[DOT NEWS] accidents

False claim.

That type of cargo WAS allowed prior to Valuejet incident and the change in DOT policy affected ALL "Class 1" items, not merely the ones that were involved in the issue.

Yes they were mismarked.

However had they been properly marked, they would STILL have been on that flight and would have STILL ignited.

Non-intert was exempted from the regs and was shippable on aircraft. It was an "aircraft part" even when not in the aircraft but only being shipped by the air carrier on aircraft :)

And Fred Wallace endorses it of course. Predictible.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...

At least Fred Wallace is satisfied, and that is all that really matters, isn't it?

Yes inded-i-doo.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I don't think you quite get the point...

In virtually every case ever known, mom's fruit cake SHOULD be blown up...

Now, blowing up banana bread, on the other hand, would be almost sacreligious...

David Erbas-White

Reply to
David Erbas-White

Note:

That could be accomplished WITHOUT the overhead of the entire DOT system by the Department of Commerce simply stating the package must have the name of the material on the outside of the package and on the traditional manifest or bill of lading. Done.

Heck, if it is really hazardous, staple an abatement procedure sheet to the bill of lading as well.

FAR more helpful than the current system.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Thanks for making my point Dave..

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Properly marked, contents properly processed/safted, and in limited quantities.

Ok, so other than that and like your 200 lb of class 1 hazmat, shipped as model airplane parts, it was ok??

Yes, but it must be marked as inert; I think that is what you ment to say

and that makes a difference????

Of course..:)

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Is that all you can say of substance??

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

I'm surprised our moronic nanny government hasn't banned anything that is a white powder, or could produce a white powder. Confectioners sugar, flour, sanding sealer, and even AP.

:-(

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Borrowing a phrase from your own post this morning:

"Is that all you can say of substance??"

- Fred

Nope.

You seem fixated on "aircraft parts".

HUNDREDS of posts.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

There are a couple other purposes:

  1. Properly labeled hazmat is supposed to prevent it from being shipped improperly -- i.e., by ground only, for instance.
  2. It makes it easier for the authorities to catch the clod who shipped it if it's not packed properly and something goes wrong.
Reply to
RayDunakin

Not entirely true, since the paper trail requires shipping classification, and part of that requires proper packaging.

For example, imagine a box of glass bottles of a strong acid, improperly packaged. The driver of a truck slams on his brakes a bit hard, the bottles slam together, break, and now start leaking all over goodness knows what else that may, or may not react.

Properly labeled and packaged, those bottles are a lot less likely to break. May not even be allowed to ship in glass, for that very reason!

-Kevin

Reply to
Kevin Trojanowski

Well, if your point is that there's some kind of parallel with Jerry's shipment of model [ airplane parts / rocket motors ], then I explicitly disclaim such comparison... what specific mechanical condition existed, with respect to that shipment, such that the motors were likely to spontaneously ignite in truck transit?

As I understand it, the gas generators in the Valujet incident used a spring-loaded percussion-style igniter that is normally triggered when an oxygen mask is released from its overhead compartment and pulled down for use by a passenger... shipping them without the safety caps installed to disarm the ignition mechanism would have been like shipping small arms ammunition "packaged" in a cocked firearm... were Jerry's model rocket motors "packaged" with igniters installed and wired to launch controllers with batteries and interlock keys already in place?

If not, there's no comparison.

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

Over 150,000 died recently as a result of dihydrogen monoxide. WHen will this madness end!

Reply to
The Rocket Scientist

But in the case of rocket materials (or even precursors) there is NO acute spill hazard, so that is an extreme example.

But once it is packaged, and papered and everybody trains to handle EVERY form of hazmat so they can occasionally haul typically ONE form, it is still shipped and transported exactly the same way it was before any of these regulations existed. And the accident rates have not decreased.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

It used to be just fine to ship 1.4 and 1.3 by air. It was only because of the Valuejet overreaction they eliminated all Class 1, not merely that with its installed initiator safety devices disabled!!!!!

It makes it easier to see you are full of shit as usual by generating excuses on behalf of other people.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I guess if you do not understand the concept, you will question and not recognize the substance..

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Who said anything about spontaneous ignition? Please don't attempt to put words in my mouth. The motors, if exposed to fire, would of/could of been a secondary ignition as a result of the fire as were the oxygen generator devises on value jet. From what you have said in the past, I don't expect you to understand the similarity concept. .

I guess, if you do not understand the concept that shipping unmarked flamiable hazmat in any variant is wrong, then you will not except the fact that either comparison was not an unexceptable practice.

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

See my previous post, I don't feel like repeating myself.

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Jerry wrote,

"It used to be just fine to ship 1.4 and 1.3 by air. It was only because of the Valuejet overreaction they eliminated all Class 1, not merely that with its installed initiator safety devices disabled!!!!!"

Jerry,

1.3 can be shipped FedEx air (and others licensed) in quantities up to about 480 pounds NEQ, station to station. We do it routinely with very large motors for commercial and military customers. Compatibility of other cargo and routing is taken into account and that's important. The final call is also made by the pilot in command. I don't have the 1.4 limit handy but intrinsic 1.4 can go door to door and the regulations are a bit less stringent.

Or do mean passenger aircraft? That's bad for any class 1 or 5 or 4 etc, etc for very sane reasons. Number one being that all the cargo compliance criteria, especially compatibility, I just outlined don't come into play. If someone's NiCad battery in their shaver down in the cargo hold, shorts and sets off a case of J's in some adjacent package (neither checked for compatibility), the pilot will have a lot less time to get down to terra firma. The Valuejet example is a good example in some respects. It was started by a short (it could of just well been an electric shaver or a butane hair curler) in a bulk loaded cargo hold and ended up with a 3000 degree fireball in the that melted the control cables in a very short time. If the improperly shipped oxidizers were not there, the situation would have been much less severe and the crew may have had a chance to land. It's much to do with controlling compatibility and safety.

None of this will convince you so just ignore it.

Regards,

Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace

formatting link
887-2370 x222 Toronto (410) 571-8292 Annapolis

Reply to
Anthony Cesaroni

I'll stay a neutral observer, I'm not an apologist.

But I will tell you with many connections to commercial shippers of cargo, nothing to do at all with rocketry or even model aircraft parts.

Many lie and pay fines later.

Many US companies cheat , steal and rob the stock market and lie to the auditors.

I've done lots of IT audits on third parties, and most all lie about their computer security they have in place thinking it won't be checked.

And the world turns like the sands of time in an hour glass, the days of our lives continue.........

Reply to
AlMax

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.