Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 4 Experiences 'Self Combustion' Aboard Just-Landed Aircraft

Why yes. Yes I did. And the recall will be perfect timing for my aging iPhone 4s.

Jimbo47 said:
Did you make this account just to post this? Honestly they won't recall it until a few more phones explode, which seems very unlikely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iPHONE RECALL View Post

...................................:D:apple::D:apple::D:apple::D:apple::D.....................................

HORRAY!!!!!!! NEW iPHONE 5'S FOR EVERYBODY!!!!!!! I SMELL A BURNING RECALL BABY!!!

...................................:D:apple::D:apple::D:apple::D:apple::D.....................................
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
metals and ions

orthm said:
Most portable devices these days use some sort of Lithium polymer battery. Lithium burns when exposed to oxygen. Last time I checked, air has oxygen in it. If there's a short or a puncture of the battery pack, you get fire.
Click to expand...

Sort of... Li-ion batteries have Li-ions in them not metallic Li which is reactive w/ air and moisture. A puncture to the battery can cause a short circuit which leads to excessive heating and can cause the graphite used as the anode to catch fire. Also, under certain deep charging/discharging conditions, oxygen loss from the cathode side (likely LiCoO2) can add fuel to the fire - literally.

Another possibility is Li metal plating (due to manufacturing problems of the anode) on the anode side which can form metallic Li dendrites that poke through the electrolyte and separator and again short the battery (direct electronic connection of cathode to anode) causing heating and burning of materials.
 
*LTD* said:
Well, that's one.

Give us a few hundred more and it'll be something worth looking into.
Click to expand...

Maybe if it was another company.. But Apple I'm sure will be (if not already) on top of the situation. Just thinking more about it.. the iPhone 4 was the best selling phone (I think).. and yes, while it is ONLY 1 known case.. it is still worth looking into.

----------
marksman said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

iPhone's are da bomb.
Click to expand...

the experience will "blow" you away.. :rolleyes:
 
cerote said:
That's because it is an aftermarket back panel that has his silhouette.
Click to expand...

I don't think so, although the cracking does sort of look like glasses. But when you compare it to the aftermarket back, it doesn't look the same. Look at the top of the head/forehead, and also at the chin. (And the aftermarket back changes more than the silhouette):

custom-steve-jobs-logo-iPhone-back-4.jpg


iphone_4_self_combustion.jpg
 
Cougarcat said:
No, the radio frequencies are separate, according to the NYT article. The number wouldn't matter.



There has been no recorded incident of consumer electronics interfere with aircraft. But there has been no evidence that proves that they unequivocally don't, so the FCC has decided to err on the side of caution.

We accept risks much, much larger than this on a daily basis. If rules like this were applied to the world, everyone would live in padded rooms, hooked up to medical monitors, and all forms of transportation would be banned.
Click to expand...
I love this rule honestly. Do you really want to be on a flight with a hundred idiots all talking on the phone? Some people are annoying as hell when they are on the phone and last thing I want to do is to deal with those people on a plane.
 
Hmm

Must be defective, I mean if it hasn't happened before why would this be a common issue? I seriously doubt it is a common issue. We all read about the exploding iPod touch with the angry mother complaining it caused her son "horrible mental distress", nothing like it has happened since.
 
alhedges said:
I don't think so, although the cracking does sort of look like glasses. But when you compare it to the aftermarket back, it doesn't look the same. Look at the top of the head/forehead, and also at the chin. (And the aftermarket back changes more than the silhouette):

Image

Image
Click to expand...

Well I stand corrected then.
 
Frasern1 said:
I love this rule honestly. Do you really want to be on a flight with a hundred idiots all talking on the phone? Some people are annoying as hell when they are on the phone and last thing I want to do is to deal with those people on a plane.
Click to expand...

+100

I'd rather have crying babies next to me than idiots on cellphones.

At least the babies can't be expected to realize that they are as annoying as all hell.
 
betaboy78 said:
Is it just me, or does the logo on the back of the iPhone look like the Steve Jobs Silhouette version of the Apple Logo?
Click to expand...

Does rather look like it. Which means that it is possible that that is not the original back plate. and if the back plate was taken off it is possible that someone scratched the battery and it was just fun timing that it blew up on the plane and not some other time.
 
tommyleeh said:
Can you say recall? If this is true. This is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

They don't do recalls for one offs that haven't even been proven to have been a defect in the phone.

----------
Small White Car said:
And THIS is why the flight attendants tell you to turn your phone off during the flight!
Click to expand...

Actually the instruction is to turn off all cell phones, iPads etc and put them away during take off and landing. Once you are at cruising they will let you get them back out.

The reason isn't about the devices at all. It's because something like 98% of all crashes happen during one of those two times. So if **** is going to happen they don't want anyone distracted by a phone call etc or have to deal with some douchebag that insists on finishing his call etc
 
Maybe he was running an N64 emulator on an almost dead (non-working) battery when the slight decrease in air pressure caused the battery to blow up. Or he had a short in his battery somehow.

Or the TSA will begin searching our iPhones because this guy was the iPhone bomber.

----------
charlituna said:
They don't do recalls for one offs that haven't even been proven to have been a defect in the phone.

The reason isn't about the devices at all. It's because something like 98% of all crashes happen during one of those two times. So if **** is going to happen they don't want anyone distracted by a phone call etc or have to deal with some ****bag that insists on finishing his call etc
Click to expand...


Yeah, they don't allow portable TVs even though they do NOT give off any signal; they only receive signals that are already in the air!
 
I think this has something to do with pressure changes. When the aircraft lands, the cabin is depressurised thus exposing the aircraft to sea level pressure.

This shouldn't happen at all, based on Apple's specs, the iPhone can safely function at 10,000 feet and commercial aircraft are pressurised to an equivalent of 8,000 feet.
 
alhedges said:
I don't think so, although the cracking does sort of look like glasses. But when you compare it to the aftermarket back, it doesn't look the same. Look at the top of the head/forehead, and also at the chin. (And the aftermarket back changes more than the silhouette):

Image

Image
Click to expand...

Where's the camera flash on that? It should be visible but I can't see it.
 
Self Destruct

This phone will self destruct in 30 seconds! Maybe the phone owner hit the battery overload button. I wonder if the TSA will ban phones in yet another reaction to a past incident, citing the potential for the use of phone battery incindiary devices.
 
adder7712 said:
I think this has something to do with pressure changes. When the aircraft lands, the cabin is depressurised thus exposing the aircraft to sea level pressure.

This shouldn't happen at all, based on Apple's specs, the iPhone can safely function at 10,000 feet and commercial aircraft are pressurised to an equivalent of 8,000 feet.
Click to expand...

I doubt the air pressure change is that extreme, or more things besides batteries (like our ears) will be blowing up. If it started burning, it's probably a short. Maybe he spilled his soda on it.

----------
arogge said:
This phone will self destruct in 30 seconds! Maybe the phone owner hit the battery overload button. I wonder if the TSA will ban phones in yet another reaction to a past incident, citing the potential for the use of phone battery incindiary devices.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can't have lighters, but I can have batteries that can start fires. I can't have containers that can hold more than a certain volume, yet my stomach can hold way more than that volume. What if someone has a somehow frozen liquid explosive? What if someone drinks liquid explosive?
 
faroZ06 said:
I doubt the air pressure change is that extreme, or more things besides batteries (like our ears) will be blowing up. If it started burning, it's probably a short. Maybe he spilled his soda on it.

----------



Yeah, I can't have lighters, but I can have batteries that can start fires. I can't have containers that can hold more than a certain volume, yet my stomach can hold way more than that volume. What if someone has a somehow frozen liquid explosive? What if someone drinks liquid explosive?
Click to expand...


I would hope the toxic vapors escaping through a person's mouth or butt would be enough to trigger a warning.
 
faroZ06 said:
I doubt the air pressure change is that extreme, or more things besides batteries (like our ears) will be blowing up. If it started burning, it's probably a short. Maybe he spilled his soda on it.
Click to expand...

8,000' is a typical maximum cabin pressure altitude (probably at 40,000' cruising altitude). It varies a bit between different aircraft. Passengers don't usually have a problem adjusting during climb and descent, as there is a programmed cabin climb and descent rate which is much slower than the actual aircraft's rates.

Unless the passenger has a head cold or other medical condition which can affect sinuses and ears, most people cope with the pressure changes just fine.

Another poster seemed to think pressurization was just for passenger comfort (not "popping eardrums", for example). I suppose if not passing out and possibly dying as discomfort, that might be true. Most people will pass out almost immediately (within a minute, or so) at 35,000'. At 25,000' you have a bit longer - typically 4-5 minutes, though cognitively, they are pretty useless past a few minutes. (I don't remember which page in this thread this post was made, or I would have quoted.)

As for the OP, I suspect we don't have all the facts on the condition of the phone. Although there could have been a latent defect in that particular battery, we can't be sure that the phone wasn't damaged in some way prior to the incident until more details are released. There's too much conjecture here - especially those using pseudo, and just plain wrong, science.
 
alhedges said:
I don't think so, although the cracking does sort of look like glasses. But when you compare it to the aftermarket back, it doesn't look the same. Look at the top of the head/forehead, and also at the chin. (And the aftermarket back changes more than the silhouette):

Image

Image
Click to expand...

I agree they are not the same! Maybe Jobs is sending us a message from the other side of the void! ^^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back