http://www.airlive.net/breaking-cologne ... mb-threat/

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flig ... 46#dafc6b4

News story (in German) http://www.bild.de/regional/koeln/easyj ... l#fromWall

An easyJet A319 operating flight U23246 from LJU-STN made an immediate diversion to CGN this evening due to a bomb threat. A passenger reported overhearing a threat to the crew, the aircraft was diverted immediately to CGN. An unaccompanied piece of baggage was destroyed as a precautionary measure, and several people were arrested.



Looks like they used the slides to evacuate.

How can there be an unaccompanied piece of baggage on board in the first place? I mean, somebody must have carried it on board. I assume it's hand luggage, not checked luggage.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

How can there be an unaccompanied piece of baggage on board in the first place? I mean, somebody must have carried it on board. I assume it's hand luggage, not checked luggage.

Someone checked the baggage at check-in but was not accounted for on the aircraft.

I believe the reason behind this started in mid-80's after the Air India/Narita Bombing. Also, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, the main theory behind TWA 800 states that the explosion was a result of the AC coil getting hot from sitting on the ground because of a checked bag without the pax on board.

joeycapps wrote:

PatrickZ80 wrote:

How can there be an unaccompanied piece of baggage on board in the first place? I mean, somebody must have carried it on board. I assume it's hand luggage, not checked luggage.

Someone checked the baggage at check-in but was not accounted for on the aircraft.

I believe the reason behind this started in mid-80's after the Air India/Narita Bombing. Also, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, the main theory behind TWA 800 states that the explosion was a result of the AC coil getting hot from sitting on the ground because of a checked bag without the
pax on board.

No, to quote from the NTSB press release of 8/23/2000: "The National Transportation Safety Board today determined that the probable cause of the crash of TWA flight 800 was 'an explosion of the center wing fuel tank resulting from ignition of the flammable fuel/air mixture in the tank.'

'The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty,' the Board said, 'but, of the sources evaluated by the investigation, the most likely was a short circuit outside the center wing tank that allowed excessive voltage to enter it through electrical wiring associated with the fuel quantity indication system.'"

I believe the over heated air pack was one theory.

This article says it was diverted due to a suspicious conversation...nothing about baggage.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/easyjet-plan ... 18278.html

SO WHAT IS THE TRUTH ?

727LOVER wrote:

This article says it was diverted due to a suspicious conversation...nothing about baggage.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/easyjet-plan ... 18278.html

SO WHAT IS THE TRUTH ?

Apparently there was a controlled explosion of a suspicious piece of baggage. Keep in mind This does not necessarily mean that there was actually explosives in the baggage.

joeycapps wrote:

PatrickZ80 wrote:

How can there be an unaccompanied piece of baggage on board in the first place? I mean, somebody must have carried it on board. I assume it's hand luggage, not checked luggage.

Someone checked the baggage at check-in but was not accounted for on the aircraft.

I believe the reason behind this started in mid-80's after the Air India/Narita Bombing. Also, and someone correct me if I'm wrong, the main theory behind TWA 800 states that the explosion was a result of the AC coil getting hot from sitting on the ground because of a checked bag without the pax on board.

Not TW800 bt Lockerbie was the incentive to develop a System that no Piece of luggage can fly without the identified owner flying on board. The System was developed by Fraport. If a passenger who checked baggage is not going through the Boarding pass check, the bags will be off.loaded.

More details here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40236823

Interesting. People are quick to insult LCCs and their passengers. Having seen pics of the evacuation there's nobody with massive bags slowing things down or walking away with them. Contract that to legacies and it's a different story.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

How can there be an unaccompanied piece of baggage on board in the first place? I mean, somebody must have carried it on board. I assume it's hand luggage, not checked luggage.

There wasnt. The backpack that was destroyed was one of the 3 suspects.

It is now being reported that no explosives were found, neither in the the suspicious piece of luggage nor elsewhere inside the aircraft. Three British men are still being held and questioned because of "terrorism-related talk".

Slovenian medias are reporting that 3 british businessman are still detained after returning from business trip;aged 31,38 and 48

Likely drinking and saying stupid things. Despite being a false alarm, this was well handled by U2 and the German authorities. Few weeks ago there was a minor bomb scare on a MH flight in MEL and Australian police kept pax on the aircraft for 90 minutes after the aircraft landed.

While it may end up being a false alarm, these people are incredibly stupid discussing a subject like this whilst on a plane. Are there any laws against disrupting a flight in this way?

If what is reported in the German media is correct, a typical example of paranoid passengers reporting something to crew and leaving them with no choice but to react.

We have thorough security screening measures for a reason. 3 young guys boisterously chatting may be stupid but it is not criminal.

They also had book/magazine with sniper rifle on front page it seems


overreacting from some of the passengers

BHXLOVER wrote:

While it may end up being a false alarm, these people are incredibly stupid discussing a subject like this whilst on a plane. Are there any laws against disrupting a flight in this way?

Not knowing the actual nature of the discussion nor if the words "bomb" or "explosion" were actually uttered perhaps it is the passenger that overheard and made assumptions that should be fined for disruption? Or perhaps, these men were discussing current events - is that to be banned as well?

They have been released without charge with the German police saying there was never any danger.

Why was the aircraft evacuated via the slides? Several injuries reported as a result of this.

Armodeen wrote:

Why was the aircraft evacuated via the slides? Several injuries reported as a result of this.

I feel like this is the dumbest part of this. Same as the Virgin ATR a few days ago.

Yet Malaysia had an idiot supposedly try to rush the cockpit and there was no need for using the slides.

Terrible effort at staying cool under pressure guys.