Chef says we've been cooking frozen chips wrong - and it's all about how we use the oven
Frozen chips are a staple in British homes, but many people are making a simple mistake that means they never cook to restaurant quality, according to one expert
Chips will be so much tastier and crunchier if you do one task before putting them in the oven
(Image: Getty Images )
Frozen chips are always on standby in the freezer for a swift side dish or nibble. They're also much speedier to whip up than homemade chips.
However, one common problem with frozen chips is their tendency to turn soggy in the oven, which is far from ideal when you're craving a crispy finish. There's one error that can lead to limp chips without you even realising. Chef David Nayfield from Che Fico claims that frozen chips can taste as good as restaurant quality every time you cook them, provided you do it correctly.
This means avoiding overcrowding your oven trays or air fryer baskets, which he describes as the 'biggest mistake' you can make when cooking chips at home. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here .
To achieve the perfect crunch, your chips need enough room to crisp up. Placing too many too close together will cause them to steam rather than bake, reports Nottinghamshire Live.
David also emphasised the importance of pre-heating your appliance before cooking. Putting them straight into a cold oven or air fryer is likely to result in soggy or unevenly cooked chips.
Article continues below
A useful guideline is to heat your appliance to around 200C before cooking the chips, to achieve that perfect golden texture. And when it comes to the debate between using an air fryer or a traditional oven to cook your chips, chefs have a clear favourite.
New York City's famed chef, George Duran, has said that using an air fryer for your chips is akin to 'giving them a fast-track to crispy heaven'.
This method is not only often faster than oven cooking, but it also removes the risk of injuries from handling hot cooking oil, making it a much safer alternative.
Article continues below
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
12 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The British public will never forgive Labour's latest cruel pension raid
We're not going to the dogs: 12 reasons why Britain remains the greatest place to live
The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The best portable neck and handheld fans, tested: six expert picks to keep you cool
Most people were hoping we wouldn't see a repeat of June and July's heatwaves this year, according to a recent YouGov survey of 5,148 British adults. Well, another one is already upon us. The Guardian's journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. Learn more. Thanks to the climate crisis, we know that things are hotting up year on year, and while we can hide in air-conditioned shops and offices, our homes can get uncomfortably – sometimes dangerously – hot. And we also have to go outside – or worse, voluntarily pack ourselves like sweaty sardines on dangerously hot public transport. On those occasions, a portable fan can make all the difference between manageable discomfort and indulging in an inadvisable quantity of ice-cream. Which one should you buy? I've spent the past few weeks testing handheld and neck fans from the likes of John Lewis, Dunelm and Bush, assessing them for power, noise, battery life and portability. Here's what I've found. Best handheld fan overall: John Lewis handheld and foldable fan Best budget handheld fan:Fine Elements folding rechargeable mini travel fan Best for power:Diveblues Jetforce Best neck fan: Jialexin three-speed neck fan I've been testing consumer technology for more than a decade now, including electric toothbrushes and water flossers for the Filter. Yet, without wanting to shatter the illusion that this makes me uniquely qualified for the task, portable fans are among the easiest things to test. There's little subjectivity involved, as you can measure power, noise, weight and battery life. All you really need is a working hypothalamus and fingers that can manoeuvre buttons – which I have. You also need hot weather, of course, but the Great British Summer has been, if anything, a little too accommodating in that regard. It also helps that my PC can turn my tiny office into an overheated sauna in 20 minutes. Each of the 13 fans I tested was assessed for measures that can be objectively tested. Power was not only measured by active use, but via a dedicated digital anemometer to measure wind speed at the highest and lowest supported speeds. More power equals more volume, so I used a sound measurement app held 15cm from the source to assess the decibel level at high, medium and low speeds. I timed how long it took each fan to empty its battery at the lowest and highest speeds (a test my three cats hated even more than I did, due to the constant noise for hours at a time), and popped each one on the scale to get an idea of portability. I also assessed them for more subjective things. Is the fan nice to hold? Can it be folded for increased portability or hands-free use? Does it look visually appealing? Finally, there's the biggie: price. With portable fans costing between £3 and £100, there's a huge range of options. It's simplistic to suggest that a higher cost automatically equals a better experience, though there is naturally a correlation. Nonetheless, I'm more forgiving of odd quirks in cheap fans than I would be in more expensive ones. There's also the sticky issue of repairability, and the growing waste problem of fast tech. Tough-to-replace lithium-ion batteries were present in all but two of the fans tested, which is far from ideal. With that in mind, I kept an eye on build quality too, hoping to endorse fans that will have a long and productive life before they need to be disposed of (electrical recycling, please – you can find a local spot here). After testing, the fans were either returned to the manufacturer or donated to charity. Here are the six best portable fans from my tests. It may not look that special, but John Lewis's offering is a well-made product at a reasonable price that doesn't put a blade wrong. The handle is a good size for a comfortable grip, and the sage colour my review unit came in is rather stylish. You can also get it in white, light blue or an eye-searing orange if you prefer. Why we love itLooks and build quality aside, the fan provides what you need without fuss. It has three power settings, putting out between 2.5 and 3.7 metres a second (m/s) of wind speed, and the 10cm head covers your whole face at a sensible distance without needing constant adjustment. I measured a peak volume of 62.4dB, which isn't the lowest, but is still quieter than some of the chunkier fans at their lowest levels. The battery lasted more than four hours on its highest setting, which should be sufficient for most journeys, and it can be charged up via a USB-C cable when it's empty. Pleasingly, the handle can also be folded down to make it a handy desktop fan with or without a cable attached. It works well, as long as you have space to keep it close enough to be refreshing. It's a shame that … at 25cm, it's a little on the tall side. Power levels: 3Measured air speed: 2.5-3.7m/sMeasured volume: 51.1-62.4dBTested battery life: maximum, 4hrs 11mins; minimum, 9hrs 37minsMeasured weight: 181g Cheap and cheerful, this folding fan may feel a little rough around the edges, but it gets the job done. It's not the cheapest fan I tested, but it proved superior to Dunelm's £3 offering (which dropped to a barely noticeable 0.5m/s power as the AA batteries drained) and beat Superdrug's £5 fan on battery life (a disappointing 45 minutes at maximum and two hours on minimum). Why we love itIt's flimsy, but the fan delivers the basics pretty well. It has three speeds, giving between 2.6 and 3.7m/s of wind speed, while the battery lasted six hours at the lowest setting, and just short of three at its highest. It's a touch noisier than the John Lewis model, maxing out at 64.8dB, but it's more travel-friendly, folding in half for portability and weighing 48g lighter. That folding hinge means you can also use it as a desk fan, if you like, and there's even a small flashlight on the bottom for looking around in the dark (though it's easy to leave this on by mistake). It's a shame that … the build quality isn't all that, with some rough plastic moulding. Power levels: 3Measured air speed: 2.6-3.7m/sMeasured volume: 54.3-64.8dBTested battery life: maximum, 2hrs 50mins; minimum, 6hrsMeasured weight: 133g If you want power for a reasonable price, then the Jetforce is the answer. Even at its lowest of five speeds, it narrowly betters the speeds of the two fans above by hitting a breezy 3.8m/s. Why we love itA refreshing breeze even at the lowest settings, but when you're really struggling with the heat, crank it up all the way to level five, and it hits a massive 6.6m/s. In truth, you likely won't need to max it out, and that's just as well because the noise levels really pick up on the higher settings. Starting at an already noisy 66dB, put it all the way up to level five, and it reaches 74.3dB, about the level of a vacuum cleaner – a vacuum cleaner uncomfortably close to your ears. It'll also hit the battery hard: at level 1, you can eke out nearly 11-and-a-half hours, but that drops to 2hrs 37mins on max. Still, if you can cope with the noise or routinely wear headphones, it's a nice option to have in really hot weather. Plus, the flexible head means you can use it as a desk fan, and it has an attachable lanyard so it can be worn around the neck, blasting air upwards. It's a shame that … it gets noisy fast. Power levels: 5Measured air speed: 3.8-6.6m/sMeasured volume: 66-74.3dBTested battery life: maximum, 2hrs 37mins; minimum, 11hrs 25minsMeasured weight: 184g Sign up to The Filter Get the best shopping advice from the Filter team straight to your inbox. The Guardian's journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. after newsletter promotion Want something hands-free to keep you cool? A fan worn around the neck does that, while targeting the body's thermoregulation centre, which can, in theory, make you feel cooler. The Jialexin three-speed neck fan certainly delivered that, if you can cope with fans running so close to your ears. Why we love itIt really does make you feel cooler, even if the fans don't appear to be more powerful when compared with regular handheld fans. My anemometer test revealed seemingly low speeds of 1.7 to 2.2m/s, but there are more air sources and, as a result, the cooling effect felt more consistent and less disruptive than a jet of constant air to the face. The downside of this, however, is the noise. While the measured volume of 52 to 64.1dB doesn't sound too bad – around the sound of a busy office – having it this close to your ears for an extended period is tiring, and you do feel a sense of calm when it's switched off again. That said, if you're wearing headphones, it becomes a non-issue. This neck fan is extremely comfortable to wear, and it's more flexible than solid plastic ones, so you can shape it around your neck for more comfortable cooling. That, for me, makes it stand out from its competitors. It's a shame that … by design, neck fans have to be quite close to your ears. Power levels: 3Measured air speed: 1.7-2.2m/sMeasured volume range: 52-64.1dBTested battery life: maximum, 3hrs 19mins; minimum, 8hrsMeasured weight: 291g Best for: a multi-function fan If you've got money to burn, then the JisuLife handheld fan Ultra2 is both ridiculously powerful and extremely versatile. Starting with the power, it has 100 different speeds, ranging from 2.8m/s all the way up to 9.8m/s at full blast, with 98 increments in between. The battery is impressive too, lasting well over a day at the lowest speed – though this did drop to 1hr 34mins when running at full blast. I was secretly quite pleased about that, as the 88.8dB volume (similar to a hairdryer) wasn't a particularly fun time for my ears, even from a decent distance away. In truth, that kind of power is uncomfortably like staring down a wind tunnel anyway, and the lower settings are considerably easier on the ears: 59.5dB at level 1, rising to 79.1dB at 50. The high price of entry is made a little easier to swallow, though, since the Ultra 2 brings a few extra features for the money. There are a couple of adapters in the box to turn the fan into an air cushion inflater pump or to help kickstart campfires by pushing in more air. A powerful torch on the back can flick between different lighting modes, including a flashing one to attract attention in an emergency. For those of us allergic to camping, there are more sedate indoor uses. One of the adapters is a dust cleaner, which has removed an unspeakable amount of gunk from my keyboard, and the USB-C charging port is two way, meaning you can steal some of the 9,000mAh battery for your other devices too. It didn't make the final cut because … you could buy 15 Fine Elements fans for the Jisulife's RRP of £95. Power levels: 100; measured air speed: 2.8-9.8m/s; measured volume: 59.5-88.8dB; tested battery life: maximum, 1hr 34mins; minimum, 26hrs 49mins; measured weight: 294g Best for: peace and quiet Take it from someone who's listened to the incessant hum of fans for weeks now: the noise can become grating. If keeping sound to a minimum is your priority, then this VonHaus 3-in-1 fan might be the one for you. At its lowest setting, it registered just 41dB – less than the sound of a fridge humming. At that volume, you're looking at a limited power of 2.7m/s, of course, but you can increase that to 4.3m/s over five incrementally louder settings if you need something more. It's worth noting that by the time you hit maximum, the volume reaches 61.9dB – more comparable with the other fans on test. Overall, it's a well-designed fan: comfortable in the hand, with a stand to put it upright on your desk, including a phone holder at the base if you want to watch something over the fan's whisper. You can even use it as a makeshift neck fan with the detachable lanyard, and the head pointed upwards. This isn't a direct substitute for a neck fan, as it's still aimed at the face, but it's a nice added use case all the same. It didn't make the final cut because … the smaller head doesn't cover quite as much of the face as other models. Power levels: 5; measured air speed: 2.7-4.3m/s; measured volume: 41-61.9dB; tested battery life: maximum, 3hrs 45mins; minimum, 13hrs 20mins; measured weight: 129g Look out for fans with different uses. While the traditional way to use a handheld fan is, of course, in the hand, some models can double as desktop fans, either by folding in half or with a bundled stand. Some even come with a lanyard attachment so they can be worn hands-free around the neck. While power might seem like the key feature, remember this is always a trade-off. Higher fan speeds will make you feel nominally cooler, but will come at the expense of battery life and more subtle noise levels. Neck fans have two advantages over regular handheld fans. The first is that they're entirely hands-free, meaning you can wear them without temporarily losing the use of a hand in the process. The second advantage is that as they target the neck, there's evidence to suggest they may make you feel cooler overall. This is because the thermoregulation centre is at the base of the brain, so a neck fan may make you feel cooler than a regular handheld one, even if your actual body temperature isn't dropping all that much. The downside to this is that the positioning directly below your ears can be a little tiring, given the constant volume (although this is a problem that's easily sidestepped with a pair of headphones). Alan Martin is a writer who has been putting products – including phones, gaming devices and wearables – through their paces for more than a decade. He is constantly tripping over product boxes
Daily Record
3 hours ago
- Daily Record
Japan Airlines plane crash pilot's 'harrowing' last words before 520 people died
"The pilots were talking to each other in a state of deep distress because they didn't know what was going on and what they could do." The single deadliest air crash happened 40 years ago in Japan. The most shocking of recent times is the London bound Air India plane crash shortly after take-off in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad on June 12 of this year, killing 241 of the 242 people on board and 19 others on the ground. The largest number of deaths in an aviation incident was on March 27, 1977, when two 747s collided on a foggy runway on Tenerife North, formerly Los Rodeos Airport. 583 people were killed. In Scotland, Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, killing all 259 people on board on December 21, 1988. However, the crash in mountainous terrain north west of Tokyo - in Ueno, Gunma, Japan, exactly 40 years ago today remains the deadliest involving a single aircraft, reports the Mirror. Amid the remains of the Japan Airlines plane and the souls that perished on board, investigators recovered the black box containing the cockpit voice recording which captured the terror of the pilots. Aviation journalist David Learmount, who has investigated and reported on air incidents for almost five decades, recalls how reading the CVR transcript was so harrowing that he was reduced to tears. Speaking on the 40th anniversary of the crash, David, a consulting editor on Flightglobal magazine said: "I've lost count of the number of CVRS I've listened to and transcripts I've read from accidents - and the Japan Airlines 123 remains the only one that ever made me cry. "The transcript was so harrowing I could not listen to the CVR. "The pilots were talking to each other in a state of deep distress because they didn't know what was going on and what they could do. "It wasn't just fear. They wanted to save their airplane, to save their own lives and the lives of everybody on board, and they didn't know what to do. You've never heard that kind of distress." On the anniversary, we remember the lives lost on the doomed flight. What happened? On Monday August 12 1985 Tokyo's Haneda Airport was crowded with thousands of people trying to get home. It was the eve of Obon - a Japanese Buddhist custom when most of the country traditionally honour their ancestors, often returning to their place of birth for family reunions. At 6.12pm, Japan Airlines 123 took off heading to Osaka, 400 kilometres to the west. The flight was filled almost to capacity. 509 passengers and a crew of 15. The flight time was 52 minutes. The most senior pilot on board was Captain Masami Takahama, 49. Takahama was was one of the airlines' senior training captains, and was supporting the First Officer Yutaka Saski, 39, who was captaining the flight. Also on board was Hiroshi Fukuda, a veteran flight engineer. For the first few minutes after take off, all seemed to be fine. As the plane climbed, the air pressure difference between the air inside the cabin and the air outside the cabin grew greater and greater. Approximately 12 minutes after takeoff, the aircraft experienced a loud explosion. Oxygen masks dropped down in front of hysterical passengers. The cabin altitude alarm was blaring, alerting the pilots that the air inside the plane was now too thin to breathe. The piloting crew radioed an emergency to air traffic control. Captain Masami Takahama requested a turn back to Haneda- now 70 miles behind them. He was unaware that the bang that was heard in the cockpit was due to a hole at the rear of the plane and this wave of pressure had blasted off a huge section of the aircraft's tail, including the rudder, the auxiliary power unit, and several other critical control systems. The captain instructed his first officer to turn to the right to head back to Haneda but he started banking too steeply. But no matter what the first officer did, he couldn't turn the plane back to wings level. Horrified Hiroshi Fukuda, the flight engineer could now see that hydraulic pressure has dropped. The plane had a complete hydraulics failure and there was no checklist to deal with this nightmare scenario. Flight 123 began to swing from side to side like a falling leaf - a nauseating movement for passengers. Without hydraulic power, the pilots could no longer control the pitch of the aircraft. It began plunging up and down hundreds of metres at a time in a terrifying rollercoaster cycle. Passengers began scribbling farewell notes to loved ones, which were later found in the wreckage. Using the engine power, they were able to slow down the erratic moments and even turn the plane momentarily. "By increasing engine power on the left side, the plane would turn to the right. Increasing power on the right side, the airplane would turn to the left. So that helped. However, they still thought they could attempt to control the plane manually, which they couldn't,' said David. And their altitude pilots were now dulled by hypoxia - having been too distracted to put on their oxygen mask. In the cabin, passengers were running out of oxygen. Their best hope was a controlled crash landing at Haneda, but the plane needed to lose altitude. The flight engineer suggested they could lower the landing gear without hydraulic power. For the first time since leaving Tokyo, the plane had now dipped below 20,000 feet. A lower altitude now brought a new danger. Straight ahead of the plane loomed a towering mountain range. The aircraft began diving at more than 18,000 feet per minute, 10 times the normal rate of descent. "Raise nose, raise nose.... power' were the captain's last words as the ground proximity alarm buzzed around him before the CVR cut out on impact. The pilots fought a losing battle for almost 30 minutes before the plane hit the Mount Takamagahara area, close to Mount Fuji. The right wing tip and its outermost engine hit the mountain ridge and was ripped off. The plane spun onto its back and careened into the mountainside at hundreds of kilometres per hour, igniting into an enormous fireball. Four miracle survivors - including a 12-year-old girl whose parents and sister were killed in the crash - were all seated at the back of the plane, where impact forces were not as great as at the front, and sheer luck protected them from flying debris. The investigation into the crash concluded that a faulty repair on the aircraft seven years earlier had ultimately caused the fatal malfunction. During a landing in Osaka in 1978, the pilot had pitched the plane's nose too high and slammed the tail into the runway. The rear pressure bulkhead, a critical structural component in aircraft, specifically designed to maintain cabin pressure, was severely damaged. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Boeing engineers performed the botched repair - which led to a ever weakening structure. It wasn't a question of if it would fail, it was when. David said: "It was a patch-up job, not a repair. They took a shortcut trying to fix it and put the plane back in action.' Over time, repeated pressurisation while in the air put stress on the incorrectly repaired section. The cracks led to metal fatigue and ultimately, the separation of the aircraft's tail. By August 12, 1985, the plane had flown more than 12,000 times since the shoddy repair. But on that final fateful flight, the damaged bulkhead reached breaking point. The rapid decompression also ruptured hydraulic systems, rendering the aircraft uncontrollable, although the pilots tried desperately to prevent the inevitable. Boeing redesigned the tail of the 747, so that rapid pressure spikes in the tail plane would no longer cause the kind of structural failure which occurred on flight 123, and also redesigned the plane's hydraulic systems, so that the loss of the aircraft's tail would not result in the total depletion of all hydraulic systems. Japan Airlines also modified its maintenance procedures, putting in place stricter supervision of important repair work and making regular inspections more thorough. Although the crash was Boeing's fault, the airline bore the brunt of national fury. After the crash, Japan Airlines paid 780million yen ($7.6million) to the victims' families - not as compensation, but as 'condolence money'. The company decided against taking criminal action against Boeing. Japan Airlines president Yasumoto Takagi resigned from his post. The company's maintenance manager, Hiroo Tominaga, died by suicide. Susuma Tajima, the engineer who checked and cleared the 747SR for takeoff before its final flight, also took his own life after the crash. "Careless Boeing engineers were to blame, ' said David. 'But this was the company culture. The culture is set by the people at the top. It always does. It happens in every organisation. And they made such shortcuts and shoddiness permissible." In recent years, Boeing has been at the centre of several controversies regarding the safety of of its planes after two fatal crashes. And history appeared to eerily repeat itself after had a mid-flight blowout of a door plug, due to poor safety checks. It was a miracle no one was killed. The incident, which occurred shortly after takeoff from Portland, Oregon, resulted in a gaping hole in the fuselage. The NTSB, investigating the incident and has pointed to systemic failures within Boeing. The company said they are working on strengthening safety and quality across their operations.
