US laptops-on-planes ban may extend to flights from ALL nations United States Homeland Security Secretary Gen. John Kelly says he's considering a ban on laptops in airline cabins from flights that leave all nations, not just Europe and the Middle East as is currently the case. On Fox News Sunday Kelly chatted with host Chris Wallace and, at the 9:10 mark of the video below, was asked if he …
Like many folks the only reason i take my laptop in the cabin is security. I don't put anything electronic of value in checked luggage. I have never ever taken my laptop out during flight(also never used airline wifi). I listen to music or watch video on my phablet(384gb of storage between my 2 phablets). Or on international business with the full reclining seats usually the in flight entertainment has a bunch of stuff that i can watch.
If the airlines had a thing where you could give them the laptop and they would stow it securely say in one of those cart things on a tray (at least for business and first class that is all i fly anyway). Give me a ticket or something to retrieve the laptop at the end that would be fine for me anyway.
Short of that i suppose if i travel internationally after this ban I will have to ship my laptop fedex or something to the destination, as i do not trust the baggage handlers for that $3500 device and more so the inconvenience of having to replace it on a trip.
Taking a 3 week trip to thailand soon and probably be forced to go to amsterdam in late july for a week or so for work.
Tablets and phablets everywhere from what I've been seeing.
I hope you haven't missed the fact that all tablets, e-readers, and hand-held game consoles are also explicitly banned. The phablets may or may not be, depending on whether a particular TSA agent considers your phablet to be of a "normal" size for a phone. Under the strict interpretation of the UK version of the ban, my Moto-Z (which is a large, but not a huge phone) is banned unless I remove the battery mod and the bumper case and leave them at home. With the mod and the case, it is too long (151mm instead of the permissible 150) and too thick (15.5mm instead of the permissible 15mm). My wife's ancient Samsung T450 slider feature phone would appear to be banned from the Middle East to UK flights outright, despite being compact and having (or needing) no battery worth speaking of - it is 24mm thick, which is well above the limit.
Talk about madness.
As above; using a laptop on a plane is a good way to get the screen broken, but for sure it's not going in the hold as is.
But it seems not beyond the beyond the bounds of possibility to have some sort of locker system, perhaps mounted into a standard hold carrier; I give them the laptop, they scan it, stick it in a spare slot, and give me the key to that slot (and perhaps a voucher for a replacement laptop :)
The issue about hand luggage is annoying but obvious: if airlines want to charge for hold baggage, of *course* people will take things for free into the plane. The majority of 'hand baggage' isn't - it's there simply because it's cheaper and quicker to get out at the other end, if you don't have to wait for the carousel. Maybe there are options here to explore regarding what may be taken into the cabin.
"And cameras.
So that's tourism buggered."
Quite - I almost never travel with a laptop, but almost always with my camera, which is probably more fragile and more expensive than the average laptop or tablet. That always goes in hand-luggage - in that days when hold luggage was free, my camera was often my only hand luggage.
Maybe I should go back to a completely manual film SLR with no electronics.
"I agree. Who uses a laptop on a plane these days anyway? Too clunky. Tablets and phablets everywhere from what I've been seeing. If they would promise secure passage, I'd be fine with handing it over."
I use a laptop, and fly in economy. But then, I write large quantities of text on a daily basis, rather than watch films and read a report or two.
America seems to be really caving in to terrorists at the moment - that, or it is trying to isolate itself from the rest of the world. I'm not sure which, although given how hard the US Government seems to be trying to make cloud services a non-starter for non-Americans, I'll probably go with they are trying to isolate themselves from the rest of the world.
While I agree with what you've said, keep in mind, you fedex your laptop, you will end up without the laptop for 3+ days and it too can be stolen or damaged. (Albeit there's a lower probability.)
It will also mean an increase in sales for hard cased luggage containers. When I have to travel, my work kit weighs between 30 - 40lbs. while my roller ways 25-27lbs. Going international, I guess I could fit my ruck in the middle of the case and it should be ok.
But the one thing you're missing... your tablet or phablet... is also banned, otherwise the sale price of the 12" iPad Pro would be going thru the roof.
Hmmm, well. Either it will become:
1) A global ban everywhere, or
2) Implemented by the US alone, or
3) Quietly forgotten about and not implemented at all.
If the USA does do this on its own then it's going to make going there very unpopular with businessmen.
Also it's kinda crazy that they're not talking about banning hand luggage laptops on domestic flights. What protections do those enjoy that international departures don't? Some kind of magical amulet? Either there is a threat, or there isn't. If there is a threat worthy of taking action, a patchily or partially applied ban simply means that the ban is totally ineffective. Is the suggestion of not banning hand luggage laptops on domestic flights bending to the weight of public opinion? And if so, since when did politics overrule security measures? Ah yes, since sometime back in January I suspect.
As it happens, we know that there has been a partially successful attack in Africa whereby a doctored laptop exploded, killing no-one but the attacker. Whether or not this translates into a threat that we must all pay heed to is another matter. Clearly the USA thinks it does, and evidently to some extent so does the UK. But it sounds like there's some difficulty persuading the rest of the world that there is a problem. That could be a bad thing...
The whole laptops in hand-luggage vs hold luggage thing may have several origins. There's more opportunities to use more aggressive scanning techniques on hold luggage (stronger X-ray machines, etc), well away from actual people. So perhaps the reliability of detecting explosives there is higher. If it's simply a perception that a laptop bomb in the hold cannot be triggered by the passenger, that would explain it too. But that sounds nuts. Timers? Like they used to use?
Also, the airlines state, that devices with Lithium batteries should never be checked and only taken as hand luggage, so if you are travelling to the US, you basically can't take anything more than a mobile phone (tablets are also currently covered in the ban from the arabic nations).
I guess the (relatively) limited storage on a mobile phone is quicker and easier to go through / copy, compared to a hard drive... Once the laptop is checked in, they have more time to casually clone the drive, while it is out of your sight.
I guess the (relatively) limited storage on a mobile phone is quicker and easier to go through / copy, compared to a hard drive...
I won't be too sure about that. My personal phone has about the same amount of storage as my work-issued laptop, and certainly more storage used by data (A fraction of my music collection, if you care. Unfortunately, there are no reasonably-priced micro-SD cards in the 512GB range, so I still can't carry the full thing). To compound things, I can clone my laptop's SSD through USB3 in under 15 minutes; however copying the same amount of files from my phone over that pretence at a usable data-transfer protocol called MTP would take at least 24 hours - despite the SD card being able to sustain 100+ MB/second for reads, and the transfer going over the nominally faster USB3.1.
Modern mid-range phones have an amazing amount of storage and processing capacity - quite comparable to low- and mid-range laptops.
OK, I was exaggerating just a tiny bit about 100MB/sec :)
My particular card is Sandisk SDSDQUAN-200G-G4A, which used to be expensive, but appears to be on the stock-clearance sale at the moment. It is not a fastest card around for sure - but according to http://uk.pcmag.com/sandisk-ultra-microsdxc-uhs-i-200gb-card/71266/review/sandisk-ultra-microsdxc-uhs-i-200gb-card it does sustain 86 MB/sec on sequential reads in CrystalDiskMark in a PC. According to the same article, at least in some phones its performance is limited by the phone, not by the card. In my Moto Z Play, it manages 63MB/sec for sequential reads ["Disk Speed / Performance Test" by Hipxel].
"...however copying the same amount of files from my phone over that pretence at a usable data-transfer protocol called MTP would take at least 24 hours - despite the SD card being able to sustain 100+ MB/second for reads..."
If your data is on an SD card why would they try to get the data off over MTP?
If your data is on an SD card why would they try to get the data off over MTP?
With Android 6 and later, unless you need to swap your SD cards around, it is much more convenient to format the card as an internal storage. If your phone is encrypted (which is the default starting with 7, if I recall right), then so is the SD card formatted as internal. Removing the card and sticking it into an SD reader will not let you access the data - the keys remain within the TPE/SE if your phone supports it.
"Also, the airlines state, that devices with Lithium batteries should never be checked and only taken as hand luggage"
The first rule of panics is that the latest panic supersedes all previous panics.
The second rule of panics is that the countermeasures of the latest panic override those of all previous panics.
The consequence is headless chick syndrome.
So, what do you do when you end up with two conflicting but simultaneous panics. Neither can supersede the other since they both come at once, and since they conflict, you can't observe or counter both of them at once since they directly conflict with each other: countering one feeds to the other and vice versa.
"So, what do you do when you end up with two conflicting but simultaneous panics."
What do you mean? That's the only kind of panic worth bothering with! Now you can pick and choose which contradicting measure you want to apply at your whim, insisting it's the more important one. It's the Swedish buffet of bureaucracy, there's a rule just waiting to be enforced for your every need!
"Also, the airlines state, that devices with Lithium batteries should never be checked and only taken as hand luggage"
I thought that depended on whether it's installed in equipment or not. From:
Q2. What kinds of batteries does the FAA allow in checked baggage (including gate-checked bags)?
A2. Except for spare (uninstalled) lithium metal and lithium-ion batteries, all the batteries allowed in carry-on baggage are also
allowed in checked baggage. The batteries must be protected from damage and short circuit or installed in a device. Battery-powered
devices—particularly those with moving parts or those that could heat up—must be protected from accidental activation. Spare
lithium metal and lithium ion/polymer batteries are prohibited in checked baggage—this includes external battery packs. Electronic
cigarettes and vaporizers are also prohibited in checked baggage. “Checked baggage” includes bags checked at the gate or planeside.
"the airlines state, that devices with Lithium batteries should never be checked"
I know I don't want to be on an aircraft full of lithium batteires in the hold...
The average case would probably have a laptop, a camera, some alcohol (who doesn't buy spirits abroard?)
All you need is a short, you get a small fire, the alcohol is the perfect accelerant, causing a bigger fire, spreads to the other cases, causing a bigger fire....
yep...
Also it's kinda crazy that they're not talking about banning hand luggage laptops on domestic flights.
Especially since those tend to carry a greater proportion of domestic[0] passengers, which is what the terrrists are said to be aiming for.
[0] though not necessarily domesticated.
Because of course the TSA is that extremely competent law enforcement force that no terrorist will ever try to challenge them <G>.
Also, if you want to down a plane full of US people, the best way is to down a domestic flight - and if the technology to bypass checks exists, it can be obviously used for any flight, from any airport - if they are smaller, less equipped airports - the better.
Anyway the reason people pack everything they can in their cabin luggage is that they not trust luggage handler at all - besides those who can't wait to get back their luggage, some airports are really slow.
Yet. putting electronics in the hold they will go inside densely packed bags as well. If they're going to open each and every bag and inspect them (and I really would like to avoid a fat-fingered TSA employee mess with my photo gear...), they can do the same for cabin luggage - at least I can ensure everything is properly re-packed for the travel. I wouldn't like a case with several thousands of photo equipment opens while handled because it wasn't properly closed.
You beat me to the point. Further, US security theatre tends to be just that - a theatre. On at least three occasions my wife has told me to stop nagging, sailed through US 'security' and had penknives, liquids, etc picked up at the European connecting airport (LHR, AMS, VIE-means nothing to me).
Perhaps the current USA forgets that the original motivation for this charade was Sept 11, 2001 - when all the hijacked planes were US flagged carriers flying domestic routes.
Oh and if you want to avoid half the screening, just buy a business class ticket. I doubt if the extra cost is going to deter a person with nasty intentions.
And yes, on occasions when an upgrade has been available on the cheap ($100-$150), I've travelled business class and used the laptop for coding, report writing, and similar work. If travelling on my dime, it's saves having to take time off (vacation / holiday) and has been worth the money.
And if you start banning laptops, where do you draw the line? A big tablet (e.g. iPad "pro" is of comparable size to a small laptop and could pack a fair punch if the battery was replaced with an explosive.
I'll stop before I get tagged for 'questioning'.
@ivorb
But to be fair, the 9/11 attacks involved box cutters, not bombs. Nobody is going to smuggle a threatening blade inside an electronic device, but they might be able to get a hidden bomb in one.
And as for not applying this ban to domestic flights A) your suicidal terrorist would have to get into the U.S. first, possibly with their bomb materials (though you can be a lone wolf domestic jihadi) and B) a large number of people on flights coming in from overseas are foreign, and they don't vote or call their Congressman.
Because there's a lack of chemicals and explosives in the US? And it is also impossible to obtain them from criminals?
Also, governments are obsessed with air travels - but any country which has sea ports offers great entry points to anybody who don't really need to travel fast, and smuggle illegal goods...
Anyway till now many terrorist attacks were made by people born locally - and US too doesn't lack them.
the problem is, NEVER.
Once a gummint program gains a foothold, it will be justified into self-justification, then grow into a hideous eldritch abomination of a monster, then become a "legacy program", until people just accept it a "normal".
If they REALLY wanted tp protect against terrorists, they'd PROFILE more, and inconvenience the REST of us a HELL of a lot less. But that's not "politically correct", now, is it?
"The four 9/11 flights were all domestic flights. Make of that what you will."
But has there been a successful terrorist attack on a US domestic flight since then? I can't recall any (and searching for that involves terms I don't want to be associated to...). The debate is over causality - are the security procedures in place working, or is there another reason for the lack of incidents?
Actually not surprising at all.
They only want to inconvenience "them Forinars". We cannot be inconveniencing the locals, you know the folks that pray at the alter of the Great Orange One. Of course because it kills the tourist trade, they also do not care since it will keep them "Forinars" out of "our" country. Yep Making Amerika Great Agin....
But you also miss the real reason: It becomes a money making scheme for the airlines. T
Use this as a way to rent device to the parents of fidgety kids o long and short haul flights. Those who really need to have something can rent the "approved" tablets to watch the airlines entertainment offerings. Win Win for the airlines.
So the evil overlords get something out of it, and they do not care since they fly private anyways.
@Ole Juul
"Not being able to do that will add an hour or two to the time spend working, either before or after the flight."
And, as you have to send your laptop off with your checked baggage before you got through security screening, you won't be able to get that work done while waiting for your plane either!
If you are very lucky, your laptop might still be in your luggage at your destination, so you can do the work when you land...
Better to not take a laptop at all and buy a disposable device at the other end. Maybe they are working with Google and Microsoft to get people to buy Chromebooks / Windows 10 S devices, once they land.
"Better to not take a laptop at all and buy a disposable device at the other end. Maybe they are working with Google and Microsoft to get people to buy Chromebooks / Windows 10 S devices, once they land."
And if you're landing going to a not-zone, meaning you MUST have a local copy?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
