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 22nd Mar 2017, 12:11
  #121 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 228
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So I plan a trip of 3 or 4 days, and can fit all my clothing and other stuff into an old laptop bag, goes between my calves and my seat while everyone else is wielding possibly heavy mid-size cases into the overhead lockers. No laptop in it though, just a 7 or 8 inch tablet. The tablet has to come out and go in the hold. On its own in a tiny cardboard box it would be vulnerable to damage or theft, so does it need a suitcase mostly full of packing? Surely it is more convenient for everyone to inspect it on check-in, which was already happening, I assumed, and then stay with the hand luggage. Even in the hold it should still be checked, so no saving of work, just a pointless and inefficient (for me and the airport and the airline) increase in baggage volume.
aox is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:11
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is not a genuine security issue; it's an economic war by the US on companies with which it can't compete because it's services is so woeful. Rather than up their game, they again unlevel the playing field. Chapter 11, fifth freedoms and now this. Trump is as bent as a three dollar note and he has cowed to the US3 without upsetting Boeing. Otherwise, why would all US operators flying from those nations on the list be exempt from the rule?
Aluminium shuffler is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:30
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It amuses me with all the conspiracy theorists and anti-Trumpers that are willing to sacrifice thousands of lives for their beliefs(actually, they disgust me).

It is obvious that the much-maligned raid that happened in Yemen(authorized by that terrible person) actually did reveal some hugely important information which will save a lot of lives, possibly including yours. There is a plot to attack multiple airliners in one day and kill thousands. There is precedent for a plot like this in the past if you Google search and there is a deep desire to pull it off.

The weaponry has been created as seen by the Daallo airlines attack in which a computer made it through security.

The several countries, all in one easy to guess region, have had infiltrators slowly make their way into becoming security scanners and are ready to let the bombs go through despite being detected in a coordinated manner on the same day.

Obviously, the names of the compromised screeners are unknown but their locations are known, so only a blanket ban can be made. The detection systems that are used for baggage and the manner in which they are used are considered to be more reliable than the individual security persons who have now been sidelined in terms of this particular plot which has been years in the making.

But don't worry, an individual airliner will be brought down as a back-up plan at some point by one of those insiders, just like the Russian airliner in Egypt. Although that was a maintenance guy as the insider.

I guess these airlines are victims of their own people. Kind of like we are becoming.

It is called putting 1+1+1 together.

Last edited by JammedStab; 22nd Mar 2017 at 13:12.
JammedStab is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:36
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
surely it is more convenient for everyone to inspect it on check-in
Checked baggage screening is still a costly and difficult issue, but apparently this is now the preferred process for objects they have identified as high risk.
Sober Lark is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:36
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
and making it add up to two...
RustyTD is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:40
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No high risk, just high worth. If there was an actual problem, you'd invite people to clear "extreme vetting", "high security" and welcome them on board, again.
RustyTD is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:42
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RustyTD
and making it add up to two...
Many appear to only be able to add that high in terms of realistic outlook and acceptance of what the threats are today, who is creating almost all the threat, and how our policies are making them worse.
JammedStab is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:45
  #128 (permalink)  
aox
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 228
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sober Lark
Checked baggage screening is still a costly and difficult issue, but apparently this is now the preferred process for objects they have identified as high risk.
Sure, but in my example the tablet will presumably be screened whichever piece of luggage it ends up in. If someone who hoped to travel with just a single smaller than average piece of hand luggage ends up having to take an extra item just to put a tablet in on its own that isn't really helping anyone, including the security staff.
aox is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 13:16
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JammedStab
so only a blanket ban can be made.
Except a blanket ban hasn't been made. If it had, we'd be banned from taking any electronic equipment on board any aircraft.
eal401 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 13:21
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,993
Received 318 Likes on 163 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
Presumably Sally Leivesley, last heard telling us that MH370 had been the victim of a cyber-hijack.
It was indeed, she's just popped up on the BBC lunchtime news to tell us that

"In a cabin, a relative small device can make a hole in the side of the plane and crash the plane; in the hold it's much less likely and the pilot has a good chance of getting the plane down on the ground".

Doh ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 13:50
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Aluminium shuffler
This is not a genuine security issue; it's an economic war by the US on companies with which it can't compete because it's services is so woeful. Rather than up their game, they again unlevel the playing field. Chapter 11, fifth freedoms and now this. Trump is as bent as a three dollar note and he has cowed to the US3 without upsetting Boeing. Otherwise, why would all US operators flying from those nations on the list be exempt from the rule?
US operators are not exempt. There are simply no US airlines operating direct flights to the US from the listed countries.

Your shrill little anti-American anti-Trump rant is embarrassing.
nolimitholdem is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 14:23
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For the conspiracy theorists, why part you and your laptop, forget bombs.

if your laptop is in baggage, it gives the "right"ppl a couple of hours to access and scrutinise your laptop and copy data, don't rely on the case being locked argument, and of course if it is interesting it may end up being "stolen".
oldoberon is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:03
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 592
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZFT
We have a company ban on any laptops travelling in checked baggage for (perceived) security issues. I suspect we are not alone so this must have an economic impact on the effected carriers.
Not to mention the consequent lost productivity on a long haul flight, too.

It looks like SriLankan (a direct flight) will be getting all my regular LHR-CMB business rather than SriLankan or Qatar based on my mental "reasonable price & reasonable timing" algorithm as historically.
The late XV105 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:05
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Received 18 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by nolimitholdem
US operators are not exempt. There are simply no US airlines operating direct flights to the US from the listed countries.

Your shrill little anti-American anti-Trump rant is embarrassing.
US operators are only 'exempt' as they don't fly to those locations as they are rubbish and nobody will use them. they pulled out because they were soundly beaten and are bricks that the ME3 will show them up on their home turf for what they are.

Of course its an economic attack - the USG is simply protecting its home market and avoiding even more US citizens seeing how good the ME3 are, how bad the US carriers are and by how much the US guys are ripping them off. Trump has learned from his crude attempt on immigration to come up with a plausible excuse first, and then prevent the competition from entering the USA.

The whole argument about hold vs cabin is fatuous. If someone is going to mount an attack, they will simply come from another location which is not on the list.
GrahamO is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 15:11
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by The late XV105
It looks like SriLankan (a direct flight) will be getting all my regular LHR-CMB business rather than SriLankan or Qatar
Yep, that makes sense...
Airbubba is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:09
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If someone is going to mount an attack, they will simply come from another location which is not on the list.
Which part of 'duh, they're going to use airports where they have agents working in security' is proving hard to understand?
MG23 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:41
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seattle
Posts: 725
Received 10 Likes on 3 Posts
airports where they have agents working in security
This is the most likely scenario. They might be trying the Daallo Flight 159 type attack again. But here's the problem with a laptop ban: If the bad guys have penetrated security to that extent, they can pretty easily plant anything they want onboard an aircraft or hand it to a co-conspirator passenger. Why bother with a laptop when they could hand the guy a complete carry-on bag?

If this is indeed the threat, then we need to shut down flights originating from the compromised airports completely. And then work with the local officials to plug security holes.
EEngr is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 17:59
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sand pit
Age: 55
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MG23
Which part of 'duh, they're going to use airports where they have agents working in security' is proving hard to understand?
And you think with all the going on in France and Europe or anywhere in the world right now, that they aren't just as susceptible as Dubai?
It's pretty naive as there are probably more radical terrorist in Paris or Detroit as in UAE.
casablanca is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 18:02
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,732
Likes: 0
Received 71 Likes on 35 Posts
Given that BA have spent the last few years heavily promoting "hand baggage only" fares, it would have been good if, instead of the bland standard sentences they put in their statement of today about this, there was some information about how people who already have such tickets are to handle it. The last thing we want is for commercial departments to make a revenue opportunity out of this.
WHBM is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 18:18
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
IATA-WAS has just circulated the following 'clarification'

Several IATA member airlines have reported being told that the new security directive on large electronic devices also applies to devices (including electronic flight bags) carried by airline flight and cabin crew members. We have been in contact with both the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Transportation Security Administration headquarters in Washington, DC and have been told specifically that the new directive does not apply to flight and cabin crew devices.
ExXB is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.