Why a plane turned around when a passenger lost a phone midflight

https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2025/03/28/air-france-lost-cellphone/

by bookofjoe • 1 year ago

114 201 1 year ago

washingtonpost.com

bookofjoe4• 1 year ago

https://archive.ph/x1d1c

mysterydip• 1 year ago

Is the risk of a phone overheating and exploding the battery less if the owner knows where it is?

mitthrowaway2• 1 year ago

Yes, because if you know where it is, you likely also know it's not wedged into a seat hinge getting crushed as you attempt to recline.

jyounker• 1 year ago

I think the fear is that the user's phone is in the checked luggage.

protimewaster• 1 year ago

At least in the USA, cell phones are allowed checked luggage. However, they are supposed to be powered of and "protected up prevent unintentional activation or damage".

I realize this was an Air France flight, but I suspect the checked rules are nearly the same.

op00to2• 1 year ago

Overheating? Maybe. Preventing explosion? Absolutely.

LorenPechtel12• 1 year ago

It's not about the risk of it going up, but in whether it will be promptly noted and contained if it does go up.

potato3732842• 1 year ago

Once you know about something you have to "do something" even if that something is stupid.

barbazoo• 1 year ago

There is definitely truth to that. Example: Post 9/11 security theatre.

bilsbie• 1 year ago

How did they know the phone was lost?

Polizeiposaune• 1 year ago

Presumably a passenger came to them and asked for help extracting their phone from a crevice in a seat.

If this keeps happening, providing an on-board toolkit and cross-training flight attendants in proper seat disassembly and reassembly could well pay off.

bookofjoe4• 1 year ago

Insurance companies and legal departments will nip that idea in the bud.

jongjong• 1 year ago

It's crazy to think that anyone could, at no cost to themselves, cause a large commercial plane to be turned around and wipe out maybe $1 million dollars of value from the economy; if you count fuel costs, staff costs, lost hours of hundreds of passengers.

Quarondeau• 1 year ago

Airlines have hugely benefited from moving travelers from paper tickets to the use of their phones, where everything is done in the airline's app. Even if a few flights get turned around now and then, that seems trivial compared to the benefits:

- No need to print/distribute physical tickets

- Check-ins via the app reduces the need for ground personnel

- They can push inflight menus, shopping items, promotions etc.

- Flight updates and other notifications can get pushed to your device

- Integration of loyalty systems like airmiles

- They get to track various user behaviors

ghaff11• 1 year ago

Passengers have benefited as well. Traditional tickets weren’t quite like cash but they were a big hassle to replace if lost.

rlpb• 1 year ago

This sort of thing happens all the time, just less obviously. For example in my city it's not unusual to hear that a major tram line is stopped during the morning commute due to a car driver blocking it inconsiderately or colliding.

Once amortized against successful journeys the overall cost per passenger isn't significant. When it is, that's when we start seeing liability moved to the instigator.

happytoexplain• 1 year ago

This train of reasoning goes to some very sick places very quickly. A more reasonable version of this is "it's crazy to think that anyone could be put in a position to etc etc". I.e. we live in a big complicated world - if an individual drops the production table, almost certainly something else was wrong besides that person making a mistake.

NoahZuniga2• 1 year ago

I don't think the parent comment is saying that this passenger is at fault, just that there is a lot of potential for abuse.

franktankbank• 1 year ago

Wipe out 1 million dollars from the economy?? Au contraire mon frere they just added 1 million dollars to GDP!

yaris• 1 year ago

While the point is valid, I can't help but think about "A hacker in a restaurant", english version found here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hacker-restaurant-alexander-s... (it's not mine and I'm in no way affiliated with the owner/author of the page).

subarctic• 1 year ago

So weird to me that this blog post is on linkedin and clicking your link opened the linkedin app on my phone

_ph_• 1 year ago

It is the only sane way to handle things like this and I think it is the reason air travel is so secure that most regulations and practices make sense.

You want the crew to be fully in charge of security. If they think the plane should turn around, it turns around. In the long term it is way cheaper to eat those costs then to start a whole industry about litigation for events like these, probably causing everyone to buy additional insurance etc.

You definitely don't want to give any incentive to anyone to "overlook" possible problems.

OutOfHere6• 1 year ago

I strongly advise buying and always using a "phone lanyard" to tether your phone to your belt loop. A well-working example is ASIN B07ZSDFY85. With it, your phone won't get lost or get left behind. Even if the risk of losing the phone is just once in ten years, it still is worth it. If it drops with the tether, you can just lift the tether cable to get it back. If you're tall, you may need two, or something longer. Note that the tether works only with a compatible phone case to hold it in place.

LeifCarrotson• 1 year ago

Bluetooth from a smartwatch or BLE locator beacon in your keys/wallet/bag works almost as well and is way more convenient.

OutOfHere6• 1 year ago

I have a smartwatch, but it won't help at all when leaving your phone in an Uber/Lyft which takes off. You will then be left with the awareness of having just left your phone rather than actually your phone.

tiahura• 1 year ago

I recommend a good pocket protector to accompany the phone lanyard. Here’s a nice leather option. B08S6KMCGM

girvo3• 1 year ago

Well I thought your reply was both amusing and technically relevant...

I'd never be caught dead with that lanyard haha so it's amusing to see it recommended, though I don't blame others for using one!

I've not considered it, but with the rise of phones and e-ink and so on, I assume pocket protectors are even less common than they were prior?

_qua• 1 year ago

I would lose 5 phones before I wore that embarrassing thing

OutOfHere6• 1 year ago

Why is it embarrassing? That's entirely in your mind. It is objectively quite neutral. It's not about the cost of the phone... it's about the massive effort that goes into setting up a new phone, literally multiple weeks of effort. Also, life can be disrupted a fair bit without a phone. There is also some data loss of apps that haven't fully been backed up. If your phone use is light and ordinary, you don't need it.

ergocoder• 1 year ago

why don't we throw in a belt pouch as well??

diffxx• 1 year ago

Here's my countervailing advice for keeping your phone safe: don't use a case or any protection at all. This trains you to take care of it.

Spooky234• 1 year ago

That doesn’t work for current gen iPhones, whose screens you can scratch seemingly with pocket mint.

boomboomsubban• 1 year ago

I use this method and have only broken one phone in ten years because of it...

kjkjadksj• 1 year ago

This little experiment lasted for about 6 weeks for me before I broke front and back glass and cracked the camera lens in one go on a cement floor. I’ll take the $6 rubber case now and save me some grief.

rcxdude3• 1 year ago

I think this is akin to the "wearing a seatbelt makes me drive more dangerously" argument. (I also don't use a case, but mainly because I don't like the extra bulk and don't mind dinging my phone up a bit, not because I think I'll take better care of it).

tgsovlerkhgsel3• 1 year ago

Do you also have a safety spike [1] installed in your car?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Tullock#Tullock's_spike

LorenPechtel12• 1 year ago

Lanyard to your *belt*?

I hike, a phone falling is a realistic issue. I use a lanyard around my neck, though, not to my belt. A lanyard long enough to reach from your belt to use is likely to let it hit the ground. I've had it slip out a few times and be caught by the lanyard--without hitting the ground.

JoelMcCracken• 1 year ago

Thank you to whoever changed the title to omit the question mark. Question marks at the end of non questions drives me crazy. I’ve tried to accept it and accustom myself to it, but I still always trying to parse it multiple times

bookofjoe4• 1 year ago

That was me. I'm the idiot who originally added it to the published headline before I realized it and removed it.

facile3232• 1 year ago

Any statement can be a question with the right tone. I actually have the exact opposite stance: we expect formal questions when in most cases it makes more sense to simply state something with a lilting tone. But maybe it's just me?

mpalmer• 1 year ago

Not all statements are headlines.

Jhsto3• 1 year ago

I was on a flight where we had a fire inside of the cabin because of some mobile device. What I found weird was the only piece of communication being that "we are returning", around 15 minutes after the plane had turned back. I was able to smell the smoke at that point.

cedws3• 1 year ago

What airline was it?

I've never been to the US but seen a lot of random videos and pilots in the US sound kind of unprofessional. They don't seem to communicate clearly and use very casual language. For instance I saw a video recently where the pilot refused a plane because he "wasn't feeling it" or something.

ocdtrekkie• 1 year ago

If the pilot isn't feeling the plane, I don't want to be on it either, so I'm not sure that's an "unprofessional" issue.

verzali• 1 year ago

No, that's a standard part of flying safety. If you are not in the right mental state to fly you shouldn't, and especially not if the lives of hundreds of people depend on you.

Spartan-S63• 1 year ago

In that particular instance, that pilot also mentioned there were issues with engine oil pressure, IIRC, and the fuel filter was scheduled to be replaced after the long haul flight over water. Those concerning data points were what led to him not “feeling it.” That type of casual language, IMO, makes it easier for people to empathize with the conclusion based on hard facts.

Jhsto3• 1 year ago

It was United.

dghlsakjg• 1 year ago

That video was noteworthy because it was such unusual phrasing.

6SixTy2• 1 year ago

The pilot in command can refuse an aircraft because of unresolved mechanical or technical issues, and sometimes issues that for example are fine on a clear calm day can just not be in weather. Remember that the pilots themselves are responsible for the safety of the aircraft and all passengers for the duration of the flight, so it's up to their judgement to make sure that a flight is safe.

But a fire on a plane is pretty much the most dangerous event you can have on a flight. Especially lithium battery fires since aircraft don't have the right extinguisher for them, and staff are generally trained to quarantine the fire just long enough so it can be taken care of on the ground.

cactacea• 1 year ago

Why do you feel that is weird? Keeping the passengers informed isn't really a priority in a situation like that. They told you when you needed to know.

Jhsto3• 1 year ago

I thought that even the cabin crew did not know what's burning. There's also the feeling of helplessness -- you know something is wrong but you are not told that something is wrong. The hysteria at the back of the plane could have been alleviated by telling that the situation is under control. When the plane was landing, I could see fire trucks, an ambulance, and police of some sort driving in parallel to the plane to rush in. I only found out about the reason from the news later.

IshKebab2• 1 year ago

What? Keeping passengers informed is zero effort, a nice thing to do, and probably a good idea. Why would you not say "we are returning due to a battery fire. The fire has been contained but we must return because X y z" or whatever.

y33t• 1 year ago

Just curious, were they able to purge or scrub the smoke from the cabin? Seems like a battery fire in a closed space like that would be a lung hazard.

jerlam2• 1 year ago

Airliners have touted in the pandemic that planes have HEPA filtration which remove 99.95+% of particles in the air, which includes smoke particles.

Battery fires will also produce other bad stuff in the air, but it's still a minor consideration compared to a fire which can bring down the plane.

KineticLensman• 1 year ago

What I found weird was the only piece of communication being that "we are returning"

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate

Dylan168075• 1 year ago

Can you elaborate on how that is relevant?

It's hard for me to imagine how the urgent aviation and navigation involved in turning the plane around takes two people 15 uninterrupted minutes, let alone the portion after turning around needing 15 uninterrupted minutes.

icegreentea2• 1 year ago

For a sense of scale, the FAA has been tracking battery related incidents, and you can take a looksie here: https://www.faa.gov/hazmat/resources/lithium_batteries/incid...

You can click through to see specific incident summaries. It looks like a significant amount (if not majority) of events are inflight on passenger flights (as opposed to on the ground, tarmac, ground handling, or freight operations). There were 85 total incidents in 2024 (there were some 9 million passenger revenue departures to give another sense of scale).

Lost phone is a problem because:

* Could be in a place that increases risk of thermal run away to begin with - classic example would be caught in the seat hinge. But even being stuck surrounding by cushioning could increase the risk of overheating

* Decreased visibility. The faster you can react (ie, try to dump the thing into a thermal protection bag / get it away from other flammables) the better. If you read the incidents, you'll see time after time the sequence "passenger notified flight attendant, who then placed it in a thermal containment bag, flight completed normally".

I could see changes to rules that will begin to prohibit storing batteries in overhead compartments (which aside from the pinch problem, actually has all the same risks of losing a phone). Or perhaps mandatory/routine pre-emptive use of thermal containment bags.

The airliners know there's no going back. They must accommodate for batteries, so they'll seek the right balance.

lsllc• 1 year ago

If you've ever had to fly with (cordless) power tools the rules allow this but the batteries must be in carry on and not be in the checked baggage (the tool itself must be checked!) and there's a limit on the max battery size (160 Wh), although I don't think there's a limit on how many you can carry-on.

For example, with DeWalt 20V batteries, 160Wh is an 8Ah (which is one of the larger sized batteries), but if you have 60V FlexVolt tools (circular saw) you are probably out of luck as they start around 6Ah (and @60V, 160Wh is only 2.6Ah), going up to 15Ah (which would be 900Wh).

lesuorac• 1 year ago

although I don't think there's a limit on how many you can carry-on.

Correct. So long as it's for personal use.

[1] Quantity limits: None for most batteries — but batteries must be for use by the passenger. Batteries carried for further sale or distribution (vendor samples, etc.) are prohibited. There is a limit of two spare batteries per person for the larger lithium ion batteries described above (101–160 watt hours per battery).

[1] https://www.faa.gov/hazmat/packsafe/lithium-batteries

andrewaylett• 1 year ago

I assume this is because the thermal containment bags they have are only rated to a certain limit, but distinct batteries hopefully won't ignite at the same time and can in any case go in different bags?

johnwalkr• 1 year ago

For the 60V flex volt battery, which is actually 3x 20v batteries which the tool can configure in series, the advertised capacity in Ah is almost certainly measured at 20V. And 20V is also a marketing term, with nominal voltage being around 18.5. So the 6Ah battery is probably around 111Wh and the 15Ah battery is probably around 278Wh. So only one of them is oversized but you should find a data sheet that clearly shows capacity in Wh.

rcxdude3• 1 year ago

IATA says a limit of 2 <160Wh batteries (with airline approval) and a limit of 20 <100Wh batteries (which is a lot!), but also airlines are free to be more or less strict as they see fit, so basically check with the airline (it's rare that they'll be less strict as a policy, but they may be OK if you clear it with them beforehand, and some are more restrictive by default).

1970-01-01• 1 year ago

Now we're losing international flights to lost phones? Sodium batteries can't come soon enough.

inejge• 1 year ago

I can't blame them, an in-air cabin fire is no joke. This[1] happened on the ground and destroyed the plane. Another very recent one[2] was in the air and thankfully extinguished. But I don't see sodium batteries in portable devices any time soon: too bulky for the capacity. LFP, perhaps.

[1] https://avherald.com/h?article=523644ed&opt=0

[2] https://avherald.com/h?article=525739ed&opt=0

thih9• 1 year ago

After checks by the maintenance teams, the device was found

Do we know where the device was found?

smeej2• 1 year ago

I feel like I'm having some sort of Mandela Effect moment, but maybe I'm missing something a lot more obvious?

I've had portable charging battery packs for at least a decade. I wasn't special. They were common. But it's only in the last few years that I've been hearing any concern about the batteries in consumer electronic devices causing aircraft fires.

I remember hearing about the ones in hoverboards, and then there was one version of a Samsung device that had problems, but nobody generalized to "all such electronic items must be in the cabin with you, and if you lose track of yours, we're turning the plane around."

Did something maybe change about battery chemistry that I don't know about? Or did the design change, such that the batteries aren't protected anymore or have enough more capacity that they've become dangerous?

I can't imagine there were actually widespread battery fires for as long as I remember never having heard not to put a battery in checked luggage, so what else changed such that this is such a major issue now when it wasn't before?

aoanevdus• 1 year ago

https://apnews.com/article/russia-poland-germany-sabotage-ca...

November 5, 2024

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Western security officials suspect Russian intelligence was behind a plot to put incendiary devices in packages on cargo planes headed to North America, including one that caught fire at a courier hub in Germany and another that ignited in a warehouse in England.
Poland said last month that it has arrested four people suspected to be linked to a foreign intelligence operation that carried out sabotage and is searching for two others. Lithuania’s prosecutor general Nida Grunskiene said Tuesday there were an unspecified number of people detained in several countries, offering no elaboration.

People have been sending explodey batteries by air freight. In that context, requiring batteries on a plane to be in the cabin where they can be located, accompanied by the owner of the battery could be a good deterrent.

op00to2• 1 year ago

My wild ass guess: prices dropped, causing battery packs to get bigger and increase availability to people who may not understand or care about the risk. Additionally, with lower base cost of lithium ion batteries, you get more cheap crap that is not engineered well.

LorenPechtel12• 1 year ago

I think the proliferation of power banks is also relevant. More and more people have come to consider a power bank + cable to be normal travel gear. High energy density (it's not surrounded by equipment meant to be powered from the battery) and people often cheap out figuring the cost of a bad one being low.

muststopmyths2• 1 year ago

never having heard not to put a battery in checked luggage

Maybe not conventional batteries, but you've been disallowed from putting lithium batteries in checked luggage for at least 16 years. I remember being dragged into the bowels of an airport by security to open my checked bag because I'd forgotten a device in it. That was in 2009.

When you check in bags they ask you to make sure there aren't any rechargeable devices or battery packs in them and this has also been going on for a long time.

sroussey• 1 year ago

I still send my AirTags in checked luggage. But they are small!

ghaff11• 1 year ago

Yeah, I’ve been aware of this for ages. That said I’m sure lithium batteries in checked luggage are super-common in things like electric razors and tooth brushes and a ton of other things we never think about.

It’s like airplane mode. How many cellphones on a given flight are actually in airplane mode?

therein• 1 year ago

When you check in bags they ask you to make sure there aren't any rechargeable devices or battery packs in them and this has also been going on for a long time.

Literally never once have I been asked that and I flew internationally 6 times a year for more than 5 years.

The only thing I can think of is maybe you look like the kind of person that would have rechargeable devices and battery packs in his luggage? :)

Reason0773• 1 year ago

“you've been disallowed from putting lithium batteries in checked luggage for at least 16 years.”

This rule only applies to loose (spare) Li-ion batteries, not batteries which are installed in a device.

Batteries over 160 Wh (in some cases, 100 Wh) are banned whether they’re in a device or not, but that’s far bigger than any phone battery: an iPhone 16 Pro Max battery is about 16 Wh, and typical laptop batteries are around 60 Wh.

IATA Li-ion battery fact sheet: https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/fact-sheet...

LorenPechtel12• 1 year ago

Yup, it's happened to me. I had put the battery in my daypack while we were there. I thought it had gone back in my laptop bag for the flight--nope, it was buried in the daypack. PVG security caught it.

Spooky234• 1 year ago

Devices are smaller and portable batteries are treated roughly. Also, many devices have batteries with custom-ish shapes that may be better or worse than standardized designs that were popular before devices get thinner.

The other thing is that consumers won’t be aware of risks for semi-disposable batteries. I found out a few days ago that a high capacity Anker battery that I own was recalled last year. Would such a thing even happen for a random battery sold at CVS?

I was in a leadership role for an org with about 95k laptops. We had, on average 4-6 significant battery incidents with an ignition per year. Anywhere from 30-250 reported battery swelling events annually. It’s enough that we provided kits for safe storage of at risk batteries to every field office.

Now that’s a pretty low risk of an incident, but in an airline environment the impact of that risk is very high.

ghaff11• 1 year ago

I'm almost surprised that you had that few battery swelling incidents although I assume that in a corporate setting laptops tend to get refreshed before you're likely to have swollen batteries. I've had one myself in an Apple MacBook Pro but it was a pretty old model when that happened. (Also an older iPhone that was driving my stereo system when I went to replace it after doing an upgrade.)

andrei_says_• 1 year ago

These numbers are sobering - thank you for providing. Even a single battery ignition incident can burn my house.

renewiltord• 1 year ago

It’s just that when something hits a process there’s a massive step change as everyone normalizes processes around it. Until that moment, rare events are all that you see.

rsynnott• 1 year ago

I can't imagine there were actually widespread battery fires for as long as I remember never having heard not to put a battery in checked luggage

This was pretty much the initiating incident, 15 years ago now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines_Flight_6

rcxdude3• 1 year ago

This. The rules got tightened right up when this happened, because regulators basically looked at it and went 'holy shit, what if that had been a passenger aircraft?'

ChrisMarshallNY• 1 year ago

one version of a Samsung device that had problems

The best GTA mod: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IVk8PsSgEI

ueusndn• 1 year ago

it’ll be the beginning of a campaign to buy US batteries rather than ‘cheap explosive’ Chinese ones

genewitch4• 1 year ago

Cheap lithium ion batteries are awful, though, so if the US ones are better, I'm for it. Like I know Westinghouse doesn't manufacture their own l-ion batteries, they use white label from some manufacturer they trust, probably LG.

But I have thrown away probably 100 18650 and 26650 batteries that just sucked or were fire hazards.

LorenPechtel12• 1 year ago

The cheap junk *should be* banned as a fire hazard.

stephen_g• 1 year ago

Part of I feel like is that 10-15+ years ago, people only owned a couple of items with rechargable lithium batteries in them (if any at all!), and now people can have dozens. So the tiny chance of having one catching on fire is just multiplied by 10-20x just because there are many more of them around.

The other thing that was mentioned was that devices got thinner so there's a bit more chance of bending, squashing etc. stressing or puncturing the battery which can cause a fire.

And thirdly I think is cheap devices that don't have adequate protection against thermal issues etc., but that's mostly a risk during charging (that's where those hoverboard fire stories came from).

joshvm• 1 year ago

The IATA rules are actually quite permissive (Delta for example) for checked luggage:

Lithium cells or batteries power many consumer electronic devices and medical devices, like watches, laptop batteries, calculators, cell phones, hearing aids and much more. You can bring lithium-battery powered devices as carry-on items or in checked baggage. Spare lithium batteries are allowed as carry-on items only with batteries individually protected to prevent short circuit.

FAA general rules are similar. The concern nowadays is that someone will drop a device into a seat mechanism and it could crush the battery.

giarc• 1 year ago

The concern nowadays is that someone will drop a device into a seat mechanism and it could crush the battery.

I took a few flights in the last year or two and they made an announcement along the lines of "If you happen to drop your phone between your seat, do not try to retrieve it. Call a flight attendant for help." Latest flights didn't make the same statement, but wasn't necessarily listening for it.

neuroelectron• 1 year ago

Have you heard about the pagers in Lebanon?

Retr0id• 1 year ago

Did something maybe change about battery chemistry

I don't think there's been any single notable change, but energy density is steadily increasing.

SoftTalker• 1 year ago

I used to pack my laptop in my checked bag because I hate dealing with carry-on.

colechristensen• 1 year ago

more things have lithium batteries now and questionably manufactured devices that aren't properly certified are as well

incidents with lithium batteries on US aircraft now happen about twice a week

there has been slowly ramping up concern about lithium batteries over the last several years as a result

yread• 1 year ago

Note 7 introduced a lot of people to spicy pillows, it launched in 2016

karunamurti• 1 year ago

The world needs a new rating like IPX rating for battery fire hazard.

rambojohnson• 1 year ago

Because lithium batteries that could now be in the luggage compartment.

Why a plane turned around when a passenger lost a phone midflight

Related Stories