Remix.run Logo
ekianjo 5 hours ago

The security theater needs to go on. In the meantime batteries represent a much bigger risk with potential in flight fires but I guess nobody cares enough to do anything about it.

bob1029 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Batteries are such an incredible oversight if we are trying to control for kinetic energy.

100 watts for an hour ~= 36000 watts for ten seconds. Every fully charged laptop roughly has enough energy to bring an automobile up to highway speed (once). How many of these laptops exist on a typical flight?

jonah 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We flew a couple legs on Virgin Atlantic yesterday. The info session before takeoff made several mentions of batteries - unplug devices when not on use / not in your seat, if your battery gets hot, don't leave your seat/notify a flight attendant immediately. (I think they have containers to try to contain lithium fires onboard FWIW.)

galuggus 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Recently flew through china where they asked 3 times if if i had a portable charger and made everyone sign declarations to that effect.

ekianjo 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Declarations are meaningless. This will not prevent fires ot occur.

rudhdb773b 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Are battery fires on planes a common problem? I haven't heard of many, at least with any significant consequences.

And what would you suggest be done to reduce the risk? Asking passengers to travel without phones or laptops isn't realistic.

dexwiz 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If batteries were standardized and replaceable I bet they would force you to not bring your own, and only ones purchasable passed the gate could be used. Maybe that a silver lining to the repairability issues.

harry8 5 hours ago | parent [-]

On Scoot (Budget Singapore Air) they let you bring your external phone batteries on the plane but do NOT let you use them. You have to rent one of theirs.

Skyphone installation by the airlines led to "flight mode" because the horror of not paying is far more important than safety.

All of this fake, useless theatre undermines real security and makes us less safe while picking our pockets.

Fluids to bring down a plane? FFS every human is equipped with a bladder. Why was this charlatanism ever tolerated at all?

chihuahua 5 hours ago | parent [-]

The intention/purpose of the limit on fluids was to prevent people from assembling liquid explosives inside the plane. The contents of your bladder would not help with that.

harry8 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

So if you drink some of the fluid in front of the goon instead of being instructed to pour the water out, that would show it's not explosive and everything is fine? Test for is this fluid water isn't complex chemistry right? So we're good to go, yeah? No.

It's an attack that never happened and wouldn't. It's nuts.

They should have banned underwear because the underwear bomber /did/ happen. But sure, that's awkward and would impact revenue, (I don't wanna go nude so I won't fly unless I have to), so the ridiculousness of doing so triumphed where it did not with water and shoes.

Lock on the cockpit door was worthwhile (unless the threat is a psychotic German copilot, worked bad then). Also the successful terrorist strategy had expired useless even before the end of its first use on 9/11 as passengers found out, realised new rules: fight back now, hard.

Bastards at Heathrow stole a sealed jar of Fortnum & Mason jam from me. For security! Because onion jam could blow up a plane. FFS. But sure, you could buy the same stuff once through security and take it on the plane at inflated prices. Where there was a financial incentive to do so and a secial interest to lobby for it, the idiocy stopped. In 5 meters.

The purpose of these moronic rules was /not/ what you think it was. It was just a sequence of moronic compromises around dumb ideas influenced by special interest. You can't respect it and respect your own intelligence. Security is actually important, do better.

ekianjo 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

if you are really serious about this, you can hide a pocket a fluid inside your body, and nobody would know...

arccy 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

south Korean airlines are banning battery use in flight now https://www.timeout.com/asia/news/psa-major-south-korean-air...

other asian carriers will say they can't be in overhead compartments

kijin 5 hours ago | parent [-]

South Korean here, it's all over the news but it sounds rather pointless. Faulty batteries can catch fire even when not in use. And the airlines still allow each passenger to carry up to 5 power banks, 100Wh each. That's enough power to blow up any aircraft.

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
kbutler 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

When gate-checking carryon bags, staff told passengers to take batteries out of the carryons.

It seems like something that is high risk during flight shouldn't be left to passenger compliance with spoken instructions.