...on a bomb that could evade existing measures.
I don't understand this one. The mitigation against a process/device that may be able to evade existing measures is to do more of the same? That makes no sense whatsoever. A new threat requires a new response. But as ever, the numpties "securing our safety" won't have a clue other than to be ruder to everybody. So, unless we start profiling (a certain organisation near Cheltenham that costs (or should it be wastes?) billions a year should have a list of the most likely) passengers, our radical zealots will be able to press home their attack.
Just out of interest, when will we start getting value for money out of our intelligence and security services? Our Foreign and Commonwealth office have failed to predict a single war since Crimea. Even the "redtops" have a better feel for what is about to unfold. And the mentally challenged running DfT have never taken any action in advance of any threat - they only respond after something has badly gone wrong (a bit like the Catholic church). I would have hoped for some imagination from them or am I asking for too much?