Lap top and tablet ban
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loaner iPads/Laptops with free WiFi definitely helps with internet browsing. Not much work cannot be done because most companies won't allow work on loaner laptops.
Any news on how this ban is impacting Fly America traffic. I am sure they won't like their laptops in the hold.
Any news on how this ban is impacting Fly America traffic. I am sure they won't like their laptops in the hold.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see that there'd be any effect at all. The Fly America Act already require that someone travelling for the US government to say, Dubai, would fly on a US carrier instead of Emirates. Of course, no US carriers fly direct to and from Dubai, They'd be required to fly KLM to AMS and then Delta to the US (For example) so this ruling wouldn't affect them.
That's what people are finding suspiciously convenient about this move. Maybe there's good security reasons, maybe there's not. But there's no denying that it is a significant inconvenience to passengers flying Emeriates/Ethiad/Quatar, but doesn't inconvenience passengers flying to the same destinations on US airlines and their partners.
That's what people are finding suspiciously convenient about this move. Maybe there's good security reasons, maybe there's not. But there's no denying that it is a significant inconvenience to passengers flying Emeriates/Ethiad/Quatar, but doesn't inconvenience passengers flying to the same destinations on US airlines and their partners.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: KMCO
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not true, B6 code shares with Emirates thus Government travel is permitted on the six US-Dubai Emirates non-stops much to the chagrin of DL and UA, which dropped their routes from KIAD and KATL shortly after B6 (er, EK) won the route.
Link
Link
People vote with their feet and I know from years of pax experinece that ME passengers are not happy leaving their laptops/notebooks and tablets in the hold.
Gulf airlines are the losers in this game.
Gulf airlines are the losers in this game.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not true, B6 code shares with Emirates thus Government travel is permitted on the six US-Dubai Emirates non-stops much to the chagrin of DL and UA, which dropped their routes from KIAD and KATL shortly after B6 (er, EK) won the route.
Link
Link
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dublin
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point is that they are. This will discourage people from using those routes – and thus send more business back to US-based carriers (since those covered by the law will still have to use an authorised carrier).
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I had my first experience of the laptop ban today and was pleasantly surprised how efficient it was.
Travelling THY from the Far East over Istanbul. I was hand luggage only I kept my laptop with me on the first flight and arrived at the Gate in Istanbul an hour before departure, there were additional security staff who asked if I had a laptop I said yes and handed it over, they only wanted the laptop no ancillary’s, the laptop was placed in a bubble wrap sleeve to which a limited release tag was attached and placed into one of three dedicated suitcases. I signed to say I had handed it over. A quick check of my baggage to ensure I did not have more than one laptop and I was on board. We departed about 15 minutes late but just prior to pushback I saw the three suitcases escorted across the ramp to the hold with a security guard. On arrival at Heathrow the three suitcases were escorted to a pickup point next two the baggage belt where two staff were handing the laptops over in exchange for the limited release tag.
The entire operation was efficient and secure. I can’t say it was safe because there were three suitcases fully loaded with lithium batteries in the hold. Ironically if I turned up at Heathrow check-in with the three suitcases that heavily loaded with laptops I am certain they would be refused.
Travelling THY from the Far East over Istanbul. I was hand luggage only I kept my laptop with me on the first flight and arrived at the Gate in Istanbul an hour before departure, there were additional security staff who asked if I had a laptop I said yes and handed it over, they only wanted the laptop no ancillary’s, the laptop was placed in a bubble wrap sleeve to which a limited release tag was attached and placed into one of three dedicated suitcases. I signed to say I had handed it over. A quick check of my baggage to ensure I did not have more than one laptop and I was on board. We departed about 15 minutes late but just prior to pushback I saw the three suitcases escorted across the ramp to the hold with a security guard. On arrival at Heathrow the three suitcases were escorted to a pickup point next two the baggage belt where two staff were handing the laptops over in exchange for the limited release tag.
The entire operation was efficient and secure. I can’t say it was safe because there were three suitcases fully loaded with lithium batteries in the hold. Ironically if I turned up at Heathrow check-in with the three suitcases that heavily loaded with laptops I am certain they would be refused.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lossy city
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One (deliberately or inadvertently) "hot" laptop in that bunch and suddenly you have a much bigger problem on your hands... The UK ban is at least not deliberately targeted only at competitive airlines, but just as stupid as the US one.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to be clear, it was a "limited release tag" but a limited release tag that is not filled out correctly is just a tag with a red and white striped border and unless they have filled in the details and had me sign it then it is not limiting their liability and the Montreal convention still applies.
I believe in this case it was simply being used as a manual bag tag. there was no suggestion that they were trying to limit their liability
I believe in this case it was simply being used as a manual bag tag. there was no suggestion that they were trying to limit their liability
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: India
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming those 3 suitcases and the laptops within them were subjected to some "additional" screening methods, can someone explain why those same methods cannot be applied to standard screening protocols that all carry-ons go through now ? Given that the US carriers are not subject to this rule, one would conclude that US carriers are able to do this additional screening.
If this is not the case, is there any safety benefit to physically separating a potential terrorist from his bomb payload ?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, once again, US carriers are subject to the rule. It doesn't currently affect any US carriers, because no US carriers are currently offering direct service from any of the airports listed. Presumably, if Delta (for example) were to start up it's DXB-ATL flight, then Delta would be subject to their just like Emirates.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, isn't it though?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to claim that this move isn't targeted at certain operators, just pointing out that whatever "targeting" may be behind it is accomplished by circumstance rather than explicitly naming or exempting carriers.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to claim that this move isn't targeted at certain operators, just pointing out that whatever "targeting" may be behind it is accomplished by circumstance rather than explicitly naming or exempting carriers.