Flights with no e-readers?!

[SensualPoet]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

ok...apparetnly you don't get the joke so, never mind...

Nope. Apparently not. What I can report is avoiding the US entirely avoids all the security problems in this thread. Our very recent holiday experience was proof.

[brecklundin]

keep up the great work...avoid the US please...

[NeilHawkes]

Originally Posted by nick101

Might as well give yourself up now mate ... if you come quietly, we'll make it easy on you

'Lowers head and puts arms straight out in front'

It doesn't help that I speak with a Belfast accent, (Northern Ireland born), I'm surprised I'm allowed to travel at all!

All the best,
Neil.

[nick101]

Originally Posted by NeilHawkes

'Lowers head and puts arms straight out in front'

It doesn't help that I speak with a Belfast accent, (Northern Ireland born), I'm surprised I'm allowed to travel at all!

All the best,
Neil.

Just give us your address and we'll pop round now and collect you. Or call our call centre to book a time slot to suit you to be arrested

[drofgnal]

I read through this thread and I think there are a few misconceptions:

Airport security is not about catching someone trying to do it, it is more about preventing someone from even trying. In that regard I wish security would be a little less reactionary and more out in front of the potential problem. But they are trying and I for one am thankful for it.

Electronic devices (particularly wireless) can interfere. I'm an aerospace engineer and manufacturers go to great lengths to test the aircraft for EEE (electronic environmental effects), on of those is radiated susceptibility. Not every device in the world can be tested and certified, hence the ban on wireless type devices in flight. Shielding all the harnesses and electronics on board is cost and weight prohibitive. With modern planes going to fly by wire electronics the potential for problem is even greater. Put a wireless device near a speaker phone and listen to the interference. In teleconferences all the time we have to make announcements to turn off or stow your blackberries as they create so much static on the line from their radiated emissions.

It doesn't take a lot of damage from a small explosive to bring down a plane. Structural margins are such that all pieces are required in order to keep the plane together, particularly if the damage is in certain areas. The plane that had part of the top ripped off in Hawaii was a gross exception, not the rule. In that regard I do find devices with batteries somewhat troubling, particularly if they can discharge a lot of energy in a short time, like a camera flash. They can then become the perfect detonator. If I had the power to prohibit one electronic device from cabins it would be cameras with flashes, but any device with a high energy density lithium battery is circumspect. (The device that brought down the lockerbie plane was a radio in checked baggage I believe).

I don't as much anymore, but I used to fly all the time, both pre and post 9/11. Did I like the new security measures or think they all made sense? No they didn't. I've seen grandma have her mail clippers taken, kind of dumb as now we know that whatever happens in the cabin, the pilot does not open the door to the cockpit!!! Do what you want with them the pilot will not open the door. So the 9/11 scenario is averted simply by securing the cockpit door. Post 9/11 terrorists are focusing on blowing the plane up in flight. The London arrests and plot to blow up 10 airliners bound for the US, Reid the shoe bomber (I frankly have no problem removing my shoes you can store enough C4 in a couple of shoes to bring down a jet if detonated at the right place), and now this guy travelling from Nigeria.

In today's world people are going to make threat assessments and plan accordingly and put into place measures to prevent such incidents. (Ask anyone who has ever flow El-Al airline!) Are they all going to make sense to the paying public, no, but I'm thankful someone is considering it.

Lastly, and not a safety issue, I'd like to see us return to the era of passengers having one small bag on board. Frankly I get tired of people packing for a two week trip with carry on luggage!!

Oh and one more I forgot, hard drives are very sturdy when off, I can attest to that as I ran over my laptop with the rental car one time. (Apple!) The LCD screen was trashed, but the laptop booted up and ran fine with an external monitor!!

[NeilHawkes]

Originally Posted by nick101

Just give us your address and we'll pop round now and collect you. Or call our call centre to book a time slot to suit you to be arrested

Dear Sir,

I'll be waiting at Lagos International Airport on 1st January, 2013, from 10:45am to 12:30pm.

Unfortunately the World will have ended by then, so na, na, nana, na

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by drofgnal

(The device that brought down the lockerbie plane was a radio in checked baggage I believe).

It was a Toshiba radio cassette recorder, but the actual bomb itself was Semtex explosive with an electronic timer. The "radio" had nothing to do with the bomb, other than provide something to put it inside.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by SensualPoet

Nope. Apparently not. What I can report is avoiding the US entirely avoids all the security problems in this thread. Our very recent holiday experience was proof.

We may be a bit reactionary here in the US but I believe our feelings are fairly justified. Watching thousands of innocent people die from a terrorist attack involving our own aircraft has left us extremely cautious. The fact that the terrorist organizations have not given up and gone away and are, in fact, still intent on causing further death and destruction seems to me to be a good enough reason for additional security measures. (Although I still think the whole "shoe" thing is over the top, I bow to drofgnal's point about storing explosives in them ~ of course, I don't think they'd get very much C4 in a Jimmy Choo shoe. )

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kazbates

I bow to drofgnal's point about storing explosives in them ~ of course, I don't think they'd get very much C4 in a Jimmy Choo shoe. )

You don't need much; the Lockerbie aircraft was destroyed by about 100g (4oz) of explosives.

[nick101]

Originally Posted by NeilHawkes

Dear Sir,

I'll be waiting at Lagos International Airport on 1st January, 2013, from 10:45am to 12:30pm.

Unfortunately the World will have ended by then, so na, na, nana, na

Ha! We planted that story just to smoke you out, and it worked! Come 1/1/13, you're busted matey!

[Latinandgreek]

I don't mind taking off my shoes, actually. It's actually not the inconvenience of airport security measures that get to me, it's the fact that my privacy is being invaded when I have people going through my bags etc., and the dirty feeling I get when I'm asked personal questions by airport personnel, like someone put me under a microscope.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I don't mind taking off my shoes, actually. It's actually not the inconvenience of airport security measures that get to me, it's the fact that my privacy is being invaded when I have people going through my bags etc., and the dirty feeling I get when I'm asked personal questions by airport personnel, like someone put me under a microscope.

You'll go through customs checks of your luggage no matter HOW you choose to travel; it's not unique to flying. Travel on the Eurostar train and it's just the same.

[aceflor]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I don't mind taking off my shoes, actually. It's actually not the inconvenience of airport security measures that get to me, it's the fact that my privacy is being invaded when I have people going through my bags etc., and the dirty feeling I get when I'm asked personal questions by airport personnel, like someone put me under a microscope.

Me, I just plain hate the way the airport security people are talking to passengers and can be as rude as they want without any sort of consequences. Plus most of them are illiterate, and incapable of making the difference between a phone, a netbook and an e-reader. At least that is the kind of personnel used for security in European airports as Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Düsseldorf or Cologne.

I don't mind taking off my shoes, but I want to hear the "please" and "thank you" that should come with the order. I am not surprised they let someone with explosives through at Amsterdam, where they yell orders but never look at you and keep chatting all the while with their colleagues about their last night adventures.

Ups, I should say Malaga Airport Security is both professional and nice, although the passengers there are multinationals who for most of them do not speak spanish and can themselves be quite rude. So not all airports in Europe....

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You'll go through customs checks of your luggage no matter HOW you choose to travel; it's not unique to flying. Travel on the Eurostar train and it's just the same.

It is very rarely you get stopped in custom checks and traveling inside EU it never seems to happen.

The only time it has happened that somebody have looked inside my bags have been for security checks.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You'll go through customs checks of your luggage no matter HOW you choose to travel; it's not unique to flying. Travel on the Eurostar train and it's just the same.

Of course, but I have been hassled more in recent years, and not just by the customs personnel at airports, which I've found odd and disturbing. I've actually had the security check people grill me about my flight destination, where I was flying from, the purpose of my trip, where I will be staying (I was flying home, to Canada with my Canadian passport, and they actually questioned me about why I was going to Canada, where I lived, etc.), and they actually went so far as to grill me about my phd research and my reason for choosing my thesis topic... and this was at the security check, not customs.