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

United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 1001 posts

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#171

Post by tasuki »

analogpixel wrote: post #151

I pine for the day when news is this: - Flight 767 returned to airport after seeing a bluetooth device named "BOMB" - After asking all passengers multiple times to turn off all devices and not getting the "BOMB" to go away, they flight had to return to the airport where officials were waiting to search the plane. - This was not intentional, but a product that calls it self "BOMB" https://hellottec.com/product/bomb-po…

Oh, I thought how stupid it was to return the flight based on Bluetooth device name, which is just a random string identifying a thing. But I think it's also strongly discouraged to bring devices called bombs on a plane?

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#172

Post by lazide »

thrownthatway wrote: post #141
bruce511 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an aside, this is something I've only seen in the US. At least in my country the domestic baggage claim area is not accessible unless from an arriving aircraft. I'm guessing that has more to do with theft though than security.

Do people collect their bags from the baggage claim area and then immediately reboard an aircraft to exit the terminal? How do the arrivals exist the terminal Are you not allowed to have a friend who is picking you up assist with baggage claim?

often baggage pickup is on the terminal side of the ‘one way exit’.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#173

Post by basilgohar »

elzbardico wrote: post #50
fortran77 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

It's also completely false because they cited only Palestine-related hijackings, and not the parent article that goes back far further and proves they're lying.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#174

Post by monkeywork »

thrownthatway wrote: post #143
hvb2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's because in the US they're handling the international flights separately. It's also the reason why even when you have a layover, you need to clear customs. Domestic flights in the US are like busses/trains elsewhere. Most people fly without a checked bag

[flagged]

I don't know if we are the level of "most people" but I'd say we are defintely at a "signficant percentage of ppl". Due to cost of checked luggage the popularity of one bag carry on flying has exploded.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#176

Post by stouset »

goda90 wrote: post #147
stouset wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re a terrorist, I’m pretty sure you can think of dramatically more consequential things to do than cause a handful of planes to potentially divert. That’s a wildly pointless prank for something that will invariably wind up with you being arrested. Why do that when you could simply attack people waiting in the security line? That would actually cause terror and shut down an entire airport for days.

A saboteur might want to cause disruption without violence against people, and such cases would still likely be labeled terrorism.

Only because we have labeled anything and everything terrorism these days.

Even then this is an extremely lame and ineffective form of sabotage, compared to the kind of prison sentence you’d be risking.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#177

Post by objclxt »

thrownthatway wrote: post #143
hvb2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's because in the US they're handling the international flights separately. It's also the reason why even when you have a layover, you need to clear customs. Domestic flights in the US are like busses/trains elsewhere. Most people fly without a checked bag

[flagged]

> That sounds like bullshit to me.

Have you taken a US domestic flight? Everyone wants to bring their massive roll-ons into the cabin, nobody wants to check if they can avoid it.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#178

Post by neilv »

I once consulted on some aviation-related software (not the safety work prominent on my resume), and a company announcement came through, that you must never use a few specific words commonly heard in software development. The two no-no words I recall were "crash" and "bomb". Don't write them in code or documents, don't say them on the phone or videoconf, etc.

Those terms have senses that people in aviation take extremely seriously, for extremely good reasons. A miscommunication can trigger a lot of life-critical emergency mode sudden effort and stress for people. Effort and stress that is occasionally extremely necessary.

It made sense, once I thought of it.

In this particular case, it sounds like it wasn't the teen's fault, nor even a teen being slightly edgy. Just an innocuous product that broadcast a very unfortunate name over Bluetooth. Not something most people would've predicted would be a problem.

Yet, under the circumstances, with the information available, it also sounds like personnel were correct to follow the processes that were designed to prevent terrible disasters.

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#179

Post by megous »

lostlogin wrote: post #164
megous wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It’s not just the beating and killing of people. That seems bad enough, but the recent episode of ‘settlers’ torturing a dog is horrific. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/22/world/middleeast/settler-...

[flagged]

Re: United Airlines 767 returns to Newark after Bluetooth name sparks alert

#180

Post by stefan_ »

kube-system wrote: post #73
stefan_ wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3. The level of tech illiteracy combined with airplane security theater is an affront to all thinking people.

4. A normal level of risk aversion in one of the most risk averse industries If airlines ignored every threat that was “probably not” a real threat, they’d ignore all of them. It’s better to inconvenience a few thousand passengers than it is to kill a few hundred.

You don't have your head quite on, they had already taken off!
Post reply on HN