Toggle sidebar Toggle 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

Actually this is good news.

1) Antennagate
2) Batterygate
3) iBombgate

You know what they say about the rule of three's.

Now that it's over, the upcoming new iPhone model may be the lucky one that

"Just Works" 🙂
 
From the picture, I'm thinking that it was previously damaged.

Just from the description suggests that "glowing red" indicates an exposed short circuit. Maybe it was damaged before it was turned on in the airplane (eg at security or before.) The report is missing some questions like:

1. Was it turned on during flight (like you're supposed to) or was it turned on before takeoff?
2. If it was turned on during flight, was it in airplane mode?
3. Was it damaged before or during flight?

If anyone remembers the laptop and cellphone batteries that caught fire on airplanes, they were also caused by damage to the battery or while charging. Inferior Chinese counterfeits or in case of the Sony, inappropriate manufacturing changes may make it too easy to damage.

It's not unheard of anyway. The only reason this is news today is that it's the iPhone.
 
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...

There's also a drop of liquid on the bite mark in the apple logo that's refracting light, which is causing the logo to be a bit distorted in that area, in addition to the cracks probably causing further distortion.
 
jamesryanbell said:
Probably a defective phone. It's never happened BEFORE this that we know of, and I'm sure a ton of people with iPhones travel.
Click to expand...

Stuff like this is very difficult to prove as a manufacture's defect. Since it is a mobile device, it could have easily been dropped hard, mishandled, irradiated, etc etc to where the battery seal was compromised on a pressure change. If this is the only event in distribution of builds in the millions, IMO there is not enough burden of proof.
 
the apple logo on the iPhone looks like the one with steve jobs pic..

sorry alhedges, didn't see ur post before..
 
I think I like the Mission Impossible theory the best. He probably just finished a call with his current mission details, or got them texted to the device. This is the best way to make sure the texts/pictures and such don't fall into the wrong hands. However, I think they handled this wrong. The best way to handle this is to pretend to not make much of this......and then put a tail on the guy. He won't suspect he's being followed.
 
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...

Although I can see where you are going with this, the logic isn't sound. The idea of a battery exploding due to it being potentially pierced doesn't quite bare out. If so, hundreds of millions of phones world wide are potential ignition points that are capable of firing up by simply pushing a pin into the phone. Or a key. The potential for people to do serious damage to themselves if they accidentally bumped too hard into a structure would make this kind of thing be an instant consumer safety fail.

Although I am still sceptical about this entire thing (I have yet to see this in main-stream media here in Australia as yet) we still don't have a full set of facts.

----------

urp. Here we go. 4 hours ago (16 hours after I read this article on here) a major Australian news service has picked up on this, and talked to REX.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2011/s3378753.htm

However, they doubtful about the legitimacy of this item, or the batteries or components.
 
Cougarcat said:
A complete ass? No, you're just being sensible. There is no evidence to suggest that electronics pose threats to aircraft.

It's just another silly rule to make us feel safe.
Click to expand...

In the United States, both the FAA (who regulate air safety) and the FCC (who regulate radio spectrum) ban mobile phones on airplanes. However, the FCC ban is stricter, and they're the ones who have shown no interest in exceptions. That should tell you something. Along with the fact that the FCC ban even applies to pilots of private planes (though they ignore said ban all the time).

While interference with avionics is a mild concern, the biggest concern is actually interference with the cell networks themselves. The networks are not designed to be used in-air and several problems can occur when they are:

1. In CDMA-type (not just Verizon & Sprint, but CDMA air interface systems which include AT&T and T-Mobile 3G - UMTS aka W-CDMA) systems, a phone communicates in "soft handoff" with all sites it can see on the active channel. Thus a phone uses capacity on every site it can see, which is far more in the air than on the ground.

2. In TDMA-type systems (such as GSM and IDEN), where channels are not reused on adjacent sites, a phone in the air may see more than one site on the same channel, creating noise on the adjacent sites.

3. In ALL systems, problem 2 will also occur near license boundaries.

Mobile phones are not, generally, functional at the altitudes seen in commercial air travel. General aviation pilots actually cause the most issues of this type. Almost all GA pilots ignore the law, and many don't even realize it applies to them since they're in their own plane.
 
bpaluzzi said:
#1 - It was legal, just a loophole.

#2 - If you're using Steve Jobs as your example of how NOT to be an ass, you're barking up the wrong tree.
Click to expand...

You missed my sarcasm. Clearly I was pointing out that Steve acted like an ass (in this regard) much like the person who refuses to turn their cell phone off.
 
I didn't know that when the stewards said don't use your phone in-flight, that they meant it would explode! Jokes, probably a defective battery or something. And before you droids say its an issue, I read the other day of an HTC also doing the same.
 
This is why removable and replacable batteries make sense. If you felt it getting hot you could take the battery out and save your iPhone.
 
theosib said:
More reasons for aviation authorities to tell us not to use cell phones on planes.

But seriously… people like to complain about not being allowed to use cell phones on planes. If one person were using a cell phone, there's absolutely no effect it would have on the plane. On the other hand, I might see it as plausble that there might be some small amount of interference if EVERYONE were using their cell phones on the plane at once.

This one time, my wife was reading her Nook on a plane, when some guy said to her that she was going to crash the plane with that thing on. I told him he should learn how these things work before opening his mouth. He just looked away. I'm guessing he didn't expect anyone to stand up to him.
Click to expand...

I honestly think you should understand why these things are enforced before YOU open your mouth. I work in aviation and am flying almost every day due to it - I'm a flight attendant. While the simple, off-the-cuff response in regards to electronic devices is the clichéd "interference" excuse, the main reason (and this is coming straight from the training manual) is actually for safety during critical stages of the flight - take off and landing. While it is plausible that transmitting devices may cause some kind of interference, it is preferred that devices are switched off so that passengers can be briefed on safety instructions and so that they are observant. It's the exact same reason why we ask for window shutters to be open too - because the flight attendants obviously cannot see outside the aircraft during takeoff and landing, but the passengers will, and will alert crew if they see anything abnormal (for example, smoke coming from an engine). You have to remember, the attendants cannot see out of the windows as they don't have the luxury of window seats or being able to sit while they work, and the pilots have a very limited view (and their gauges don't necessarily tell them immediately if there's a problem). If passengers were allowed to click away on their devices with not a care in the world, who else is going to observe what's going on outside? Oh wait, no one.
 
Ivan P said:
I work in aviation and am flying almost every day due to it - I'm a flight attendant. While the simple, off-the-cuff response in regards to electronic devices is the clichéd "interference" excuse, the main reason (and this is coming straight from the training manual) is actually for safety during critical stages of the flight - take off and landing. While it is plausible that transmitting devices may cause some kind of interference, it is preferred that devices are switched off so that passengers can be briefed on safety instructions and so that they are observant. It's the exact same reason why we ask for window shutters to be open too - because the flight attendants obviously cannot see outside the aircraft during takeoff and landing, but the passengers will, and will alert crew if they see anything abnormal (for example, smoke coming from an engine). You have to remember, the attendants cannot see out of the windows as they don't have the luxury of window seats or being able to sit while they work, and the pilots have a very limited view (and their gauges don't necessarily tell them immediately if there's a problem). If passengers were allowed to click away on their devices with not a care in the world, who else is going to observe what's going on outside? Oh wait, no one.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you live or for which airline you work for. If an airline (or a member of airplane staff) had said to me anything like: "Be lookin' on them wings and engines beneath 'em for any smoke coming out or parts falling off, okay?" I'd be on my shortest way down on my own will. Also it is impossible to see anything relevant out of the window unless you are in the rear half of the plane. So let's not make any more silly excuses, okay? Use of cell phones and other transmitting devices is forbidden because any evil devices made to really screw up the avionics are virtually indistinguishable from modern cell phones and other normal gadgets, and there really is zero tolerance when taking off and landing with today's impossible air traffic.
 
boris42 said:
I don't know where you live or for which airline you work for. If an airline (or a member of airplane staff) had said to me anything like: "Be lookin' on them wings and engines beneath 'em for any smoke coming out or parts falling off, okay?" I'd be on my shortest way down on my own will. Also it is impossible to see anything relevant out of the window unless you are in the rear half of the plane. So let's not make any more silly excuses, okay? Use of cell phones and other transmitting devices is forbidden because any evil devices made to really screw up the avionics are virtually indistinguishable from modern cell phones and other normal gadgets, and there really is zero tolerance when taking off and landing with today's impossible air traffic.
Click to expand...

Of course they are not going to tell you to look out for that stuff because they don't want people to think they should worry about flying. But they are relying on that if you do see something self preservation will have you mention it to the flight attendants. No, not everyone will be looking outside, but then you do have people like me who insist on window seats and if I'm awake, I'm gazing to see what's going on outside (I like having a view of the wing even,I tend to pick seats that give me a good view of the wing and of below). But then, I get distracted by my gizmos and aren't looking outside anymore, I don't notice. More people like that, less chance *some one* will notice (it doesn't have to be you).

Anyways, I'm pretty sure it's mostly to keep us alert on the times the plane is most likely to crash (landing and taking off). I tend to ignore it anyways if I can get away with it when it comes to playing my music (The airline attendants don't notice) but I also do actually make a point to try to stay somewhat aware during those times (if I hear an announcement going on I do try to lower the volume some to hear if it is important and I do try to keep some attention if they are announcing something).

And yeah, the cellphone doesn't do much to disturb the avionics. At most it might interfere with a navigation instrument that might be a problem if you are trusting it and not realizing it is getting interfered with. That and it makes your headsets (My roommate flies and flies me with him) get this annoying buzz sound if the phone is trying to send out signal.

And once again, to the people who think that phones will explode if you keep them on, why do you think they then allow laptops and ipads and ebook readers to be used on the plane if you think having a device on during flight causes its battery to explode? In fact, read up on the guidelines on batteries you bring with you. They want them installed in a device or at least the battery ports to be covered to prevent a short. Also, spare batteries not put in your checked in bag (if something happens they will not realize it if it is in the checked in bag). They're actually not allowed in checked in bags. But it has nothing to do with whether a device is using them, in fact they prefer them to be installed in a device and the batteries they are worried about are the spare batteries that are not installed (I think you can check in devices that do have batteries installed but most things that would have batteries installed are recommended taking with you for "valuable things you don't want lost/stolen").
 
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