Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Lap top and tablet ban

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Lap top and tablet ban

Old 19th May 2017, 20:34
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Not going into specifics but part of the reason for requiring them in checked luggage is not only for detection but also isolation (containment).
peekay4 is offline  
Old 19th May 2017, 23:46
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,350
requiring them in checked luggage is not only for detection but also isolation (containment)
Containment from what?

If they go boom as baggage the damage is variable as hell based on location.

If they go boom in the cabin the damage is predictable based on seat location and/or overhead storage which is specific by PNR (boarding pass).

And then there is the fire hazard from a typical LI cheap battery in passenger luggage. In the overhead or cabin it's specific in location and ability to assess and contain. In the baggage hold it's the stuff that causes extreme workload on the flight crew's decisions vs time and distance to an airport.

I'll leave it to the airline safety guys to sort out the pro and cons and costs vs risk avoidance.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 00:04
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
That's an incomplete analysis.

Anyway, the risk assessment was already performed by DHS, and here we are. I'm not privy to anything secret, but knowing some information which have been disclosed, I find the assessment convincing.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 02:10
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,350
That's an incomplete analysis.
Of course it was, it was meant only to illustrate the reverse side of your earlier post

So, the public has no say in this unless we understand the reasoning. But we are the ones that need to comply
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 16:23
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: EDLB
Posts: 203
The Saudis made a 350 billion weapon deal with the US but are not allowed to carry their laptops in the cabin. Must be an interesting risk analysis from the DHS.
EDLB is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 16:30
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 57
Posts: 1,548
And 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens.

Point being that the fact that the Saudi Government may have good relationships with the US on some levels doesn't preclude the possibilities of terrorists existing in the country.
A Squared is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 16:38
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 65
Posts: 2,846
Saudi Arabian airports are not (yet) on the list of airports where laptops are banned.

I wonder if the 110 billion (over 10 years) weapons deal had anything to do with that?
ExXB is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 17:52
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 51
Posts: 2,716
So where the hell are Jeddah and Riyadh then?
White Knight is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 18:38
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind you
Age: 73
Posts: 227
Originally Posted by ExXB View Post
Saudi Arabian airports are not (yet) on the list of airports where laptops are banned.

I wonder if the 110 billion (over 10 years) weapons deal had anything to do with that?
Oh dear Lord😳!!
I'd like to meet your Geography teacher...
my salami is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 19:13
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 65
Posts: 2,846
Apologies, Saudi is indeed on the list. Will Mr. Trump's laptop be put in the hold then?
ExXB is offline  
Old 20th May 2017, 19:58
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,350
only if he flies directly back to the US.

No doubt it will get a good scrubbing in the EU countries when he departs from there.
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 02:23
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: home @ 103E
Age: 55
Posts: 78
Originally Posted by ExXB View Post
Apologies, Saudi is indeed on the list. Will Mr. Trump's laptop be put in the hold then?
He doesn't need a laptop to tweet. 😏
perantau is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 08:27
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 834
Originally Posted by lomapaseo View Post
If they go boom in the cabin the damage is predictable based on seat location and/or overhead storage which is specific by PNR (boarding pass).
If they go boom in the cabin the damage is predictable based on exactly where the attacker decides to set it off, which is nothing to do with boarding pass.

A small boom set by a clever attacker in the right place is going to be as big a threat as a large boom placed randomly, and that's before we get onto stuff like shaped charges and really clever placement.

I strongly suspect this is the issue.
infrequentflyer789 is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 11:30
  #354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NJ
Age: 47
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by edmundronald View Post
This will make Chromebooks and other net-connected empty-shell computers the tool of choice for biz travellers. Rent one or buy a cheap one as soon as you touch down.
Rather, this will result in a massive push towards videonconferencing/telepresence in lieu of business travel.

I've been a management/technology consultant flying weekly for 20 years now, and if this ban were extended to all domestic and international flights, I'd likely either find an alternative to in-person meetings or switch careers if it were not feasible. I haven't checked a bag (save for gate checking carry-ons on puddle jumpers) in years. I keep my timelines from landing to meeting starts pretty tight, and I count on flying time for working. I'm not unique, such a rule would be devastating for business travel.
RTD1 is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 12:28
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,221
There is always an element of business travel that is not really necessary but its hard line to draw between beneficial and essential. There are also events like conferences where most of the attendees dont' actually attend but meet with peers from other companies and do business just because lot of peopel from one industry are in the same place. Ie the conference itself isnt really 'necessary' but its a good opportunity to meet clients and suppliers without doing separate trips.
Video links are usually fine for inside the company work and some external stuff but many cultures like the physical presence bit .

So i can see the rule reducing things but perhaps not by that much, while working on the plane is sometimes a good idea for many a flight is an opportunity to have a rest and serious think which can be a rarity in todays world.

very hard to keep ahead of the bad guys but as I ahave said before it is foolish of the USA to make such restrictions when there is just as much risk from flying domestic US which always seems to have the lowest level of security in spite of being the proven biggest area of risk
pax britanica is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 15:08
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Posts: 32
Back to basics

The thread here seems to have drifted to business travellers and their influences.

But can I ask - the professional pilots here have to sit at the sharp end... how comfortable (or otherwise) does the thought of a new type of bomb in a laptop ( or whatever) make them feel?

Yes, there is only a slight chance of it disrupting an individual flight but, as someone once said... "for each flight, it's 50-50 - it either will, or it won't..."
MacLaren1 is offline  
Old 21st May 2017, 15:40
  #357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 595
Originally Posted by sptraveller View Post
This despite MAN having the most pernickety screening staff this side of Ben Gurion.
Wasn't just me thinking this then. A few Monday mornings back I had this pleasure. The queue in T3 was massive and slow... and not even peak summer season.
Dannyboy39 is offline  
Old 22nd May 2017, 22:26
  #358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Manchester
Posts: 32
Laptop Ban Reaction to X-Ray Equipment Stolen by ISIS

This appeared on my news feed. I have no idea as to the veracity but it's an interesting possibility:

https://professional-troublemaker.co...tolen-by-isis/
slfool is offline  
Old 23rd May 2017, 00:14
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,349
If you see my post on the previous page http://www.pprune.org/9775809-post341.html you will see there was nothing 'secret' about it except n the fervent mind of some western journalists who think everything revolves around their political mores.

It was common knowledge that Mosul university was being used by bomb makers and chemical weapons members of ISIS to generate new weapons that could be used. This is not exactly earth shaking as terrorists have made use of airport scanning equipment to test their ideas for years. So there were no 'secrets'

Unfortunately, the world is not easily split into 'Orange' and 'Blue' forces any more and there are times when alliances have to be struck in ways that small minded politicians and their media hacks find difficult to grasp. It is all part of 'The Great Game'
Ian W is offline  
Old 23rd May 2017, 10:16
  #360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 295
Originally Posted by MacLaren1 View Post
the professional pilots here have to sit at the sharp end... how comfortable (or otherwise) does the thought of a new type of bomb in a laptop ( or whatever) make them feel?

Yes, there is only a slight chance of it disrupting an individual flight but, as someone once said... "for each flight, it's 50-50 - it either will, or it won't..."
"Someone" needs a lesson in statistics. If for each flight it's 50-50, then after you've flown 1,000 sectors you'd expect "it" to have happened around 500 times. It hasn't, has it?

Since there are about 24,000 flights every day within the US with zero bombs going off, and two to three thousand every day across the Atlantic also with zero bombs going off (in recent years), suggesting that it's 50-50 seems silly.
OldLurker 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 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.