Li-Ion versus Li-Po on receviers and ignitions
 

Why is it that most big planes that I have saw lately are flying with Li-Ion batteries on the receiver and ignition. i thought that Li-Po's were the latest and greatest technology.
I guess the point that I am trying to get to here is why would you not just run Li-po's instead.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of Li-Po's and Li-Ions on your recevier and ignition systems?
Thanks for any advice....

RE: Li-Ion versus Li-Po on receviers and ignitions
 

Vibration and the fragile nature of the package in a high vibration enviroment Vs cylyndrical casing that is a bit more robust, but sacrificing higher current ratings.

RE: Li-Ion versus Li-Po on receviers and ignitions
 

I don't pretend to be a battery expert, but from the research I've done the Li-Ion is more stable and less likely to cause fires if slightly mis-handled or damaged than the Li-Poly. However the Li-Ion does not have the discharge rate capability of the Li-Poly which is why you find them in electric powered applications.

So I use Li-Ion for rx/ignition on my latest model and Li-Poly on my foamies which are the only electric powered stuff I have.

There is a new chemistry of Lithium/Manganese coming out, although they are somewhat limited in sizes and availability right now, which has the promise of the discharge rates of Li-Poly without the hazards as it's not the volatile chemical combination of the Li-Poly's.

Duralite has the new stuff, but not much information about them is posted;

http://www.duralitebatteries.com/batteries-mg.html