U.S. to ban some airline passengers from carrying larger electronics

[thaibeachlovers]

46 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

If the risk this ban is intended to mitigate is so significant, why isn't it being implemented worldwide? 

The Brits have implemented it too. Others will, no doubt.

[Andaman Al]

terrorist 5 - global citizens 0

 

This is a ridiculous step. Will the ban include all the iPads that the crew use now to store maps and flight publication data, SOP's etc? Before you pounce all over that one, flight crews in the UK are subject to the same limitations as passengers on liquids etc, so  a pilot can't carry onboard a mayonnaise based salad, drink and yoghurt for his own meal, (just incase he wants to carry out some nefarious act that is dangerous - rather than just turn the engines off and point the aircraft at the ground!).

 

Somebody is making money out of this somewhere, and it is going to cause a LOT of issues with business class passengers in particular. It seems like a dead certain way to hurt the Middle Eastern Airlines. To put a ban on Dubai, Qatar and the UAE that have amongst the most modern airports and security the world is madness.

 

What is the reason for the ban and just where did the instruction for it come from?

[esprit]

49 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The Brits have implemented it too. Others will, no doubt.

And lets see who the first country will be to instigate a "tit for tat" restriction on the US and UK !!

[Gecko123]

You guys are missing the point. Whatever the risk is (carry on bomb, hacking pilot controls) that risk is worldwide. If the risk is truly significant, controls should have been implemented on a worldwide not piecemeal basis. 

 

By the way, putting mid-eastern airline companies at a competitive disadvantage which weakens the local economies, not to mention stigmatizing and alienating laptop-toting Muslims at airports, is going to do anything but help reduce islamic radicalism.

 

Edited March 22, 2017 by Gecko123

[wayned]

I doubt that it's a "bomb" related concern, most likely a "hacking" concern.  If it were a bomb, what would be the difference between having it in the cabin or luggage?  I remember back in the late 70s, early 80s, when I traveled with a portable Techtronics spectrum analyzer as carry on.  Even then I would have to turn it on at security but it usually made it on board okay.  I remember on instance where I wasn't allowed to take it on board a JAL flight.  JAL  conveniently stored it in the cockpit behind the co-pilot's seat.  Good thinking! And back then it was because of a bomb threat!

[Gecko123]

Hacking is the threat? Really?

 

Since when does a hacker have to be in close physical proximity to a hacking target? 

Edited March 22, 2017 by Gecko123

[NanLaew]

14 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

Hacking is the threat? Really?

 

Since when does a hacker have to be in close physical proximity to a hacking target? 

I would reckon if the intent is to somehow hack the controls and/or communications of an airliner in flight, one would indeed require to be sitting onboard. I don't think that technology allows this to be done from the ground (yet).

[wayned]

Some of the flights that I have been on in the last 50 years would have been more pleasant with an experienced hacker on-board!

[NanLaew]

43 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

You guys are missing the point. Whatever the risk is (carry on bomb, hacking pilot controls) that risk is worldwide. If the risk is truly significant, controls should have been implemented on a worldwide not piecemeal basis. 

 

By the way, putting mid-eastern airline companies at a competitive disadvantage which weakens the local economies, not to mention stigmatizing and alienating laptop-toting Muslims at airports, is going to do anything but help reduce islamic radicalism.

 

You are missing the point that for maximum effect, any atrocity inflicted on an A380 full of infidels in the US or Europe would have much, much more mileage than say blowing a low-cost carrier out of the air in India or flying one into the twin towers in Kuala Lumpur.

 

Mid eastern airlines already have the global, long-haul market well and truly covered. Between Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airlines, they OWN it already. Do you think that the additional costs of security required to comply with the US and UK's new flying gadget ban is going to prevent the average Emirati or Qatari from filling up his Veyron this weekend?

Edited March 22, 2017 by NanLaew

[Gecko123]

34 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

You are missing the point that for maximum effect, any atrocity inflicted on a plane load of innocent passengers in the US or Europe would have much, much more mileage than say blowing a low-cost carrier out of the air in India or Jakarta.

 

Mid eastern airlines already have the global, long-haul market well and truly covered. Between Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airlines, they OWN it already. Do you think that the additional costs of security required to comply with the US and UK's new flying gadget ban is going to prevent the average Emirati or Qatari from filling up his Veyron this weekend?

Thanks for the terrorism-for-dummies lesson. Everyone knows certain routes and airlines are higher value targets than others. My only point is that whatever threat these electronic devices present, it and the know-how to use it can easily be transported to another airport not covered by these restriction. There are plenty of targets attractive to terrorists beyond flights originating from the countries covered by these new restrictions.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Gecko123

[Sphere]

On 21/03/2017 at 6:23 AM, webfact said:

laptops

 

If mine's taken away just before boarding at Jeddah, that would really get my goat. 

 

[Andaman Al]

35 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

I would reckon if the intent is to somehow hack the controls and/or communications of an airliner in flight, one would indeed require to be sitting onboard. I don't think that technology allows this to be done from the ground (yet).

anything with an ip address can be hacked. You don't need to be on board. If they are concerned then turn off/jam wifi on board.

[Cirencester]

Certainly wont be covered by Insurance in the hold nailed on

[utalkin2me]

We have become a generation of such small people. We have absolutely no backbone. I think if World War II were superimposed onto today's world population, Hitler would win in about a week. Why give in to terrorists at all? Go back to pre 9/11 procedures. What exactly are we stopping with all this nonsense? Even if you can name some events, well would could stop a lot of deaths every year by improving crosswalks too. It's all about fear though, and we're weak and we've all given in. It's a sad time it really is. 

[brewsterbudgen]

1 hour ago, wayned said:

I doubt that it's a "bomb" related concern, most likely a "hacking" concern.  If it were a bomb, what would be the difference between having it in the cabin or luggage?  I remember back in the late 70s, early 80s, when I traveled with a portable Techtronics spectrum analyzer as carry on.  Even then I would have to turn it on at security but it usually made it on board okay.  I remember on instance where I wasn't allowed to take it on board a JAL flight.  JAL  conveniently stored it in the cockpit behind the co-pilot's seat.  Good thinking! And back then it was because of a bomb threat!

Presumably the devices stored in the hold can be subjected to more thorough examination?

[Silurian]

31 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Presumably the devices stored in the hold can be subjected to more thorough examination?

 

Yeah, it is called "confiscation" of said device (laptop, tablet, etc...) by those entirely honest airport security personnel rummaging through your checked in baggage. I can imagine an increase of electronic theft from checked in baggage due to this rule.

 

I always go by the adage not to put anything in checked in baggage that I don't want to lose. Maybe best not to travel with laptops or tablets anymore...what a freaking pain.

 

[Andrew Dwyer]

So I have to check my laptop and iPad but I can sit on the plane and fiddle with my iPhone to my hearts content ?
Where's the logic ? [emoji848]

[CharlieH]

Probably be a sharp rise in Insurance claims for 'lost' electronic equipment.

All those Laptops and Ipads etc being forced into the checked bags.

[webfact]

U.S., Britain curb electronics on flights from Middle East, North Africa

By David Shepardson and Kylie MacLellan

REUTERS

 

Air traveler sits outside a closed airport gate at LaGuardia Airport in New York, U.S., March 14, 2017. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton/Files

 

WASHINGTON/LONDON (Reuters) - The United States and Britain on Tuesday imposed restrictions on carry-on electronic devices on planes coming from certain airports in Muslim-majority countries in the MiddleEast and North Africa in response to unspecified security threats.

 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said passengers travellingfrom a specific list of airports could not bring into the main cabin devices larger than a mobile phone such as tablets, portable DVD players, laptops and cameras.

 

Instead, such items must be in checked baggage.

 

Although civil liberties groups raised concerns that U.S. President Donald Trump was seeking another limit on movement after a travel banfrom Muslim-majority countries was challenged in the courts, Britaintook similar steps.

 

A spokesman for British Prime Minister Theresa May said there would be curbs on electronic items in the cabin on flights from six countries in the Middle East. The foreign office said the measures would be implemented by March 25.

 

The moves were prompted by reports that militant groups want to smuggle explosive devices inside electronic gadgets.

 

The ban would continue for the "foreseeable future," a U.S. government official said on Tuesday, adding that it was possible it could be extended to other airports and other countries.

 

White House spokesman Sean Spicer declined to talk about the intelligence that prompted the new steps or explain why some countries were left off the list.

 

Senator Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat, said he "spoke to the intelligence community over the weekend, and this is a real threat."

 

U.S. officials say militant groups are known for innovative bomb designs, including embedding them inside computers. Yemen-based Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) also has boasted of one of the world's most feared bomb makers, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri.

 

French and Canadian officials said they were examining their arrangements but neither government was taking additional security measures at this stage.

 

The airports covered by the U.S. restrictions are in Cairo; Istanbul; Kuwait City; Doha, Qatar; Casablanca, Morocco; Amman, Jordan; Riyadh and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; and Dubai and Abu Dhabi in United Arab Emirates.

 

The affected airports are served by nine airlines that fly directly fromthose cities to the United States about 50 times a day, senior government officials said.

 

The carriers -- Royal Jordanian Airlines <RJAL.AM>, Egypt Air, Turkish Airlines, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Kuwait Airways, Royal Air Maroc, Qatar Airways, Emirates and Etihad Airways -- have until Friday to adopt the new policy, which took effect on Tuesday.

 

No U.S. airlines are on the list because there are no direct flights on them between the United States and the cited airports, officials said.

 

Britain said its restrictions would apply to direct flights from Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia.

 

The British regulations affect British Airways <ICAG.L>, easyJet <EZJ.L>, Jet2, Monarch, Thomas Cook <TCG.L>, Thomson <TUIT.L>, Atlas-Global, Pegasus, EgyptAir, Royal Jordanian, Middle East Airlines, Saudia, Turkish Airlines and Tunisair.

 

IAG-owned British Airways advised customers departing from affected airports to arrive in good time at check-in.

 

Shares in IAG turned lower after the UK announcement, with easyJet also ending the day in negative territory.

 

RECENT INTELLIGENCE

 

A U.S. government source said that while the restrictions arose frommultiple reports of security threats, some recent intelligence had arrived that prompted the current alert.

 

U.S. authorities believe there is a threat from plots similar to an incident last year in Somalia, where a bomb hidden in a laptop blew a hole in the side of a plane but failed to down it, another source said.

 

However, some experts questioned whether the limited ban could improve security and said it is complicated by aviation safety concerns about lithium-powered batteries used in many electronic items catching fire in the hold.

 

Some potentially affected said the ban was unfair.

 

"Security for some people, and other people none? It's not for everybody, right?" said Mohsen Ali, an Egyptian who spoke to Reuters TV at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport where he was waiting to meet a friend.

 

U.S. officials said the decision had nothing to do with Trump's efforts to impose a travel ban on citizens of six majority-Muslim nations.

 

On March 6, Trump signed a revised executive order barring citizensfrom Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from travelling to the United States for 90 days. Two federal judges have halted parts of the ban although Trump has vowed to appeal.

 

While Democrats have criticized Republican Trump's travel ban, Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, said he backed the new precautions as "both necessary and proportional to the threat."

 

However, human rights group Amnesty International said the restrictions raised "serious concerns that this could be yet more bigotry disguised as policy."

 

(Reporting by David Shepardson in Washington and Kylie MacLellan in London; Additional reporting by Yara Bayoumy, Mark Hosenball and Phil Stewart in Washington; Alexander Cornwell in Dubai, Victoria Bryan in London, Cyril Altmeyer in Paris and David Ljunggren in Ottawa; Writing by Alistair Smout; Editing by Jeremy Gaunt and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-22

[ddavidovsky]

No one is considering what is the root cause of all this insecurity. It's all to do with the thorn in the flesh that is causing Islam loss of pride. If you're not sure quite what that is, look at Bin Laden's stated motives for 9/11. Until that particular situation is resolved (the solution is clear to me) then you can expect insecurity to mount (and as we saw in that survey the other day, people equate security with happiness). This issue is spoiling the modern world. Deny the underlying sociology of this - or deny even discussion of this issue in the context of creeping world insecurity -  and you are part of the problem.

[ilostmypassword]

Actually, the order may have nothing at all to do with a security threat:

"The answer, critics suggest, is that the electronics ban is not about security.

“Three of the airlines that have been targeted for these measures — Emirates, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways — have long been accused by their U.S. competitors of receiving massive effective subsidies from their governments,” wrote political scientists Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman. “These airlines have been quietly worried for months that President Trump was going to retaliate"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_todayworld

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

You guys are missing the point. Whatever the risk is (carry on bomb, hacking pilot controls) that risk is worldwide. If the risk is truly significant, controls should have been implemented on a worldwide not piecemeal basis. 

 

By the way, putting mid-eastern airline companies at a competitive disadvantage which weakens the local economies, not to mention stigmatizing and alienating laptop-toting Muslims at airports, is going to do anything but help reduce islamic radicalism.

 

There is ZERO chance of implementing a worldwide ban, so individual countries will protect themselves as much as possible.

I'd rather alienate a lap top toting Muslim than read about a plane falling out of the sky.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 3/21/2017 at 2:25 PM, AhFarangJa said:

I can just imagine the chaos flying out from Saudi Arabia. It is bad enough now when the locals demand that the 25 kg. suitcase the size of a small dressing table is perfectly ok as hand luggage.........There is no way they are going to part with their beloved laptop !!!.....

then they don't fly. Sounds OK to me.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 3/21/2017 at 2:49 PM, darksidedog said:

Those long haul flights are when I used to catch up on lots of work. No laptop is going to make for a very long and boring flight.

 

Not been flying long then? I remember when laptops didn't exist and the biggest passenger aircraft had only 6 seats abreast. At least we get movie choices now, unlike when it was on a big screen at the front of the cabin with somebody's head in the way.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

terrorist 5 - global citizens 0

 

This is a ridiculous step. Will the ban include all the iPads that the crew use now to store maps and flight publication data, SOP's etc? Before you pounce all over that one, flight crews in the UK are subject to the same limitations as passengers on liquids etc, so  a pilot can't carry onboard a mayonnaise based salad, drink and yoghurt for his own meal, (just incase he wants to carry out some nefarious act that is dangerous - rather than just turn the engines off and point the aircraft at the ground!).

 

Somebody is making money out of this somewhere, and it is going to cause a LOT of issues with business class passengers in particular. It seems like a dead certain way to hurt the Middle Eastern Airlines. To put a ban on Dubai, Qatar and the UAE that have amongst the most modern airports and security the world is madness.

 

What is the reason for the ban and just where did the instruction for it come from?

What is the reason for the ban and just where did the instruction for it come from?

When it comes from intelligence sources, they don't have to explain anything. To do so would put sources at risk.

It's no problem to me, but I don't have a machine grafted onto my hand and I can do without one for 12 hours or so ( actually I can go days without being compelled to use one or suffer withdrawal symptoms  ).

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

When it comes from intelligence sources, they don't have to explain anything.

But you demand  they do have to explain it if they say  the Russians influenced the election or Trumps team colluded with the Russians? We get it !

 

The ban does nothing to enhance security. If they are worried about explosives in laptops then the same explosives will explode inside the hold and be a fire risk. The lithium batteries are a fire risk. This is 5 steps backwards. The show bomber and underpant bomber were nut jobs and it was never going to work. The limitation on liquids was so ridiculous it is untrue. This is all meant to keep the population in a state of fear, at which the US is number 1 followed closely by the UK.

 

Do what Israel does - profile people and have body language experts watch them at the gate. If you are going to take a journey to heaven, your body will exude signs that you will find almost impossible to suppress. Bombings are not done by 85 yr old grandmothers and 4 year old kids they are not done by Mothers with their children on board, they have all been done by Muslim men aged  21-40 traveling alone and even if they do believe they are going to get 72 virgins they will still be crapping themselves, and those signs can easily be read.

 

Another distraction to suck the media away from the main story, Trump and Russia that needs investigating to its conclusion.

[Silurian]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not been flying long then? I remember when laptops didn't exist and the biggest passenger aircraft had only 6 seats abreast. At least we get movie choices now, unlike when it was on a big screen at the front of the cabin with somebody's head in the way.

 

But now some airlines are planning to remove those in-seat TV screens as 90 percent of travelers now bring on their own screens. Those 12 hour flights across the ocean are going to be really boring without any entertainment except for a tiny cell phone. I wonder at what size does a phone becomes a tablet?

 

American Airlines ditching in-seat video screens in new 737 aircraft

http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/26/14399394/american-airlines-onboard-video-screens-removed-no-streaming

 

I guess it is back to paperbacks and newspapers. The print industry is going to love this!

 

[Mickmouse1]

As an American political commentator pointed out " Trump's meeting with US airlines CEO'S over a week ago to introduce measures to curb the gulf airlines US expansion which they accused of being subsidised by their Governments" this curb has absolutely nothing to do with security but to turn the tide and supports US Airlines v All the Gulf states airlines. 

Britain did not apply the same to Dubai,Abu Dubai or Doha,why if the claim of security threat is credible? 

This reminds me of Satan's phony WOMD. PROTECTIONISM ?

[Mickmouse1]

As Quest said last night " if you want activate a device in luggage that can be done using your mobile phone bluetooth" ???

I wonder if the ban applies to all US carriers departing from those targeted airports?

[jesimps]

Any action which reassures me of my safety while flying is ok by me, especially against airlines from countries that produce religious nutters.

As for people complaining about having nothing to do for several hours, have you ever tried reading a book?