Apple Shares Hit New High for 2016 as Samsung Considers Scrapping Note 7 [Update: Note 7 Officially Discontinued]

[PinkyMacGodess]

No sir, it doesn't. You're making the common mistake of confusing the NTSB (which is all about safety), with the FAA (which often balances cost vs. safety).



So what. It's not unusual for simulations to fail quite often at something that an experienced pilot managed to do in real life with adrenaline and fear for his own life, and those of his passengers, flowing through his veins.



Where is this nonsense coming from? The movie, which FAA and NTSB investigators have already said does not reflect the intentions of their questions? They were not attacking his choices, but getting details that would help with future recommendations.

In real life, any pilot would agree that Sully made the choice with the best likely outcome, and least likely to harm people on the ground.

In fact, the NTSB said in their accident report conclusions:

"15. The captain’s decision to ditch on the Hudson River rather than attempting to land at an airport provided the highest probability that the accident would be survivable."

Moreover, pilots are warned over and over again to NEVER give into the temptation to turn back towards the airport after a complete engine failure, because such a turn virtually always results in fatalities. (There were simulations where sometimes it was possible to make it back to LGA, but they required an instant turn back right after the strike, which again, no pilot would do outside of a simulation.)

Simply put, there was no other realistic snap choice that would not risk having an airliner crashing short of a runway (even into a city) with wings full of fuel, which would be deadly for both the passengers and people on the ground.



Yep, as I've said many times, the Note 7 earned the ban. However, there was zero need for the DOT to make it sound scarier than it is. Not when there have been many in-cabin lithium battery fires -- fires which will continue to occur without the Note 7 around. They had a great chance to educate the public instead of scaring them, and blew it.

As for iPhones, more of them have exploded and burned on an airliner while in-flight than the Note 7. That's because the only Note 7 incident was while still at the gate, and everyone calmly walked off the plane. (Heh. And yes, I'm noting this ironic fact with tongue in cheek.)

I have not seen the movie. I have not read the NTSB reports either. I was reacting to interviews and comments I saw about the Clint Eastwood movie, and 'how dare the government try to make the miracle pilot out to be some kind of criminal!'. Yes, the interviews I saw were along the lines of the NTSB and the FAA trying to 'accuse' the 'Miracle on the Hudson(tm) pilot' of being incompetent, or reckless when it was 'obvious' that it was 'The Best Thing To Do(tm)'.

I was also going on comments by friends of mine who are pilots. They were in awe of him, but only because everyone survived. He took a hell of a chance, and it paid off. People that were on that flight should have all bought lottery tickets, and a ticket to Vegas (BABY!!!) because their luck was running very high. Often, in incidents like that, there are no '100% saved' answers. There is usually a loss of life, and often, a total loss. It worked. They ALL survived. Proof that when bad stuff happens, everyone doesn't have to die.

Had that been a plane filled with acrid smoke from an exploded device, the result could have been different. There was a plane that crashed near Nova Scotia that had an inflight fire (the AV system as I remember) and they all died. Tragic... There have been many crashes caused by inflight fires, and most of the time, there is a loss of life. (The DC-9 in the Everglades, for another one)

I wouldn't want to be on 'the flight' that was brought down because of a Neanderthal that refused to give up their Samsung Galaxy Note 7.

 

[I7guy]

I have not seen the movie. I have not read the NTSB reports either. I was reacting to interviews and comments I saw about the Clint Eastwood movie, and 'how dare the government try to make the miracle pilot out to be some kind of criminal!'. Yes, the interviews I saw were along the lines of the NTSB and the FAA trying to 'accuse' the 'Miracle on the Hudson(tm) pilot' of being incompetent, or reckless when it was 'obvious' that it was 'The Best Thing To Do(tm)'.

I was also going on comments by friends of mine who are pilots. They were in awe of him, but only because everyone survived. He took a hell of a chance, and it paid off. People that were on that flight should have all bought lottery tickets, and a ticket to Vegas (BABY!!!) because their luck was running very high. Often, in incidents like that, there are no '100% saved' answers. There is usually a loss of life, and often, a total loss. It worked. They ALL survived. Proof that when bad stuff happens, everyone doesn't have to die.

Had that been a plane filled with acrid smoke from an exploded device, the result could have been different. There was a plane that crashed near Nova Scotia that had an inflight fire (the AV system as I remember) and they all died. Tragic... There have been many crashes caused by inflight fires, and most of the time, there is a loss of life. (The DC-9 in the Everglades, for another one)

I wouldn't want to be on 'the flight' that was brought down because of a Neanderthal that refused to give up their Samsung Galaxy Note 7.

I really hope it's not that easy to bring down an aircraft from an in-cabin fire, as hoping the crews are trained for this eventuality. And even though the crews are trained let's not make an in-cabin fire from a PED on the same level as ordering a cup of coffee. (yes, I know there is some hyperbole in that remark) A battery fire is a battery fire is a batteryfire, but let's not make it seem like the odds of an iphone catching fire, is the same as a note 7.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I really hope it's not that easy to bring down an aircraft from an in-cabin fire, as hoping the crews are trained for this eventuality. And even though the crews are trained let's not make an in-cabin fire from a PED on the same level as ordering a cup of coffee. (yes, I know there is some hyperbole in that remark) A battery fire is a battery fire is a batteryfire, but let's not make it seem like the odds of an iphone catching fire, is the same as a note 7.

On that last, I really didn't know what kdarling was getting at. I haven't heard of a fire caused by a normal iPhone. I did hear of the Chinese woman getting burned by her iPhone, but she was also using a domestic knockoff charger that obviously overcharged the device.

Cascade failures are possible in those batteries, but if they are well made, and people don't use crap chargers for them, there is very little chance of a fire/meltdown. If it were that common, imagine the toothbrushes and vibrators that would be sparking fires throughout the land.

No to mention the 'other power tools'...

Dells and HP's were roasting not too long ago. Sony's too. The battery manufacturers have made great improvements in their construction of the batteries. Or at least we have been lead to believe that...

 

[kdarling]

While one can't disagree with this, I still don't see how it's germane to the conversation of a ban by lumping the entire kit and kaboodle until ped fires; considering the cpsc recall specifically was for the note 7.

You're way too focused on the ban itself. (Which ironically, only came after the second recall and public pressure. The FAA didn't bother with a flight ban for the first, more dangerous set of Notes.)

I'm talking about the way the ban was worded by the DOT. It's bad enough that most of the public has huge misconceptions about flight dangers because of Hollywood, without a government agency causing even more.

People that were on that flight should have all bought lottery tickets, and a ticket to Vegas (BABY!!!) because their luck was running very high.

Yep, just as with the famous Gimli Glider incident, the passengers were lucky that Sully was not only very experienced, but also had a background as a glider pilot. Very handy talent in such a situation

Had that been a plane filled with acrid smoke from an exploded device, the result could have been different.

NOT EVEN CLOSE. A Note 7 fire would've been far more preferable than losing both engines over NYC. You must've missed reading many posts in this forum. Let me catch you up:

There have been dozens of incidents where a phone or camera or laptop etc. lithium battery has burst into flames inside an airliner cabin. You can read some selected examples here.

Thanks in part to modern cabin materials, the damage is usually limited to some scorching of a carpeted floor or overhead bin or seat cushion. Once in a while there was a lot of smoke, but never enough to even have them drop passenger masks. Many flights didn't even bother to divert once the device was safely stored in a metal trashcan.

These days, airline crew are trained for such fires because they themselves use lithium powered devices... some of which have already caught fire in the cabin. (E.g. credit card readers and of course pilot iPads. Certification of the latter requires lithium battery fire training.) Heck, many airlines now carry special fireproof scoop bags to handle small device fires in the cabin. They're common enough to make it worthwhile.

There have been many crashes caused by inflight fires, and most of the time, there is a loss of life.

True, but those were in the cargo hold. No crashes have been caused by a device fire INSIDE THE CABIN ITSELF where they can be quickly handled. Which is why everyone from the International Civil Aviation Organization, to the British Airline Pilot's Association, to the FAA itself, wants lithium powered devices INSIDE THE CABIN which is far safer than in the hold. As the ICAO puts it:

"(Member) states are encouraged to recommend to operators that they require passengers to carry such devices in the cabin, where an incident can be immediately mitigated, and not in checked baggage."

I wouldn't want to be on 'the flight' that was brought down because of a Neanderthal that refused to give up their Samsung Galaxy Note 7.

This is exactly the kind of bogus fear result that I'm cautioning against. If exploding batteries in the passenger cabin brought down planes, there'd be dozens of crashes already, including some caused by iPhone fires. But instead there hasn't been any in the past 25 years of lithium fires in such a situation, and hopefully never will be as long as people stay calm.

On that last, I really didn't know what kdarling was getting at. I haven't heard of a fire caused by a normal iPhone.

Anything with a lithium battery can experience a thermal runaway. Normal iPhones in the US have caused injuries. Google "iphone fire -samsung". Personally, I suspect that many phone fires arise because of people putting their devices in a back pocket and eventually causing compression or overheating damage. Even charging while very cold can set up a battery for faiure.

As for in-flight airliner fires, an example was the iPhone 6 that burst into 8" flames while still 90 minutes outside of Hawaii on a flight from the mainland.

http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...-after-iphone-catches-fire-mid-flight-n543516

--

Btw, I'm not comparing the chance of iPhone fires to the chance of Note 7 fires. Nor am I saying that cabin fires cannot be dangerous. What I am saying, is that the DOT missed a prime chance to educate instead of alarm. Your own comments are proof positive that people were led to believe something that isn't true.

The good news is, it looks like the FAA might soon take the NTSB and ICAO's suggestions to educate. Perhaps in the future, safety briefings will include a section in between mask and life jacket parts, something like, "In case one of your devices catches fire, please drop it in the aisle and alert the crew. Do not try to handle it yourself. We are trained for this and have the equipment to take care of it."

If the government wants to frighten its citizens, then they should do it for the right reason, which in this case is to make sure people bring all their lithium powered devices INTO THE CABIN and NOT IN THEIR CHECKED LUGGAGE. The former is demonstrably preferable. The latter, as you pointed out, is extremely dangerous.

 

[I7guy]

You're way too focused on the ban itself. (Which ironically, only came after the second recall and public pressure. The FAA didn't bother with a flight ban for the first, more dangerous set of Notes.)

I'm talking about the way the ban was worded by the DOT. It's bad enough that most of the public has huge misconceptions about flight dangers because of Hollywood, without a government agency causing even more.



Yep, just as with the famous Gimli Glider incident, the passengers were lucky that Sully was not only very experienced, but also had a background as a glider pilot. Very handy talent in such a situation



NOT EVEN CLOSE. A Note 7 fire would've been far more preferable than losing both engines over NYC. You must've missed reading many posts in this forum. Let me catch you up:

There have been dozens of incidents where a phone or camera or laptop etc. lithium battery has burst into flames inside an airliner cabin. You can read some selected examples here.

Most of the time the damage was limited to some scorching of a carpeted floor or overhead bin. Once in a while there was a lot of smoke, but never enough to even have them drop passenger masks. Many flights didn't even bother to divert once the device was safely stored in a metal trashcan.

These days, airline crew are trained for such fires because they themselves used lithium powered devices. (E.g. credit card readers and of course pilot iPads. Certification of the latter requires lithium battery fire training.) Heck, many airlines now carry special fireproof scoop bags to handle small device fires in the cabin. They're common enough to make it worthwhile.



True, but those were in the cargo hold. No crashes have been caused by a device fire INSIDE THE CABIN ITSELF where they can be quickly handled. Which is why everyone from the International Civil Aviation Organization, to the British Airline Pilot's Association, to the FAA itself, wants lithium powered devices INSIDE THE CABIN which is far safer than in the hold. As the ICAO puts it:

"(Member) states are encouraged to recommend to operators that they require passengers to carry such devices in the cabin, where an incident can be immediately mitigated, and not in checked baggage."



This is exactly the kind of ignorant drama and bogus fear mongering that I'm cautioning against. If exploding batteries in a passenger cabin brought down planes, there'd be dozens of crashes already, including some caused by iPhone fires. But instead there hasn't been any such crashes in the past 25 years of lithium fires in such a situation, and hopefully never will be as long as people stay calm.



Anything with a lithium battery can experience a thermal runaway. Normal iPhones in the US have caused injuries. Google "iphone fire -samsung". Personally, I suspect that many phone fires arise because of people putting their devices in a back pocket and eventually causing compression or overheating damage. Even charging while very cold can set up a battery for faiure.

As for in-flight airliner fires, an example was the iPhone 6 that burst into 8" flames while still 90 minutes outside of Hawaii on a flight from the mainland.

http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...-after-iphone-catches-fire-mid-flight-n543516

--

Btw, I'm not comparing the chance of iPhone fires to the chance of Note 7 fires. Nor am I saying that cabin fires cannot be dangerous. What I am saying, is that the DOT missed a prime chance to educate instead of alarm. Your own comments are proof positive that people were led to believe something that isn't true.

The good news is, it looks like the FAA might soon take the NTSB and ICAO's suggestions to educate. Perhaps in the future, safety briefings will include a section in between mask and life jacket parts, something like, "In case one of your devices catches fire, please drop it in the aisle and alert the crew. Do not try to handle it yourself. We are trained for this and have the equipment to take care of it."

If the government wants to frighten its citizens, then they should do it for the right reason, which in this case is to make sure people bring all their lithium powered devices INTO THE CABIN and NOT IN THEIR CHECKED LUGGAGE. The former is demonstrably preferable. The latter, as you pointed out, is extremely dangerous.

There is no misconception, the note 7 was a ticking time bomb and for safety's sake, it was correct to ban them from aircraft. IMO, you're way too focused on attempting to prove the note 7 is business as usual as far as the propensity to burst into flames, which we all know was not business as usual.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

There is no misconception, the note 7 was a ticking time bomb and for safety's sake, it was correct to ban them from aircraft. IMO, you're way too focused on attempting to prove the note 7 is business as usual as far as the propensity to burst into flames, which we all know was not business as usual.

I think his point is that the Note 7 got 'airtime' (no pun intended) and has been focused on because of 'a few incidents'. A large number of incidents I say. The final straw, as he/she pointed out was when the 'fixed' units combusted.

I had heard the 'don't put batteries in your checked baggage' mantra years ago, but it's been downplayed of late. Perhaps the battery industry trade group shoved some money and bought 'research' at the FAA...

 

[maflynn]

and has been focused on because of a few incidents.

I think it was more then a few, which was the issue

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

This is exactly the kind of bogus fear result that I'm cautioning against. If exploding batteries in the passenger cabin brought down planes, there'd be dozens of crashes already, including some caused by iPhone fires. But instead there hasn't been any in the past 25 years of lithium fires in such a situation, and hopefully never will be as long as people stay calm.

Anything with a lithium battery can experience a thermal runaway. Normal iPhones in the US have caused injuries. Google "iphone fire -samsung". Personally, I suspect that many phone fires arise because of people putting their devices in a back pocket and eventually causing compression or overheating damage. Even charging while very cold can set up a battery for faiure.

As for in-flight airliner fires, an example was the iPhone 6 that burst into 8" flames while still 90 minutes outside of Hawaii on a flight from the mainland.

http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...-after-iphone-catches-fire-mid-flight-n543516

--

Btw, I'm not comparing the chance of iPhone fires to the chance of Note 7 fires. Nor am I saying that cabin fires cannot be dangerous. What I am saying, is that the DOT missed a prime chance to educate instead of alarm. Your own comments are proof positive that people were led to believe something that isn't true.

The good news is, it looks like the FAA might soon take the NTSB and ICAO's suggestions to educate. Perhaps in the future, safety briefings will include a section in between mask and life jacket parts, something like, "In case one of your devices catches fire, please drop it in the aisle and alert the crew. Do not try to handle it yourself. We are trained for this and have the equipment to take care of it."

If the government wants to frighten its citizens, then they should do it for the right reason, which in this case is to make sure people bring all their lithium powered devices INTO THE CABIN and NOT IN THEIR CHECKED LUGGAGE. The former is demonstrably preferable. The latter, as you pointed out, is extremely dangerous.

You are saying inflight device fires aren't dangerous. They are to be expected. Possibly, but I'd still not want to be on a flight with one happening. The FAA and the 'industry' have been all about profit and avoiding 'unnecessary regulations'. The DC-9 crash in the Everglades was because the 'industry' refused to put fire suppression equipment in the hold of those planes. Cost savings, and the ability to stuff a few more people onto the flight.

On the checked bag battery issue, I had heard that the TSA was scanning bags at one point to find batteries and was either removing them, or putting them in a 'safe' bag. Apparently that isn't, or never happened. I try to keep everything with a battery in my carry-on, but I'm unusual I guess.

Tangent: That Gimli Glider story is a hoot. Talk about a chain of things going bad at the same time to cause a serious problem. And imagine the first guy to see the plane heading for the decommissioned runway that was being used for a drag race that day!
[doublepost=1477482056][/doublepost]

I think it was more then a few, which was the issue

But I think what kdarling is trying to say is that ALL devices should be handled with care on a plane. The Note just got more press, and whipped up the fear, but fear isn't a *bad* thing. I personally feel that more 'education' needs to be done for people on how to handle the devices. Like don't buy those chargers at the gas stations, and don't use knocck-off chargers with Lion based devices in general.

There is a list of ways to help keep the batteries from a thermal runaway, and people need to be aware of some of the more likely causes. I for one always toss the conference swag chargers that I see on show floors. They are cheap, and dangerous. I also only plug my iPhone into my car's USB jack to get a quick charge if it's nearly dead. And even at the short times, it still tends to get warmer than when on a standard Apple charger.

But anyway...
[doublepost=1477482375][/doublepost]And that FAA report kdarling mentioned seems to prove that the real menace to air travel and batteries are those damned e-cig devices. YIKES!!!