Comment by hackingonempty
10 hours ago
> 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.
1 reply →
They don't block lithium batteries, so...
there are other, very similar compounds in the same family that are indeed liquid.