Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Middle East
Reload this Page >

Electronic Carry-on ban (inc. UAE)

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.

Electronic Carry-on ban (inc. UAE)

Old 21st Mar 2017, 19:46
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by casablanca View Post
But how does blocking 8 airlines solve this.....you think they can't book a flight transiting Europe just as well? I'd would wager there are a hell of a lot more jijadis in Europe than the countries affected by this.
Just doesn't seem to be well thought out.
It's not blocking any airline. It's blocking the carriage of electronics in hand luggage from several destinations and countries. An inconvenience perhaps but the powers that be deemed it necessary and no one cares about opinions on security matters.
4runner is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2017, 21:10
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UAE
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In AUH airport there is a US pre-clearance facility. Practically works like you are already checked into the US territory and the officers are americans and TSA.
So cannot still understands.

US Pre-Clearance Facility | Check-in & Passport Control | Airport Information | Abu Dhabi International Airport
hdgselect is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2017, 23:01
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Shisha bar near Deira clock tower
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some of the baggage handlers will have a field day.
MotoMendez is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 03:26
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dusty West
Age: 52
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To all you who claim that this is an economic ban:

So I guess with that logic the Brits (and next Canada) are helping Donald achieve his goals? Have I got that right?

Maybe, just maybe there has been intercepted communications of real threats at high government levels, not some flippant opinion of posters on a pilot rumor network.


Britain to follow US with ban on electronic devices on flights from Muslim countries in Middle East | The Independent

Canada mulls joining U.S., Britain on electronics ban for flights - The Globe and Mail
The Outlaw is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 04:25
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SKG
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hdgselect View Post
In AUH airport there is a US pre-clearance facility. Practically works like you are already checked into the US territory and the officers are americans and TSA.
So cannot still understands.

US Pre-Clearance Facility | Check-in & Passport Control | Airport Information | Abu Dhabi International Airport




That should have never been approved
Money talks I guess until something bad happens

Safety first always guys and girls
paokara is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 04:43
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sand pit
Age: 53
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree it sounds like they are acting on intel.....kudos to them.
But banning a few airports won't fix it...terrorist have to only switch and use different airports.

If they have this technology they will still use it.....but now it paints a bullseye on Aa and United cause they are only airlines allowed to carry computers?

Is it the security in airports? I am from US, and have worked closely with TSA, but can't really say I feel they are superior in any way to security in Doha for example. Passengers are double checked and no liquids allowed.

Just saying if there is really a threat then it needs to expand world wide or it is pointless.......it will be nothing more than a early Christmas shopping spree for baggage handlers.
casablanca is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 04:44
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To all you who claim that this is an economic ban:

So I guess with that logic the Brits (and next Canada) are helping Donald achieve his goals? Have I got that right?

Maybe, just maybe there has been intercepted communications of real threats at high government levels, not some flippant opinion of posters on a pilot rumor network.
you mean like WMD?
littlejet is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 05:03
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 3,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Must admit I am kind of glad they act on any Intel received. Might be bad for the business for a bit, but a least it means the aeroplane I am on is safe.
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 06:53
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: new york
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Your are wrong . If there is a safety issue it should apply to all flights.

A terrorist can blow up your airplane in doha- FRA route .

If you think this way then you should only bid for US flights for your safery lol

Originally Posted by donpizmeov View Post
Must admit I am kind of glad they act on any Intel received. Might be bad for the business for a bit, but a least it means the aeroplane I am on is safe.
mmorel is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 07:14
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 3,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
mmorel, it would depend on what intel suggested the intended targets were wouldn't it? Perhaps you know more?
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 08:01
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: SFO
Age: 43
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Desert snake View Post
The U.K. ban does not include any of the ME3.
The US ban includes them all.

Reason?
Because the US restriction includes flights departing from Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Doha.
JuniorMan is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 08:48
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AUSTRALIA - CHINA STHN
Age: 58
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why bother with any carry on item ??

Those serious about taking down an airliner only need to walk on ... no need for anything but themselves.
But Few are listening to the Achilles heel below ...
it's been over five years and nothing has changed in this respect in most airline nes I know of operating this type ..
https://youtu.be/mLmzvF2qkDY
woodja51 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OK, then, for the defenders of this new policy. Why, if this security excuse has the smallest shred of credibility, does the US ban exclude all US airlines, given their pax are using airports on the list? It is a corrupt President supporting petulant companies and bent unions, nothing more. The US always plays unfairly with regulations because its businesses are not competitive.
Aluminium shuffler is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 13:19
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UAE
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe this is a cowardly way to please US airlines unions who are crying since about the 3ME. Is a security matter so no discussion right? Safety first right?
So we can't' have an opinion, even if be in aviation business in 5 different countries for 28 years. ok.
Let me tell you something:

1- Why UK ban doesn't include Doha, Abu Dhabi and Dubai
my answer: because they bring revenue passengers there and then US and Eu Carriers can transport to US

2- Why the ban is only for flight to and not from: What is the difference? The US carriers are not included simply because they are not connecting Gulf Hubs to the US directly. The 9/11 were departing flights not arrival flights, and were on US carriers.

3-Why an electronic device in the cargo hold should be harmless instead of one carried in the passenger cabin? because you cannot switch it on? there are millions of ways to wake up from off an electronic device. And I am not an hacker guy.

Do the Americans always told the truth on everything to the people? really?
hdgselect is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 14:25
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 3,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
hdgselect,
1. The UK decided that it would add routes that disadvantage their own airlines, from certain destinations. Did they do this to help cover up this plot to destroy the ME3 while not actually disadvantaging the ME3 at the same time?
2. The intel must have suggested that the threat was from the middle east flights to the US. So why screw around with flights heading the other way? This one doesn't seem like rocket science to understand.
3. I would think they might have some idea about what threat they are against to make the decision they did with respect devices being allowed in the hold.

Most Americans I know are truthful people. Their government seems to be as bad as any other on the planet.
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 14:46
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UAE
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Trump's laptop ban is a giant middle finger to business travelers.
hdgselect is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:01
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SKG
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Desert snake View Post
Im not asking where the ME3 fly from. I'm asking why the U.K. ban doesn't cover them but the US ban does!



Because they arrive in the US and they don't want to see Americans getting killed as well another 9/11

America cares for Americans as well as their land
Something every country should do for its citizens.
paokara is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:09
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Doctor's waiting room
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One way the US operators could get round this is by having secondary screening at the gate for all passengers.

I have flown as a pax out of DXB in the past with BA and on one occasion all pax were subject to secondary screening at the gate. Airlines can increase the level of security over and above what the airport operator provides, if they choose to do so. Look no further than EL AL outside of Israel.

It would be a rather embarrassing proposition for the Arab operators facing these restrictions to do the same, as it would be a frank admission that the security on their own doorstep has room for improvement.
Emma Royds is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:48
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's obvious the the PPRuNe experts don't have a grasp of the global intelligence gather agencies.
fatbus is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:24
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by paokara View Post
Because they arrive in the US and they don't want to see Americans getting killed as well another 9/11

America cares for Americans as well as their land
Something every country should do for its citizens.
That still does not explain why the US3 are completely exempt. This is not a security matter, it is protectionism. Again.
Aluminium shuffler is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.