BA Flight called back

Dont know if anyone has seen this story yet however a BA jey en route to New York was called back when it was discovered a mobile phone was ringing at the rear of the plane. Supposedly the phone didnt belong to any of the passengers (like anyone would admit it was theirs)

It says it took the pilot 90 minutes to make the decision with advice from the ground to turn back. Surely if they thought it could be dangerous (Which they obviously did) they should have called it back sooner.

Is this the shape of things to come in future ie mid atlantic turn arounds because a mobile phone rings. I understand the that phones can be used to trigger devices but how far are we going to take these new procedures

Also the last sentence quoted by the captain as "Err on the side of caution" is a phrase made famous by the Home Secratary in every interview he has done this week. I think we will hear of this phrase much too often from now on

news.aol.co.uk...

[edit on 14-8-2006 by thesaint]

I read of a similar incident a few months ago on a Virgin Atlantic flight.

simple question... why didn't someone just turn it off?

If the phone was hooked up to a device, it would be serving as a detonator. The whole idea is that someone places a call to the phone, and the charge goes to the initiating explosive, and not to the ringer. That's how it works, as I understand it.

So, if the phone was just sitting there ringing, obviously it wasn't detonating anything.

I believe in the wisdom of 'better safe than sorry' but there are reasonable limits. If you took that saying to the extreme, you'd never leave your bathtub, and that's no way to live. :shk:

having dealt with explosives in the mil and understanding the fact that if the phone was ringing it was safe im afraid i would have just answered it. I understand it better to be safe than sorry but this seemed to kick in the ass taking things a little too far.

Wouldnt be a surprise if it was a stunt pulled off by the press although it would have been published i suppose. Sadly in the UK the press love pulling off stunts like these

Originally posted by thesaint
having dealt with explosives in the mil and understanding the fact that if the phone was ringing it was safe im afraid i would have just answered it. I understand it better to be safe than sorry but this seemed to kick in the ass taking things a little too far.

In my years in the forces i was often the first one on the scene of a suspect device and i would say ALWAYS better safe than sorry. I did'nt give a damn if it holds the whole country up for hours, unless ATO told me it was safe and they dealt with it then it was going nowhere!

Yes ok i've seen plenty of soldiers take this risk and luckily it worked out ok, but if i had a pound for every soldier i saw seriously injured because he thought he'd take a chance because he'd "had some explosives experience", i'd have earnt a damn sight more than i did!

I have'nt got an advanced knowledge of the circuitry involved in bombmaking, but i'm sure it's come along way since i was telling people not to use thier mobiles around a device. I know it's a totaly different method of detonation to compare it with, but an anti-personell mine which is traditionaly triggered by pressure, can be rigged to be detonated by pressure release. Whats to say that a mobile phone used to trigger a bomb when it rings, can't be adapted so that the circuit is armed once the phone rings, then detonation is triggered by turning the thing off or answering it?

I'm no electrician though, so i don't know......therefore thats why i leave things alone!

If someone wants to take this risk to avoid all the hassle when it's just them involved then thats cool, but don't do it when theres a load of people around you.

CX.

I know but me personally would have answered it. Wish our battalion was as safe as yours. Whilst in Bosnia whoever found a suspicious pakage such as a bag was the one nominated to open it.

You can guess what happened (No one wanted to say "Whats this bag")