UK introduces electronics restrictions on flights from six countries

alanrowell

Alan_Bowen wrote: »

Policing overseas ought to be quite easy

There's no requirement for them to obey UK rules.

The airlines aren't responsible for the security checks so the UK government can't punish them if airports do allow laptops through. And unless there are going to be checks on arrival in the UK I don't see how the UK will know if the rules are being followed

Lorian

Alan_Bowen wrote: »

Policing overseas ought to be quite easy, if you turn up at security they will remove any of the said items,

But currently overseas "security" don't look at your boarding card or passport - so how will they know you are going to the UK to treat you differently to someone catching a flight to any other county flying at a similar time?

I guess one possibility is to divert you to a special belt at the point of passport check, wouldn't that be fun.

peachyprice

I guess this could go the same way as the 'all electrical items in hand luggage must be turned on' debacle that never happened.

richardw

Additional security/ baggage inspection happens at the gate relevant to the destination at additional cost to the airline.

eDicky

Assuming that these measures arise from a lack of confidence in the security regimes at the particular airports, how are UK authorities going to rely on security personnel at those airports, even if employed by the airlines involved, to make sure that no such devices are taken on board..?

agarnett

I would say that Department of Transport have totally lost the plot. The numbers of US inbound aircraft affected by the original American ban is modest compared to the UK, purely because of the relative proximity of the problem countries on the list. It seems to me HMG are at risk of ignorantly increasing fire hazard onboard aircraft in totally unknown ways simply by encouraging unknown quantities of lithium batteries of unknown quality, which are in these now cabin-banned "devices", to be carried in part of the aircraft where it is the most problematic to detect and deal with a damaged overheating lithium battery runaway fire.

Loads of travellers use replacement lithium batteries they get from goodness knows where. Many cheap replacement batteries do not contain the necessary overheat protection circuitry.

Never mind the unknown knock on effects in security and the impossibility of any kind of consistency of compliance, how long before we suffer the first undetected-until-too-late inflight fire due to this?

peachyprice

richardw wrote: »

Additional security/ baggage inspection happens at the gate relevant to the destination at additional cost to the airline.

Fine for the UK airlines, they're likely to be more compliant. But can you really see say a Turkish airline in a Turkish airport re-scanning bags at the departure gate? They might do it for the first six months then it'll be by the by.

The US ban is not so bad for Emirates at DXB, they re-scan hand luggage at the departure gate anyway, so no skin off their nose. But not all airports have the capacity to just wheel a scanner to a departure gate.

And then, at some point, airlines are going to say they don't want all these electrical items in the hold, these items that before the ban were banned in hold luggage! And really, what's more likely, a bomber using a PED or a lithium battery catching light? Which of those has happened more frequently in the last 2 years?

richardw

peachyprice wrote: »

Fine for the UK airlines, they're likely to be more compliant. But can you really see say a Turkish airline in a Turkish airport re-scanning bags at the departure gate? They might do it for the first six months then it'll be by the by.
......
And then, at some point, airlines are going to say they don't want all these electrical items in the hold.....

I'm assuming they'll be a protocol that applies to all airlines which includes additional paperwork that has to be satisfied before any aircraft leaves a Turkish airport for the UK.

Yes, easier to say none of these items on board nor in the hold, but potential passengers won't like this.

liviboy

This is just nonsense.

If the UK and USA don't trust the passenger search systems in place in these countries then why do they think putting these "bombs" in the hold of the aircraft will be any safer?

All it would take is a little altitude-switch, an old-school timer or even just a bluetooth connection to the phone in the main cabin!

This is just an inconvenience to passengers and not anything to do with safety or security...the exact same as the 100ml liquid rule...you can still take 1l of liquids through (and I have carried 2 coke bottles through security in 5 100ml bottles each and then poured them back into the empty coke bottles once through security...so how exactly does it make us safer?)

eDicky

It's probably just some more Trumpery, an ill-conceived pretence of security measure to 'protect the Homeland', announced the day after a reported tweet in the night that then disappeared. Unfortunately the UK has jumped on board, and there are probably a lot of officials scratching their heads today over how to implement it and also a few terrorists wondering if there is really an opportunity to use this method of mischief from any other airport worldwide.