7 ms·
> It can be explosives planted, but maybe it can be batteries modified to explode instead of burn. That is not really a thing, from a technical point of view.
by kergonath 2y ago
> It can be explosives planted, but maybe it can be batteries modified to explode instead of burn.
That is not really a thing, from a technical point of view. Changing the chemistry of the battery (assuming that a suitably explosive one exists; these tend not to be developed very far) would just be swapping an explosive and not a modification. Doing something like adding some vessel to build up pressure within the battery sounds impractical (you’d need something very resistant to heat as a battery fire goes above 2000 K), at which point it’s not worth the trouble.
The most likely is either some explosive besides the battery, or something that looks like a battery from the outside, but is actually half explosive on the inside to at least pass superficial inspection.
This kind of damage really does not look like a battery gone wrong. It would have left all sorts of chemical residues and burned very differently.
- mrtksn 2y agoYou are probably right but explosives risk detection, either by the militants or by the airport security if taken to a flight to a country with serious security.
- londons_explore 2y agonews reports suggest 1000+ of these devices exploded. In a country where lots of people would happily crack open the lid of a device to replace the battery or otherwise tinker, the explosives must have been well hidden, not just tucked into the case.
- ArnoVW 2y agoit is my understanding that the devices had been delivered recently
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ale42 2y agoDetection by airport security might probably be avoided using the right type of explosive. I have no real idea about this, but I suspect that any nation-state with enough budget and know-how can manufacture undetectable or very hard-to-detect explosive devices. If the explosive is encapsulated in a sealed airtight container, which is properly "washed" after manufacturing, I guess there's no way to chemically detect the explosive inside. Not sure about how to avoid X-Ray detection but that's generally not the way explosives are actually detected. And, is the device anyway going to pass through airport security? I guess the owners are not really travelling on commercial airliners.
- mrtksn 2y agoThese devices apparently were distributed to thousands of operatives. I would imagine that people having those are some of the more elite ones and they probably will travel for business reasons, be it personal business or Hezbollah business. A few who choose to take their pagers with them(i.e. will not be heading straight home after travel, so brings the pager) are huge risk IMHO. Even a single incident may reveal the plot. I don't know how those detectors at the airports work exactly but they are probably playing cat and mouse game with the people who are into smuggling things and as a result they are probably aware of the more advanced methods like injecting things into the plastic.
- krisoft 2y agoThis is the reason why I think the explosives were most likely hidden in the batteries. Some explosives have similar enough chemistry that they cannot be told apart from legitimate battery packs by the scanners. This is a known threat, and this is the reason why some airports do extra checks on some travellers (for example asking them to turn their laptops on, asking them when and where they got the laptop and etc.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_electronics_ban https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_electronics_ban
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jandrewrogers 2y ago
- rdtsc 2y ago> The most likely is either some explosive besides the battery, or something that looks like a battery from the outside, but is actually half explosive That is the most plausible explanation. It can’t be an obvious thing or someone would notice it. If it looks like a plain battery pack, nobody would think of cutting it open.
- londons_explore 2y agoThe explosive here could be perhaps just 8mm x 8mm x 8mm to do the sort of blasts you see in the videos. Thats fairly small, and could easily be hidden in a device. Inside the battery is perhaps the best hidden, but you'd need to own a bunch of battery manufacturing facilities (expensive). Cheaper would be to simply remove some other component (eg. one of two speakers) and replace it.
- HenryBemis 2y agoConsidering the tech industry of Israel and the bottomless military/security budget, this is very plausible. Also considering that a plan like that must have taken many months/years start-to-end, this just makes me wonder what else is booby-trapped(?), fridges? laptops? microwave ovens? the next door flat? flower pots? Stuff like that take the paranoia levels all the way to 11.
- exe34 2y agoa lot of people claim "we will strike fear in the hearts of our enemies". Israel makes them quietly shit their pants instead.
- rurban 2y agoThey did certainly not make them shit their pants, what a childish idea. They'll cause a big backlash. And the best they have are again suicide bombers in Israeli cities
- 2y ago
- delfinom 2y agoI work in the battery space. All you have to do is build replacement batteries without the pressure relief vents. You can easily get a Chinese manufacture to do this for a fee and properly some complaining about how stupid it is to do. Then wrap it in some nichrome wire and have a micro run some power through it. The nichrome wire will overheat the cell really quickly causing the cell to rapidly over pressurize and boom. Small pouch or prismatic cells that would be used at the size of a pager generally won't burn. And I speak from experience of doing stupid shit to them in the name of testing, nothing like using the nail puller side of a hammer to puncture them, or rigging up a fixture with 3 concrete nail guns to shoot it or well, fun stuff
- mrtksn 2y agoVery interesting, so the battery modification is plausible it seems.
- highcountess 2y agoI agree with this theory even though I am not even sure it would require a specific modification like the mentioned heating wire, if you can simply use the existing circuit with some instruction to cause component overheating with the same effect. Another reason I do not believe it was an explosive is that a clandestine explosive installation would have resulted in far greater damage and included shrapnel. Because why would you not install very high explosives and shrapnel in a shape charge that directed the explosion into the likely body of the wearer if you are taking the risk of intercepting and making a physical modification. This is also less Stuxnet and more infiltrating insecure systems of vehicles to drive by wire accelerate cars into objects. There have been examples of this
- zdragnar 2y agoA shape charge would be pointless because you can't guarantee how the device is worn- one news article mentioned most people carry them in their pockets, so a shape charge would be blowing most of the energy away from the target in 50% of the cases.
- varjag 2y agoOne easy way to conceal the explosive would be to overmold it in a cavity inside the plastic enclosure. This would escape all but the most thorough inspections. And since battery terminals are typically also embedded in the plastic this can provide a clandestine supply of power and signal with something like Dallas protocol to the fuse.
- water-data-dude 2y agoI don’t think they’re saying you’d need to change the chemistry though, they’re saying they could have altered way it was packaged so that when it started burning there was nowhere for the gas to go. Similar to how firecrackers work. If you take a firecracker apart and light the powder, you’ll get a flash and a lot of smoke, but no bang. The explosion comes from the pressure building up in an enclosure. Disclaimer: not a chemist. Just a former unwisely curious kid
- Beijinger 2y ago"If you take a firecracker apart and light the powder, you’ll get a flash and a lot of smoke, but no bang. The explosion comes from the pressure building up in an enclosure." True. But if you open enough firecrackers and put the powder in a small plastic container you will not get a bang but a buff and a fireball the size of a car. Disclaimer: I am a chemist and a former very unwisely curious kid