Final 3 Greens

Lexxity

I hope that things get sorted out quickly, too.

There is no sense of Schadenfreude from where I'm sitting.

Brakedwell

Thanks for posting that info, - my comment about insurance refered to claims for suitcases rather than a laptop.

However, I am not surprised that the insurance companies have taken this stand, since the whole risk equation is altered dramatically by the electronic stuff going through a system that was never designed to handle it.

Oh that's super!

I agree with that.

The only way round this that I can think of is for the important stuff to go on an SD card (or alike) and put that in your wallet, or to upload the file onto a server from which you can download the file at the destination. Then put the laptop on the DHL same-day/next day service (depending on the location) or have one made available there. At least, DHL and the like do offer insurance on loss or damage.

Vizzo

Definitely main players so no harm in discussing these things.
Especially as Mr Terrorist seems to like nothing more than screwing around with air travel. When he picks on busses, the thread wll close.

A330ismylittlebaby

I think security should be increased on cruise ships now.
I don't think it's a case of "don't take a drink on board" though at the moment that's the best thing to do i think.

The best thing is to have I.D Cards around your neck, no i don't mean walking the streets with one. I mean like airport passes when you start work. Well we can have them for while we are going through security check points to prove you have had a CRC.

I mean i reallyt don't know what to do because there could be a bad apple without a criminal record, so i guess alot of our safety is on security checks which i'm happy with and our security services who do a very hard job.

Final 3 Greens

O That's SUper

I was quoting BEagle, but I'll respond to your point.

I don't think that SD cards are allowed, but even if they are I typically need about 15GB of data, so it isn't really feasible.

As to shipping the laptop, not really an option either, as I tend to go from one place to the next quite quixkly and the laptop wouldn't follow fast enough.

Funnily enough, I am sitting here configuring a laptop specifically for the possibility of leaving it in the UK, for those occasions when I work there.

brakedwell

So the security services have been monitoring the suspected terrorists for eighteen months. Instead of waiting until after they were arrested, why were stricter security measures not introduced as soon as the plot to blow up ten transatlanic jets was uncovered? It's all beginning to seem a bit fishy to me.

spork

My original post on this, which could be anywhere now due to mods rearranging threads according to unpublished rules, was to clarify that it’s NOT terrorist action causing the current chaos, it’s the numbskull security action. I don’t fly as much as I used to, but when I do, I’m not the least bit worried about terrorist action. Statistically it’s highly unlikely to be me. If it is me, then so be it.
My biggest worry, which has been the case for years now, is that statistically EVERY SINGLE FLIGHT I TAKE is affected by the fools at the airport, who again and again fail to act in the correct manner. With their latest UK action, does anybody feel safer that pax are to be deprived of a book to read, and that granny’s Oil of Olay is safely in the hold? UK security is a ship of fools. I tend to agree with clv101’s post (at #328) that quite possibly nothing anti-terrorist is being achieved at all by all this bogus activity.
Well, my daughter has just arrived (Sat 10:00hrs) from Atlanta via Newark to Gatwick. Her experience of the US internal security was good, in the sense that they didn’t confiscate, they just relied on passenger honesty. Signs were displayed saying “please dump bottles here”. Once on the internal flight, other pax were producing stuff from their bags that they hadn’t dumped. Bags had not been searched after the dump areas, so totally ineffective security going on there! For the flight to the UK, again requests were made to put certain items in hold baggage, but NOT enforced. She asked to take her Ipod on board and they allowed it. So, nothing to be vitriolic about there.
Concerning the insurance companies’ attitude, when did posters last try and claim for anything on any policy? For many years we’ve paid fortunes in premiums, and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING has ever been covered. There’s always a get out for them somewhere. No change there then!

BEagle

I've just been doing some sums concerning a business trip in October.

Home to place of business is about 700 miles, plus the Channel Tunnel. Drive down to Strasbourg, night in an hotel, drive on the next day... Same coming back. Add a bit of a holiday as well as I'll be there for around 10 days.

Or home to BHX, leave car for 10 days, suffer security restrictions, wonder whether essential luggage will arrive.....

If petrol, Eurotunnel and motorway costs and 2 extra nights in a hotel will be less than the £1027 it would cost to drive to the airport, park for 10 days, fly, then I shall probably drive - because of the security of my essential business requirements.

I'm sure many other business travellers are doing the same analysis.

El Grifo

Eh, actually its the blogs that are screaming vitriol laddie, not the US security or your daughter.

I could post a link but it would not last 10 seconds on this strange forum.

spork

Not sure about the "laddie" bit, but my point precisely. Re-read my post carefully. Blogs can be deceiving. But maybe their experience is different? Let's face it, there's obviously a lot of inconsistency within Europe on security. I was just letting you know some info "hot off the press". YMMV!

BEagle

I see that BAA are now allowing people to buy things at their duty free shops and take them onto the aircraft (except for liquids to the US).

What bloody hypocrisy. No doubt the loss of revenue has prompted this; I hope people boycott BAA's shops until the current absurd restrictions are eased.

Good to hear Willie Walsh's scathing comment regarding the inadequacy of BAA being unable to provide a sufficiently robust infrastructure to process passengers for ba's flights. He is so right!

Oh that's super!

As someone who travels with laptop, I do feel your pain (damn that they might not be allowing SD cards - I thought it might be OK if it's inert like that and fits in a wallet).

I wonder if they would be able to come up with a tamper-proof laptop that will eventually be cleared to be taken as a hand-luggage one day, by a security cleared person.

Final 3 Greens

Oh That's Super

As someone who travels with laptop, I do feel your pain ù

Appreciate your comments mate.

Oh that's super!

Final 3 Greens,

If they start banning laptops for domestic travel in Australia (we don't have the restriction here yet), I'll have to buy another computer and leave it at the secondary place I spend a lot of time at, because I have a number of peculiar software program that is not widely available (i.e. I can't just borrow someone else's computer to work on). Wonderful to have to get another software licence too - not.

At least, I don't think the baggage handlers would find it so easy to break flash drives, even if they chuck my luggage around (like you, my bags have suffered some unbelievable damage through rough handling - they must have run over them with their trolley to have done that). Having said that, I'll waste a further 30 minutes each way by having to stand around the carousel too. That's going to eat further into my sleeping time that is pretty precious as it is.

I don't really blame the government, airlines etc - I blame the terrorist for this. But it still doesn't make any difference to the fact that I find it frustrating.

I have just read the concerns expressed by musicians on BBC. I feel for them too.

chandlers dad

"Tamper proof" is not possible. If you need to repair the computer, Ipod or Cellphone, then the techie has to be able to get inside. If they can get inside a good "sparks chaser" can modify it. Most techie's modify things to work better or faster but these demented jerks sometimes change them to act as a detonator.

One other point is that if you have to have your laptop with you on a flight, and I do, I am going to remove the hard drive (easy on most newer laptops, just slips out) and put it in one bag, and the computer in another bag.

At least this way the jerks who troll baggage lines stealing anything they can get to will not have a workable computer if they steal mine. Would feel a lot better if the security would allow me to hand carry the hard drive with me but fat chance on that these days. Its small, about the size of a Fisherman Friends box and would go in your shirt pocket.

El Grifo

fair do's Spork, fair do's !!

Oh that's super!

I should have worded my post better. I was really thinking in the line of 'tamper-proof seal' of some sort, rather than the laptop being impossible to get tampered with. Effectively, a security sealed (even if that needs to be checked out by some authority and the seal placed by them) laptop that will show up if anything at all is done/changed - even if one screw has been removed and put back.

I agree about the hard drive. I wish I could hand carry that. Even if it doesn't get stolen, considering the baggage handlers appear to be capable of breaking anything that is capable of being broken, I do not wish to trust anything that is remotely fragile (read: something that will break if dropped from the 5th floor of a building) in the hold.

EastMids

To all those who say the current UK rules not allowing any hand-baggage are a reasonable precaution get this...

Hand baggage is only banned on flights departuring FROM THE UK, its not even ebing banned on inbound flights to the UK. Well wooohoooo! We all get to leave the UK safely, but we'll get blown up on the way back to the UK. I'm sure that makes you sleep better!

These restrictions will totally **** up the UK airline industry if they carry on. They have the potential to cause mysery to hundreds or even thousands who will lose their jobs as a result, without making anything safer - see previous point about this being a one-way problem. If anyone thinks these rediculous restrictions and their ramifications are better than putting in place more rigourous security inspections (as has been done in a number of other countries) then hold your hand up now. NOT ME!

The UK government has only put these rules in place this because, as usual, it is using a kneejerk reaction to solve an immediate problem rather than taking a balanced and sensible approach that considers reality and longer term ramifications.

Andy

bjcc

EastMids

I seem to recall the Goverment saying it would not carry on. It is therefore a short term mesure.

To be honest, yes, much of it is a pain, nothing more, and now we know the situation, and what we can and cannot take on an aircraft, it shouldn't be anything more than a minor inconvience, provided people are sensible.

So instead of taking a book to the airport, buy it airside. The queues at the search areas should deminish, given that much of the problems there are caused by seraching hand baggage.

Drinks on the way to US? I understand there is no restriction on the sale, or provision of drinks on aircraft due to the regulations. In fact, I understand that many airlines provide drinks free still.

Pax confidence? Yes, there is some merit in the claims this will cause some people not to fly. But then showers of tin over the atlantic would have a worse effect.
That would almost certainly have led to your doomsday prediction of job losses.

The inequality of security when arriving in the UK, yes, I see your point, but the UK has no sway over other airlines operating into the UK in that respect.

Oh and on the subject of Insurance, check the small print. All insurance companies are different. A friend of mine had her camera nicked from her hold luggage a few years ago. Her Insurance company paid out. Thats not to say that I don't understand the incovience of things being nicked from hold bags. I certainly wouldn't put my camera gear in there, not so much from any ability or otherwise to claim for it being nicked, more the inconvience.

EastMids

bjcc, you miss the point. The restrictions are not logical...

Firstly, do you HONESTLY believe the changes with respect to carry on items (with the exception of liquids) make things safer, because if you do there's no point in you flying anwhere anyway as you won't find the same "reassuring" restrictions in place in any other country, meaning your return trip is going to be more dangerous and cause you much more anxiety than your outbound. There's no such thing as solving half a problem here - if you think its going to happen, it does the same damage whether the plane explodes eastbound or westbound! You either believe we've got it right and everyone else has got it wrong, or you believe what we alone have is a gross over-reaction.

Secondly, whatever you think about the restrictions, there are other forms of travel (e.g. rail for domestic travel) and other air routes (Eurostar to Paris and then fly) available that avoid the issues created here. Many people, business travellers in particular, are already starting to do these things because they cannot reliably perform their business function with the current rules. Whilst our new security regime might give you warm fuzzy feelings about your outbound flight, many many other people are going to be doing the other without being concerned it carries any more risk, and the only result is severe damage the airline industry here.

Andy