consequences

A FRESH warning has been issued over a major travel item that many of us now use, that actually poses a huge threat when flying.

Over the past couple of years, power banks have caused several issues across a number of flights.

In response, airlines have introduced new measures that specify the type of power bank you can or cannot take onboard.

As the school summer holidays approach, travellers are now being reminded to carry these items in their hand luggage.

Power banks contain lithium batteries, which according to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), pose a huge risk to aircraft, with more and more devices being found in hold luggage over the past year.

The aviation body also said that the average person now takes four different lithium-powered devices on a flight.

Read more on travel inspo

TRAVEL TIP

The £2.99 SIM hack that can save Brits HUNDREDS abroad

CHEAP BREAKS

UK’s best 100 cheap stays – our pick of the top hotels, holiday parks and pubs

However, they are prone to overheating, especially if they are defective and this can cause a fire.

The CAA states: “Passenger awareness remains low – over a third (36 per cent) of travellers are unaware of the dangers of packing batteries in checked baggage, even though 92 per cent fly with a mobile phone, 55 per cent with a laptop and 49 per cent with a power bank – suggesting hundreds of batteries could be incorrectly packed on a typical flight.”

While some airlines have responded to the increased use of lithium batteries by carrying containment bags – such as Virgin Atlantic and Wizz Air – they still pose the biggest risk of fire to flights.

And it’s not just power banks that have lithium batteries though and they aren’t anything new – you’ll also find them in your laptop, mobile and smart watch.

When an incident regarding a lithium battery occurs in the cabin, cabin crew can handle it more easily.

However, if the issue is in the hold it is a trickier problem to solve.

According to the CAA, there are around two lithium battery incidents every week.

And these incidents can cause delays as well as the plane diverting.

The rules to be aware of include taking items such as your mobile phone, vapes and power banks on board in the cabin.

If you are taking power banks, you are allowed a maximum of two and you cannot charge them during the flight.

Laptops must be switched off if they are in hold bags.

As part of its new campaign ‘Pack right, Safe flight’, the CAA added that travellers should “choose reputable suppliers and brands when buying devices and spare batteries” and that “batteries that show signs of damage, overheating, or swelling should not be used and should never be carried on an aircraft”.

Giancarlo Buono, Director of Aviation Safety at the UK Civil Aviation Authority said: “Flying is by far the safest way to travel, and we want to keep it that way.

“Pack right for a safe flight, and that means don’t put your batteries in your checked bag. Take them into the cabin with you.

“This simple tip will make your flight safer for you, and the other passengers you’re flying with.”

Here are the rules on batteries for some of the major airlines:

British Airways

You can take up to 15 battery-operated Personal Electronic Devices (PEDs) that contain lithium batteries such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, cameras, music players, smart baggage tags (e.g. Apple AirTag) onboard.

If in hand luggage, they must be switched off or placed in flight safe mode.

If in checked luggage, they must be completely switched off – not in sleep or hibernation mode.

You can only carry up to two power banks per person and they must be in the cabin in either the seat pocket or in a bag under the seat in front of you and they cannot exceed 100Wh.

Ryanair

Electronic devices and spare lithium batteries must be carried in the cabin only.

Each passenger can carry up to 15 electronic devices for personal use in the cabin “including but not limited to: smartphones, tablets, laptops, cameras, handheld gaming consoles, headphones”.

Each passenger can only carry up to two power banks and these are included in the overall limit of 20 spare lithium batteries – which cannot exceed 100Wh.

Ryanair adds: “Spare lithium batteries and power banks must be carried on the passenger’s person or in the under-seat cabin bag stowed under the seat in front.

“Power banks and spare lithium batteries must not be placed in cabin baggage stored in the overhead lockers.“

Power banks cannot be recharged when onboard or during the flight.

EasyJet

EasyJet has a limit of 15 electronic devices per passenger, which must be 12V or less and 100Wh or less.

When it comes to power banks, Wh ratings cannot exceed 160Wh for lithium batteries, and only two can be carried per passenger.

EasyJet states: “Power banks are prohibited from use on easyJet aircraft and must not be used to charge other devices.

“Power banks must be carried in carry-on baggage only, and it is recommended that power banks are carried where they can be monitore, d i.e. on your person.”

Virgin Atlantic

For Virgin Atlantic, you can travel with up to five spare batteries and/or power banks, depending on their watt-hour (Wh) rating.

All batteries and power banks must be able to fit inside the airline’s onboard Fire Containment Bag, which measures 37×28×10cm.

The airline states: “Please keep them in an accessible place during your flight — not in the overhead locker.

“Power banks cannot be plugged into your seat’s power supply at any time.

“Power banks cannot be used to charge other devices while onboard.

“Batteries and power banks must be under 100Wh.”

Wizz Air

For Wizz Air, power banks cannot be used during any phase of the flight, and they are not allowed in checked luggage.

Each traveller is limited to a maximum of 20 spare batteries, including a maximum of one power bank, which cannot exceed 100Wh.

The airline states: “Power banks and e-cigarettes should be carried where they can be monitored, i.e. on the person.”

The Air National Guard is pushing Congress to boost fighter numbers as it seeks to modernize its aging inventory. With the Air Force at large feeling the effects of years of underinvestment in new fighters, and with China presenting a massive pacing challenge, the move is the latest effort to ensure that the service can keep up in terms of numbers and capability.

According to a report from Air & Space Forces Magazine, Air National Guard adjutants general from more than 20 states sent a letter to Congress last week that requests multiyear funding for the acquisition of between 72 and 100 new fighters each year.

These numbers would be a significant hike compared with recent years: not since 1998 has the Air Force bought more than 72 new fighters in a single year.

“The United States Air Force is the oldest, the smallest, and the least ready in its 78-year history,” the letter states. “We must build a fighting force that will win.”

Specifically, the letter urges the minimum annual purchases of the 48 F-35As and 24 F-15EXs, with a preferred goal of 72 F-35As and 36 F-15EXs.

While the letter was signed by Air National Guard leaders, these totals would be expected to furnish units of the Active, Guard, and Reserve components.

By comparison, the Air Force requested funding for 48 F-35As in Fiscal Year 2024, followed by 42 in 2025, 24 in 2026, and 38 in the proposed 2027 budget.

The Fiscal Year 2027 budget request also includes funding for the purchase of 10 F-35Bs and 37 F-35Cs for the Marine Corps and the Navy, which is already a notable uptick in planned acquisitions. At the same time, the F-35 program has faced worrisome delays in work on a new radar, as well as a host of other critical upgrades.

For the F-15EX, budget documents show the service requested 24 aircraft in 2024, 18 in 2025, 21 in 2026, and 24 in 2027.

A sustained annual buy of even 24 F-15EXs would represent an acceleration over current production plans for the Eagle II, after the Fiscal Year 2026 budget request increased the program of record from 98 to 129 aircraft, including funding for 21 jets in a single year. In its latest budget request, the Air Force provides no details about whether there may be any new changes to the planned total fleet size for the F-15EX.

One of those who signed the letter is Brig. Gen. Shannon Smith, head of the Idaho Air National Guard, who told Air & Space Forces Magazine that, “We are burning these jets and the airmen over time to support the joint force to accomplish the president’s goals with Epic Fury in this conflict with Iran.”

On top of the demands of combat operations, Brig. Gen. Smith warned that the Air National Guard fighter fleet is rapidly aging, meaning that “Most of the money will go to keep them flying. In a few years, they’ll be struggling to be flyable, let alone be relevant.”

While plans are in place to replace A-10s and F-15Cs, even older F-35As will need replacement before too long, Smith added. More urgent is the looming requirement to supersede the more numerous F-16s.

In total, the Air National Guard has 24 fighter squadrons, 11 of which have already received new fighters or are planned to. While some Guard F-16 units have transitioned to the F-35, there is no plan in place for the Guard’s remaining 13 Viper squadrons. Taken together, the Guard’s inventory constitutes close to half of all combat-coded F-16s.

In the past, thought has been given to a new light fighter, to balance the more costly and capable F-35 and, now, the F-47, although that would be extremely costly and take years. Another option would be to start buying new F-16 Block 70/72 jets, although the production line is already burdened by multiple export orders.

Even if Congress supports the Air National Guard chiefs’ recommendations and the budget is available, getting new jets on ramps will be far from easy.

As well as boosting capabilities and ‘combat mass,’ new fighters bring other advantages in terms of reduced maintenance demands, easier access to spare parts, longer airframe life, and overall higher availability.

The issue of spare parts is a critical one. Back in 2024, we looked at how, by the Air Force’s own estimates, hundreds of its aircraft are at risk of being left grounded due to a lack of spares, thanks to a $1.5-billion shortfall in its budget request.

However, meeting the aim of 72 to 100 new fighters each year would demand a significant uptake in production capacity, which is already stretched. With that in mind, the Air National Guard projects it could still take 10 to 15 years to re-equip units now flying older fighters.

One option to re-equip Guard and Reserve units would be to cascade fighters down from the Active component, but Air National Guard chiefs warn against this, too, since it only pushes recapitalization with new fighters further down the line.

What is unclear is how the Air Force’s plans for the F-47 sixth-generation fighter might play into this.

In 2023, then-Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall said that the service was working around a future force planning construct that included 200 of the sixth-gen combat jets.

At this point, however, there are still questions about how exactly the F-47 will fit into the Air Force’s future force structure and how many of the jets the service might actually procure. The jet was originally planned as a replacement for the F-22, but that appears to have changed, or is at least in limbo. It is by no means clear how long the F-22 will be around after the F-47 is introduced, but if the F-47 is delayed, it could come at the end of the F-22’s service life. If the Air Force intends to operate the two at the same time, at least for the earlier part of the F-47’s career, but delays in fielding it occur, this could also open up another gap in the combat mass.

Another factor is the service’s emerging plans for fielding its future fleets of Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drones, which are being designed from the ground up to work in close concert with current and future crewed jets. In the past, the Air Force has signaled that it wants to buy over 1,000 CCAs. However, this number is understood to cover multiple CCA increments, with Increment 1 being procured in numbers between 100 and 150 units, at least to start with.

Ultimately, the CCA effort aims to drastically improve the tactical jet fleet combat mass, which could offset the dwindling fighter force, and active-duty F-35 and F-22 units will get them first. Thereafter, they could be quickly rolled out to fourth-generation jets, too. On the other hand, the CCA concept still has much to prove and is not without risk.

In the background to all this are the concerns within the U.S. military leadership at large about the significant advances being made by the Chinese military and, in this case, its air arms. The People’s Liberation Army Air Force is rapidly expanding and modernizing at a scale that threatens to surpass the United States in both numbers and capability. Warning signs of a massive fighter expansion include an apparent new J-35 factory and the many Chinese CCA programs.

As long as the U.S. government continues to procure aircraft at comparatively slower rates, China has the opportunity to race ahead and is already producing advanced fighters in large quantities, creating a growing imbalance in the Indo-Pacific region.

Clearly, there are very many factors at play, not least budgetary. However, in making their case to Congress, Air National Guard bosses are once again underscoring the continued demand for crewed combat jets within the service, and at the same time, highlighting some of the challenges in keeping the fighter force at the top of its game.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com