There are all kinds of reasons that flights divert, though this has to be one of the more unusual ones, as reported by The Aviation Herald.
In this post:
Paris to Lisbon flight diverts to Porto over iPad
This incident happened on Thursday, April 10, 2025, and involves Transavia flight TO7646, scheduled to operate from Paris Orly (ORY) to Lisbon (LIS). The flight was operated by a Boeing 737-800 with the registration code F-HTVP, and was scheduled to depart at 3:20PM, and arrive at 5:00PM (with a one-hour time change). For those not familiar, Transavia is the low cost subsidiary of Air France-KLM.
At the time of the incident, the jet was toward the end of its 894-mile journey, cruising at 37,000 feet. The crew reportedly found an unidentified object onboard, which was later identified as an iPad that didn’t belong to anyone onboard.
At this point, the flight was around 100 nautical miles from Porto (OPO), so the crew declared an emergency, and decided to divert. The jet touched down in Porto around 25 minutes after the emergency was declared, 1hr50min after it first departed Paris.
The aircraft remained on the ground for around 90 minutes, so that the item could be dealt with and the cabin could be searched. The plane then operated the 43-minute flight to Lisbon, touching down there at 6:49PM, just under two hours behind schedule.
Was this flight diversion an overkill?
Understandably, some people are a little puzzled by this diversion, and are questioning if this response was an overkill:
- People leave electronic devices behind on aircraft all the time, and aircraft aren’t always cleaned thoroughly between flights
- At the time that the flight diverted, it would’ve only been a matter of minutes longer to reach the intended destination of Lisbon
While that’s fair, there are two important points to consider:
- We don’t actually know how suspicious the iPad looked, in terms of where it was placed, if it was concealed, if it was turned on, etc.
- The aviation industry operates under a system where safety is paramount and consistently the top priority, so if something is identified as a potential point of concern, pilots divert to the closest possible airport, regardless of how inconvenient it is
Bottom line
A Transavia Boeing 737 flying from Paris to Lisbon diverted to Porto, after an unaccounted for iPad was discovered onboard. With the number of electronic devices on any given plane, that’s certainly an unusual reason for a diversion, especially so close to the destination. However, the crew was presumably simply following company safety protocols, which dictates a diversion for something like this.
What do you make of this Transavia iPad diversion?
The iPad is mysterious and important.
Can't we insert a little bit of risk-weighting judgement into these ridiculous decisions? If an iPad was already on the plane all the way from Paris to Porto and nothing happened, what the likelihood that it's something malicious and landing 20 min earlier in Porto is necessary versus continuing just a bit farther to the intended destination? How about we wait for one iPad bomb to be shown to have taken down a plane before...
Can't we insert a little bit of risk-weighting judgement into these ridiculous decisions? If an iPad was already on the plane all the way from Paris to Porto and nothing happened, what the likelihood that it's something malicious and landing 20 min earlier in Porto is necessary versus continuing just a bit farther to the intended destination? How about we wait for one iPad bomb to be shown to have taken down a plane before we panic over every single lost device? If I'm on that plane, I'm willing to make that bet, honestly.
Watches have helped blow up planes along with what appeared to be a bottle of contact solution. That's why they divert over an Ipad.
So, now every single item left on a plane better be grounds for landing immediately, huh?
Eric, you are making some very valid points about the situation, however, perhaps you are overlooking one little known fact.
Since 9/11, many countries have a dedicated airfield, capable of handling all sorts of terrorist incidents.
That location is never going to be a major aviation hub for the obvious reasons, e.g: to minimise the disruption to the otherwise unaffected passengers, etc.
The first responders, anti-terrorist authorities, etc, are probably based at...
Eric, you are making some very valid points about the situation, however, perhaps you are overlooking one little known fact.
Since 9/11, many countries have a dedicated airfield, capable of handling all sorts of terrorist incidents.
That location is never going to be a major aviation hub for the obvious reasons, e.g: to minimise the disruption to the otherwise unaffected passengers, etc.
The first responders, anti-terrorist authorities, etc, are probably based at OPO.
I hope this helps?
Diverting from LIS to OPO just doesn't make any sense in a situation like this, how much flight time did that save?
The best diversion was the AF one a few years ago when they found a vibrator in the lavatory. I can only imagine those announcements, "Who left their vibrator in the lavatory? You must claim it now or we will divert to Reykjavik!"
The level of stupidity keeps climbing. It shows plane wasn’t properly cleaned at all otherwise the iPad would have been found after prior flight. Also, it is time for planes to have some sort of way to dispose things like this while flying. Place the stupid iPad on a box or something and eject it from the plane while in air. Same goes to lithium batteries, etc… Just let it off from the plane and stop disrupting the travel of hundreds of passengers.
You are living proof of your statement.
"The level of stupidity keeps climbing."
"Place the stupid iPad on a box or something and eject it from the plane while in air."
Esk, bro you are supposed to nice to other people who post herein.
There is no need to be such a droll critic.
It is clear that you are missing the TD target for your rhetoric.
Rather than concentrating on ridiculing people all of the time, why not give the readership the benefit of your aviation experience.
Is it a case of mind over matter?
You don’t mind and the...
Esk, bro you are supposed to nice to other people who post herein.
There is no need to be such a droll critic.
It is clear that you are missing the TD target for your rhetoric.
Rather than concentrating on ridiculing people all of the time, why not give the readership the benefit of your aviation experience.
Is it a case of mind over matter?
You don’t mind and the readership doesn’t matter?
Do try to be nice bro, have some respect for Ben’s website and those who are here to benefit from it, yes?
"Place the stupid iPad on a box or something and eject it from the plane while in air."
I felt second hand embarrassment reading that. There is no physical passage between the cabin and outside while the cabin is pressurized. Not to mention other stuff like the iPad being ingested by an engine, hitting a control surface, hitting another aircraft, hitting someone or something on the ground, polluting the land where it lands, etc.
Dumbest diversion this month.
Uncle, your four word post …. what does it actually mean?
What are you trying to say?
If you do not understand why an aircraft might be diverted to an alternate location, why not ask the question?
Please remember that there is no such thing as a stupid question …. only stupid answers!