Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

onemileatatime.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 629 posts

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#431

Post by Zak »

smoldesu wrote: post #347
ajmurmann wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This section makes it even more confusing to me, since I thought that the whole cell phone transmission restriction theater had been removed a few years ago. Was that only within the US and I've been violating EU regulations for years?

The more predominant issue is keeping anything with a lithium-ion battery in checked luggage. They'll crack down on anything from laptops to hearing aids.

Both lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries that are installed in devices are allowed in checked baggage in the US and most other places. The devices must be powered off. What that means is a bit ambiguous as most modern laptops, tablets, and phones have some components powered any time a battery is installed.

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/lithium-batteries-baggage

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#432

Post by YeBanKo »

rajko_rad wrote: post #343

I left my AirPods case in my seat, realized walking toward baggage area, wouldn’t let me go back to get them.. assured me someone would go get them for me… I filed a claim, they said they couldn’t find them there… now I see my AirPods case in an apartment complex in the Bronx… nothing I can do….

At the very least, you should file a police report and a complaint with DoT.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#433

Post by layer8 »

Zak wrote: post #431
smoldesu wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more predominant issue is keeping anything with a lithium-ion battery in checked luggage. They'll crack down on anything from laptops to hearing aids.

Both lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries that are installed in devices are allowed in checked baggage in the US and most other places. The devices must be powered off. What that means is a bit ambiguous as most modern laptops, tablets, and phones have some components powered any time a battery is installed. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/lithium-batteries-baggage

The regulation specifically states that "the devices must be completely switched off (not in sleep or hibernation mode)", and mobile devices normally all have a way to completely shut them down, with no components remaining active. The only exception I'm aware of are wireless earbuds (e.g. AirPods). Presumably you're not allowed to have those in checked baggage.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#435

Post by yftsui »

postalrat wrote: post #357
leifg wrote: post #276

Knowing German I read through the sources. This article is pretty misleading. The [primary source]( https://www.watson.de/leben/urlaub%20&%20freizeit/879935671-... ) is a slightly clickbait article asking the questions: "Are AirTags allowed in checked luggage?". They reached out to Lufthanse asking them. They responded: "Luggage trackers are electronic devices so they have to be turned off when the luggage is checked…

What do you mean "active tracker"? As far as I know airtags have a battery and aren't passive devices.

AirTags doesn’t report its location, the iPhone or other iOS devices report nearby AirTags. That’s the difference between an active tracker that has its own cellular connection.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#436

Post by ShakataGaNai »

Do they realize how many these these days have small batteries in them? Shavers, tooth brush, etc - that almost always are checked. Not to mention the coin cell batteries.

Are they really planning on banning every battery in luggage AND Enforcing it? That seems like a recipe for a bad time.

Don't get me wrong, there is a reason for some of the rules. The galaxy note 7 will be forever known as the fire phone. Cheap shitty hoverboards similarly caught fire with regularity.

But is there a single story about an AirTag catching fire?

This entire thing doesn't make sense.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#437

Post by tsujamin »

samdcbu wrote: post #389
tsujamin wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although there have been some legitimate concerns raised about some 5G bands edging into altitude sensors https://www.icao.int/safety/FSMP/MeetingDocs/FSMP%20WG11/IP/...

TLDR; the aviation industry had a decent technical study done on radio altimeter interference from 5G and the FCC determined it didn’t show radio altimeter interference from 5G was likely. Then an aggregated summary of that technical data was shared with an aviation industry group (whose members include radio altimeter manufacturers), and that group used the aggregated data to claim any 5G use would likely lead to ca…

sounds like I’ve been had by Big Altimeter :’)

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#438

Post by Zak »

kylehotchkiss wrote: post #151

Interestingly, they're not an issue in carry on bags. Which sit about 3 feet higher than a checked bag inside of an airplane.

The main concern with lithium batteries is fire. A fire in the cabin can be detected and contained much faster than in the cargo hold.

Fire is probably not a realistic concern with an AirTag, Tile, or similar low-powered device using a tiny battery, but the regulations are not nuanced. Devices powered by lithium batteries are supposed to be turned off if they're in the cargo hold.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#439

Post by stephen_g »

tsujamin wrote: post #137
nostrademons wrote: post #76

Note that the reason for airport mode is a courtesy to cell-phone carriers. It's not any air safety issue. Rather, 300-500 cell phones all trying to contact the next cell tower, multiple times per minute, would wreak havoc on cell service. https://www.inverse.com/article/51015-cell-phone-use-on-airp... At one point, when both cell phones and laptops were new, there was perhaps a risk to the airplane's electronics. Mo…

Although there have been some legitimate concerns raised about some 5G bands edging into altitude sensors https://www.icao.int/safety/FSMP/MeetingDocs/FSMP%20WG11/IP/...

Sure, but base stations are going to be your main worry there, since they put out way more power than user devices and the antenna of a radio altimeter will be quite directional and pointing down.

Re: Lufthansa bans AirTags in checked luggage

#440

Post by samdcbu »

Kye wrote: post #220
gnfargbl wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cell tower network is designed to cope with devices located on the surface of the planet, i.e. where the geometry between the handsets and the tower is roughly two-dimensional. I am also unconvinced that handsets on aeroplanes are really a problem for the network, but trains aren't the counterexample you're making them out to be.

Flight patterns are also pretty consistent. Tower planners have probably given some thought to it.

Cell towers are designed for terrestrial users because their radios aren’t pointed at the sky.

Gogo provides inflight Wi-Fi in the US through its ground based towers and all the antennas are pointed at the sky :)

Flights (at least in the US) fly roughly a direct route, but ATC spaces out planes and small weather diversions are common. So it’s more like a band of coverage needed between cities. Also, the combinatorics of considering every US city pair that currently or has previously had commercial service between gets long. Then you would have to consider every route that an airline in the future may offer, even just seasonally. Then if you calculated the optimal route between each pair and figured out the width of the cellular coverage at 30,000 ft from a single cell tower below, I don’t think it would be possible to offer service to every domestic flight in the US without achieving complete coverage of the US.

China on the other hand has a limited number of very narrow flight corridors that all commercial aviation is restricted to because the majority of the airspace is government controlled. That’s the only nation I can think of that would have enough air traffic to justify terrestrial tower installation but whose domestic flights are confined to a such a small part of the airspace that it would be possible to provide service to all domestic flights without achieving coverage of all Chinese airspace.

Post reply on HN