4 ms·
This regulation is only because specific lithium battery chemistries like NMC or Li-Polymer. Once proven safer chemistries like LFP or sodium-ion are used more
by r00fus 2y ago
This regulation is only because specific lithium battery chemistries like NMC or Li-Polymer.
Once proven safer chemistries like LFP or sodium-ion are used more commonly in laptops (including SSBs like this Samsung one) then regulation should shift to accommodate.
That said, who really needs over 100Wh of battery when most long haul flights have plugs available?
- whamlastxmas 2y agoPeople use laptops without chargers outside planes too, and processing intensive stuff drains batteries very quickly
- brookst 2y agoTrue, but who would buy a laptop that could never be taken on a plane?
- viewtransform 2y agoPeople with lengthy jail sentences ?
- hagbard_c 2y agoPeople who take trains instead of planes (like me), people who are off-grid, etc. There is a market albeit a smaller one than the main stream market. It might be a good market to launch these things for testing purposes.
- bagels 2y agoIt took decades to allow electronic devices to be used in flight, despite no evidence that they would cause a problem. I wouldn't count on battery chemistry changes leading to changes in FAA rules very quickly.
- heavenlyblue 2y agoIsn't the concern the fires caused by the batteries?
- mertd 2y agoInitially people assumed without evidence that the wireless signals from portable devices would interfere with avionics. It was the days where you could prophetically "hear" that you are about to get a call or sms through your computer speakers.
- TaylorAlexander 2y agoSounds like they did have evidence then...
- akira2501 2y ago> people assumed without evidence If you don't have evidence that emissions will be within acceptable limits and will not interfere with the planes avionics then you don't introduce things into life safety critical areas like planes. It's the same reason a captain can declare pretty much whatever they want on their plane and you as a passenger are _obligated_ to follow those orders. It's a felony if you don't. The captain doesn't have to present evidence just any concern that some action might interfere with the safety of his flight and that's the end of the discussion.
- fy20 2y agoThe ironic thing is that during the same period, 110V powered electric shavers - which most likely spurt out noise all over the RF spectrum - were perfectly acceptable to use on aircraft.
- pixl97 2y agoI mean I've never seen 200 people use an electric shaver for an entire flight. He'll, I don't think I've seen one.
- alwa 2y agoAren’t these particular rules specific to lithium-ion battery chemistry in the first place?
- jlund-molfese 2y agoSort of—the limits are separate by battery chemistry, but I don’t see any type of battery where TSA in the US allows for greater than 100 watt hours Ex https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/items/lithium-batteries-100-watt-hours-or-less-device https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/... But also wet batteries in general, https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/items/non-spillable-wet-batteries https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/...
- surfingdino 2y ago> who really needs over 100Wh of battery YouTube video editors and idiots running LLMs.
- justinclift 2y agoGaming laptops are a thing too. ;)
- Aperocky 2y ago> That said, who really needs over 100Wh of battery when most long haul flights have plugs available? Plenty of laptops still run intel lol.
- threeseed 2y ago> then regulation should shift to accommodate You are talking about shifting regulations globally. Companies like Apple are not going to build products just for one or two markets.