Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids.

The limits were instituted after discovering a plot to smuggle acetone and hydrogen peroxide (and ice presumably) on board to make acetone peroxide in the lavatory. TATP is not a liquid and it is not stable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_pl...



This illustrates a point though. TATP you could synthesize on a plane is entirely inadequate to bring down a plane. It also requires a bit more than acetone and hydrogen peroxide. Pan Am 103 required around half a kilo of RDX and TATP is very, very far from RDX.

The idea of synthesizing a proper high-explosive in an airplane lavatory is generally comical. The chemistry isn’t too complex but you won’t be doing it in an airplane lavatory.


> TATP you could synthesize on a plane is entirely inadequate to bring down a plane

Even a small fire can down a plane, especially when distant from diversion airports.


No, you can’t bring down a plane with a small fire. If that was possible terrorists would use a newspaper and a lighter.


A small fire in the right place (like a wiring loom) can definitely bring down a plane, but generally attackers don't have the specialist knowledge to achieve that, and those places are not easily accessible between meal services.


They don't block lithium batteries, so...


there are other, very similar compounds in the same family that are indeed liquid.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: