3 ms·
> if the plane blew up and it came out that some passengers had posted online that there was a “bomb” blue tooth device and they didn’t turn around This story
by JumpCrisscross 5mo ago
> if the plane blew up and it came out that some passengers had posted online that there was a “bomb” blue tooth device and they didn’t turn around
This story is just stupid. If you actually think you have a bomb onboard, you divert to the nearest airport. (And if you think you discovered a bomb accidentally left discoverable, you don’t ask for it to be please turned off.)
The pilots and crew knew they were being idiots. Whether due to power tripping or CYA, who knows, but I’m not surprised this happened on United.
- Spoom 5mo agoIsn't that what they did?
- JumpCrisscross 5mo agoNope. Look at the flight track. They went all the way back.
- Spoom 5mo ago> Nope. Look at the flight track. They went all the way back. Good point, I was thinking they were over the ocean and that was naturally the closest airport, but it looks like they could have landed in e.g. Nova Scotia in a shorter time period.
- userbinator 5mo agoAnd if you think you discovered a bomb accidentally left discoverable, you don’t ask for it to be please turned off That was the most hilarious part for me.
- overfeed 5mo agoTurning it off would have solved the bureaucratic problem for flight crew. Sadly, the passengers (collectively) failed to accomplish this basic task.
- userbinator 5mo agoIt could've been in checked luggage and turned itself on from the movement. No way for the passengers to get to it. Unfortunately it didn't turn itself off (although if it did, and then later turned on again, that would've been even worse.)
- dpkirchner 5mo agoThe passenger may not have even known, I've certainly renamed friends' phones as a goof, although not to something that would get them in to trouble.
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago> Turning it off would have solved the bureaucratic problem The article says two Bluetooth radios weren’t turned off. Do we know if one of those was “the bomb?”
- simulator5g 5mo agoYou can't really turn off most BLE devices with internal batteries, off means low power mode nowadays. Some of them are still discoverable on wireshark when they are 'off'.
- zmmmmm 5mo agoI don't think it's as silly as people are making out. It at least proves a passenger is in control of the device, rather than it being stashed / hidden in the cabin. A device in the cabin not owned by any passenger broadcasting a signal is definitively more suspicious than one with a passenger in control. We don't know what their next step would have been - they might have asked everyone from row X to Y to turn their bluetooth back on to narrow down the search etc. They probably didn't expect that anybody would fail to respond to the first instruction.
- cmurf 5mo agoI expect pilots called company, and risk assessment made the decision. Pilots can and do make flight safety decisions, but operational control is an airline decision.
- halapro 5mo agoDoesn't make it any less moronic. Next they're gonna arrest you for boarding the plane with Da Bomb hot sauce.
- sixothree 5mo agoI presume a passenger reported it. And the pilot was not allowed to ignore it.
- hunter2_ 5mo agoNot being able to ignore the speech/writing/transmission of a passenger is reasonable. Not being able to ignore the speech/writing/transmission of the manufacturer of a device on the plane is unreasonable. Wifi SSID? Passenger speech, since those are typically changed by the user. Bluetooth GAP/GATT device name? Manufacturer speech, since those are often not changeable by the user.