moment:

would YOU really want to get on a plane with someone who brought his/her LOW-PRICE wheel on board with QUESTIONABLE CIRCUITRY/BATTERY quality?

of course not

but.... who would decide WHICH wheels are GOOD ENOUGH or HAD ENOUGH TESTING to be ALLOWED on a plane?

so....

our wheels won't be coming on planes with us any time soon

nor should they be able to for reasons mentioned above

IMHO, of course

[Keith]

Before I was poor, sorry I mean married, I held a pilot's licence. The biggest problem with using an aircraft practically is getting anywhere from the airport once you had landed. Using taxis, if you could actually find one at a small airstrip, often cost as much as the flight itself.  In the end you tended to only fly to airfields that were within walking distance of your destination, or where the airfield was the destination I.e. An airshow.

With hindsight, what I wouldn't have given for an electric unicycle, to be able to fly to the nearest small airfield and then wheel to my destination would be perfect.

There is, of course, absolutely nothing prohibiting you from taking your EUC in your own aeroplane :-)

[Citi Wheel]

If there was an easy way to rent the Li-ion batteries for your specific EUC in major cities, you could take your EUC on vacation without batteries, then rent the pop a set of batteries when you get to your destination. At this point though, I don't think electric unicycles are popular enough to make an EUC battery rental business financially viable.

[Greg Spalding]

27 minutes ago, logos122 said:

If there was an easy way to rent the Li-ion batteries for your specific EUC in major cities, you could take your EUC on vacation without batteries, then rent the pop a set of batteries when you get to your destination. At this point though, I don't think electric unicycles are popular enough to make an EUC battery rental business financially viable.

That does make great sense. But then you might be getting the TSA workers too much credit in thinking they could understand how your wheel could be transported with the without batteries and how they would be able to determine that you didn't have any batteries with you in the first place because they would have to reconstruct all the wheels to be able to have the batteries replaced more easily... The logistics would be too great to overcome at least in the United States or Europe. In my opinion

[noisycarlos]

4 hours ago, Greg Spalding said:

That does make great sense. But then you might be getting the TSA workers too much credit in thinking they could understand how your wheel could be transported with the without batteries and how they would be able to determine that you didn't have any batteries with you in the first place because they would have to reconstruct all the wheels to be able to have the batteries replaced more easily... The logistics would be too great to overcome at least in the United States or Europe. In my opinion

Mmm, maybe they show in the X-ray machine.

[Greg Spalding]

45 minutes ago, noisycarlos said:

Mmm, maybe the show in the X-ray machine.

perhaps

[flass]

9 hours ago, Greg Spalding said:

That does make great sense. But then you might be getting the TSA workers too much credit in thinking they could understand how your wheel could be transported with the without batteries and how they would be able to determine that you didn't have any batteries with you in the first place because they would have to reconstruct all the wheels to be able to have the batteries replaced more easily... The logistics would be too great to overcome at least in the United States or Europe. In my opinion

I presume that is why so many major airlines have banned EUC on their flights regardless if there is a battery attached or not. I guess it will be hard to see on the x-ray then, but I have no idea, probably they just find it too complicated (and too few passengers really wanting to carry an EUC) to take care of. 

[marc]

Untill now every airplane has flown at every flight with dozens or hundreds of tablets, hundreds of gsms, dozens of laptops, dozens of airplane instruments working on batteries. The lights, the TV screens, the microwave ovens, the moving parts of wings, moving wheel system, ... all of them work on batteries. Besides even if they work with fuel, is fuel more safe? We have seen the accident with Concorde. Passenger airplane flying faster than sound speed, most expensive passenger airplaine, but a small piece of tire hits the wings. There is not even a hole in the wing. And only the pressure wave in the wing causes fire.

So what have they done to secure all these existing batteries in airplanes. Nothing special. 1000 times more batteries (in numbers of Wh) are present on the airplane. "They are not dangerous!?". "They cannot explode!?". But only our EUCs are the only evil ones. Only our EUCs can explode, other battery powered instruments would not. Come on. Be serious.

Suppose it catches fire, I assume that there will be Fire extinguishers as it will be also used for other instruments (excluding EUCs) that catch fire.

 

I would propose another thing: instead of approaching airplane companies, we, as EUC'ers have to build a certificating organisation towards EUC producers to dissociate the "good" EUC's from "bad" EUC's. This means to dissociate safe EUC's with qualitative batteries and good battery management systems and those of  80$.

Afterwards with this list of "good" EUC's, we can approach IATA. That is the way also that is followed for "bad" phones=samsung note 7 and good phones =rest.

When there is a research behind it, people are easy to accept it than when you say "we want that you accept ALL EUC's. It doesn't matter if they are safe or not."

 

[US69]

45 minutes ago, marc said:

Untill now every airplane has flown at every flight with dozens or hundreds of tablets, hundreds of gsms, dozens of laptops, dozens of airplane instruments working on batteries. The lights, the TV screens, the microwave ovens, the moving parts of wings, moving wheel system, ... all of them work on batteries. Besides even if they work with fuel, is fuel more safe: we have seen the accident with Concorde. Passenger airplane flying faster than sound speed, most expensive passenger airplaine, but a small piece of tire hits the wings. There is not even a hole in the wing. And only the pressure wave in the wing causes fire.

So what have they done to secure all these existing batteries in airplanes. Nothing special. 1000 times more batteries (in numbers of Wh) are present on the airplane. They are not dangerous. They cannot explode. But my EUC who has ridden 5000km without overtemperature is "too dangerous" to enter the airplane. Come on. Be serious.

Suppose it catches fire, I assume that there will be Fire extinguishers as it will be also used for other instruments (excluding EUCs) that catches fire.

 

 

It is a total different Thing, to have one -for example- ipad or Phone Batterie, which is specifically build for this product!

It is a total different thing, to have -like in one of my unicycles 4 packs of 16 seriell  18650 Industrie cells stacked together....

That is a difference!

I dont know if you know the regulations exactly...

On a passenger flight your are NOT ALLOWED to have at least ONE single small Batterie or reserve batteriepack for a phone or something in your  checked in luggage!

It are not our Unicycle alone! You are allowed to Transport this SMALL batteries in your Hand baggagge ON plane! Because...as you have said...there they are better controlable in the case of a Problem! Our 64 stacked together Industrie cells can -when shortaged- even work as a bomb!

This has nothing to do with "Come on..be serious"...you really think they stop the Boing dreamliner - a worldwide Multi Billion Dollar business- from flying everywhere because of his Lithium batteries Problems, but let you go on board with a EUC or Hoverboard....because it's "unfair""????

It is more -"Come on: Learn about dangerous of stacked cells and Lithium cells in general! "

It is not against EUC's...it is against big batteries, thats all......

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358357/Now-electric-unicycle-sparks-fire-guts-house-fire-brigade-warns-against-using-cheap-batteries.html

 

18 hours ago, noisycarlos said:

Mmm, maybe they show in the X-ray machine.

They Show in the x-ray! Definitly!

[Greg Spalding]

1 hour ago, marc said:

Untill now every airplane has flown at every flight with dozens or hundreds of tablets, hundreds of gsms, dozens of laptops, dozens of airplane instruments working on batteries. The lights, the TV screens, the microwave ovens, the moving parts of wings, moving wheel system, ... all of them work on batteries. Besides even if they work with fuel, is fuel more safe: we have seen the accident with Concorde. Passenger airplane flying faster than sound speed, most expensive passenger airplaine, but a small piece of tire hits the wings. There is not even a hole in the wing. And only the pressure wave in the wing causes fire.

So what have they done to secure all these existing batteries in airplanes. Nothing special. 1000 times more batteries (in numbers of Wh) are present on the airplane. They are not dangerous. They cannot explode. But my EUC who has ridden 5000km without overtemperature is "too dangerous" to enter the airplane. Come on. Be serious.

Suppose it catches fire, I assume that there will be Fire extinguishers as it will be also used for other instruments (excluding EUCs) that catches fire.

 

I would propose another thing: instead of approaching airplane companies, we, as EUC'ers have to build a certificating organisation towards EUC producers to dissociate the "good" EUC's from "bad" EUC's. This means to dissociate safe EUC's with qualitative batteries and good battery management systems and those of  80$.

Afterwards with this list of "good" EUC's, we can approach IATA. That is the way also that is followed for "bad" phones=samsung note 7 and good phones =rest.

When there is a research behind it, people are easy to accept it than when you say "we want that you accept ALL EUC's. It doesn't matter if they are safe or not."

 

i understand the concerns above

but, i would welcome anything that makes what we do safer

[Carlos E Rodriguez]

On 9/23/2016 at 6:59 AM, Greg Spalding said:

i understand the concerns above

but, i would welcome anything that makes what we do safer

A new battery technology needs to be invented. Until you can show that crushing or hitting does not cause a failure. Lithium will not be allowed. 

[Mono]

On 2016-9-22 at 1:40 PM, marc said:

EUCs can be transported with every transport unit: car, train, tram, bus, ship, at the hand,... but not in airplanes since it is "dangerous" even if the probability of exploding is 0,000001%. I asked to certain airplane companies. They did not accept motorised instruments with battery.

You give the number as 1/10^8. Where does this come from? This number is non-negligible when we are dealing with passenger airplane safety! IIRC, the chance to die in the plane due to an accident is in the order of 1/10^7 per trip. Given an explosion would often lead to loss of the plane, we would increase the death rate by 10%. A single regulation which decreases death rate by 10% is definitely a deal I would buy as a passenger who doesn't care to bring EUCs with me. 

Quote

Or do you have other suggestions to change this regulation?

Finance research to improve battery explosion risk from 1/10^8 to 1/10^12. Though, I have a hard time to see this were well-spent money, in balance. There is also another problem: how can we guaranty the high battery quality standards of the large batteries brought by passengers?

All in all, I personally hate that I cannot take my EUC in the airplane, but I can see that the regulation is perfectly viable, in particular as the harm effects all passengers, while the benefit is taken by far less than 1%.

 

[Carlos E Rodriguez]

4 hours ago, Mono said:

You give the number as 1/10^8. Where does this come from? This number is non-negligible when we are dealing with passenger airplane safety! IIRC, the chance to die in the plane due to an accident is in the order of 1/10^7 per trip. Given an explosion would often lead to loss of the plane, we would increase the death rate by 10%. A single regulation which decreases death rate by 10% is definitely a deal I would buy as a passenger who doesn't care to bring EUCs with me. 

Finance research to improve battery explosion risk from 1/10^8 to 1/10^12. Though, I have a hard time to see this were well-spent money, in balance. There is also another problem: how can we guaranty the high battery quality standards of the large batteries brought by passengers?

All in all, I personally hate that I cannot take my EUC in the airplane, but I can see that the regulation is perfectly viable, in particular as the harm effects all passengers, while the benefit is taken by far less than 1%.

 

Blame cheap cheater manufacturers. If they had done high quality assemblies and no fires, we would not be having this discussion. We always pay because the a-hole-cheaters making a low quality product forces governments to increase regulations and oversight. 

The chemistry is unstable when compromised. Explosion! not likely. Fire yes because of poor quality. 

So yes. i dont want my plane to come down in flames because some cheap low quality cell went into heater mode and cought fire. Also I believe Lithium fire is had to put out. Granted it is basically a nice fire starter.

the only way I would be ok, is if they come up with a container that is capable to contain the fire of a lithium pack. It would not contain the smoke but at least it wont kill me.

But i just dont see it. Then you have radicals trying to cause hard by disguising every day products and making them into instruments of death. So a battery just need to be compromised and cause a small fire causing the plane to do emergency landing. So it will never be allowed.

I would go further and you are already seeing it. They are banning all devices including laptops in many countries because the stupid evil people.