On Oct 14, 1:56*pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:
In article
,





*Mark wrote:
On Oct 14, 9:16*am, Mark wrote:
On Oct 13, 10:39*pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:

In article
,

*Mark wrote:
On Oct 12, 1:03*pm, wrote:
Mark wrote:
On Oct 11, 11:37*pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:
This from FAA:

FAA ON LITHIUM BATTERIES
The FAA Friday released a Safety Alert to address "risks in
transporting
lithium metal batteries in cargo by aircraft," noting that UPS
Flight
006, a 747 that crashed on Sept. 3, was carrying large quantities
of
lithium batteries. Fire was reported on the UPS flight but the FAA
notes
that a cause of the crash has not yet been determined. The crash
destroyed the aircraft and killed the crew. The FAA has found that
lithium metal batteries are not only "highly flammable and capable
of
ignition" but also possess destructive explosive potential. The
agency
says Halon 1301, the fire suppression agent found in Class C cargo
holds, "is ineffective in controlling a lithium metal cell fire"
and
lithium metal battery explosions can lead to "rapid fire spread"
in
cargo compartments. Lithium-ion batteries are somewhat different.
They
can exhibit the same thermal runaway as lithium metal batteries,
but the
FAA says Halon 1301 is capable of suppressing lithium-ion battery
fires.
The FAA's alert offers recommendations that are limited to
batteries
flown in cargo holds and do not apply to batteries carried by
passengers
or crew. The FAA is considering courses for further action.

Thanks for the post about the old technology lithium
batteries which don't have a rat's ass of relevance to
the nanotitanate lithium batteries discussed in this
forum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCkXw...1&feature=fvwp
http://www.hobbypartz.com/life.html
http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com/vehicles/index.php
http://www.metaefficient.com/recharg...hiumion-batter
...

You do understand that FAA Safety Alerts have relevance to aviation,
don't you?

He posted that to make a counterpoint to my assertions
regarding the future of electric flight. Your point is mute.

You do understand that this is rec.aviation.piloting and not
marks.sales.pitch.for.electric.cars don't you?

Your point is mute. Electric aviation will replace internal
combustion aviation.

* You do understand that nano-lithium titanate batteries have a lower
capacity than conventional lithium-ion battery technologies don't you
and their claim to fame is charge time?

Wrong.
http://www.technologyreview.com/read...17&ch=nanotech

* You do understand that all lithium batteries are flamable don't
you?

Yes and No. *So are coffee tables, but they aren't
disallowed. *The new batteries are safe.

The future of electric aviation won't involve
lithium. It will revolve around nanoengineered carbon
or a new crystal technology I've not mentioned here
until now.

Its generic name is "balonium."

Hello Mr. Fairburn.

* *Thanks for not saying dilithium crystals, because
it only exists as a gas.

Ok, now give this a peruse and see that it's not another
"magnet motor" or anything else with violates the 2nd
law of thermodynamics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcCLIwlbhLc&NR=1

It doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics, but it DOES suffer from
energy density! How many watts/m**2 will it pull?

IMHO, the thing would have to be HUGE to acquire usable power.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Let me explain it this way. The fellow in this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=369h-SEBXd8

sets world records with his electric car. THEN, in the
video, he replaces the heavy lead batteries with lithium
ion batteries which *still are not nano engineered*,
therefore the density is nowhere near optimum, but
when you combine a few hundred in series it smokes
the competetion even easier.

Now, with nano engineered crystals, or carbon nanotubes
filling a battery, you effectively increase the electron surface
density and ion exchange by 10 fold. Then when run them in
series the power will be tremendous, and even more than you
see in that electric racecar.

I'm thinking airplanes now, with droptanks or wingtanks
filled with electric energy. Carbon nanotube batteries aren't
heavy like lead batteries.

"With 8 times the Reserve Capacity (RC) of typical lead/acid
batteries, CNT Battery technology allows cars to travel hundreds of
miles between charges, up to an estimated 380 miles per charge. Even
more impressive, CNT Batteries recharge in ten minutes from a regular
electrical outlet, about the time it takes for a highway road trip pit
stop. An hour's worth of recharging could add up to a pollution-free,
coast-to-coast trip through Capitol Hill. The battery can be modified
to the specifications of existing batteries".

http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=21540

Ok, so this is already better than AV gas. But I'm
still looking beyond the carbon nanotube battery to
something even more powerful...and electric. It's on
the way.

We will be running out of coal and gas in 20 years.
There's no time like the present to convert technologies.

---
Mark