lmonmm

No electronics on certain flights

215 posts in this topic

Oh here we go again...The biggest terrorist govt that ever existed....creating more chaos and scare mongering, around the world, and now the UK and next Australia...what a world we live in..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

  • I can understand if business travel will avoid these destination , which in the case of Australia means going to Europe via Asia or Sth Africa

business in the Middle East may be done by telecofrencing

the contents of computers could be downloaded to USB stick for a backup if the computer goes missing or gets damaged,but that is going to take a lot of time

a report on the DAILY NATION mentions that France is considering having restrictions

Kenya already has heavy security with 2 xray screenings then a full body scanner at each gate

Edited by COSMIC RHINO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh here we go again...The biggest terrorist govt that ever existed....creating more chaos and scare mongering, around the world, and now the UK and next Australia...what a world we live in..

 

Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Insurance does not apply to laptops etc in checked baggage.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/laptop-ban-electronic-devices-not-insured-flights/

 

Possible solution for the affected carriers is discussed in the Kenya Air non stop to the US thread

Edited by AKR1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This is a huge problem for our upcoming trip to Rwanda. We are booked on Qatar Airways, Dallas-Doha-Kigali, roundtrip. There's no way I'm checking our lenses. Not sure what our workaround will be at this point.

Edited by Alexander33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, it is easier to buy any kind of body then to buy a decent lens. And we all know that the lens is who makes the difference.

 

Not if your body is something like a Canon 1DX !

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever own a 1DX must be a pro, and every pro insure its property. But I stand by my words about lenses; fantastic photos have been done and published with first and second generation of DSLR! NAtGeo is my witness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But does insurance cover checked bags?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember one trip where our travel insurance had a sticker to place on my camera. So, it was covered. We will all need to see what is actually covered or not covered on our trip insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We recently lost a hold case (well, BA lost it for us!) Whilst there were no expensive electric devices (incl cameras) in the case, I was faced with 3 sources of redress - BA (whose liability, in common with other airlines is limited to £1000), our travel insurance, which carried a significant excess, and out home contents insurance. It was the all-risks complement of our contents insurance which came closest to covering our loss. I'm reasonably sure this would also cover cameras and lenses (which are itemised on the policy). However, cover is only a part of the equation for me, I would be very uncomfortable indeed heading off on Safari knowing my camera equipment may go awol.

 

The thing that puzzles me with this latest requirement is why it is apparently considered ok for airlines to travel with potential bombs in the aircraft hold?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just realized that this is probably why the flight I was tracking from the US to Tanzania just dropped significantly.

 

This is annoying, but the savings on the flight would allow me to replace my camera if it gets stolen, at least! :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@Alexander33, please keep us updated on what happens. I'm so sorry for you. Maybe Qatar will refund under these conditions and you can go klm through Amsterdam?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I just realized that this is probably why the flight I was tracking from the US to Tanzania just dropped significantly.

 

This is annoying, but the savings on the flight would allow me to replace my camera if it gets stolen, at least! :D

For those in the US, flights to Tanzania would only be affected if connecting in one of the airports on the list including the big Middle East hubs. So if flying from JKIA on say KLM no issue but if on the big ME carriers - then yes.

Edited by AKR1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That last link is interesting because that's the first I read that cameras are ok under the UK ban, unless this is just the first time I really paid attention. No one wants to add an extra stop unnecessarily, but...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

According to what is being reported, US Navy SEALS during a recent raid on al Qaeda in Yemen (you might recall the raid from the news because one of the SEALS was killed) recovered specific intelligence suggesting that terrorists were intending to use bombs concealed inside laptops to bring down airliners. Furthermore last year an al Shabab terrorist attempted to do this on a flight out of Mogadishu he blew a hole in the side of the plane, fortunately only just after take-off, he was apparently sucked out of the hole and killed but the pilot was able to turn the plane around and land everyone else safely. The battery compartment in a laptop in which the explosives would be hidden is not that big but it would only require a small amount of explosives to blow a hole in the fuselage if it was positioned next to a window, at altitude this would cause a catastrophic loss of cabin pressure and destroy the plane. The same bomb packed in the middle of a suitcase full of clothes and surrounded by other bags in a container in the hold would not likely cause catastrophic damage there’s therefore a much better chance that the plane would survive. Of course Pan Am Flight 103 that was destroyed over Lockerbie in 1988 was apparently blown up using explosives hidden inside a radio cassette recorder placed inside a suitcase that was in the hold, but the terrorists had removed a good portion of the insides of the machine to accommodate the explosives so it was I presume a more powerful bomb than would be the case with one hidden in laptop. I would hope that the assumption might be that the screening for hold luggage would pick up a bomb of this size. Also as someone interviewed on the radio this morning said separating the bomb from the bomber is always a good idea, if the bomb goes in the hold the bomber should have no control over where it ends up even if they could still set it off remotely from within the cabin say by mobile phone which I assume might be possible. Inside the cabin the bomber can place the bomb exactly where they need it to be to cause the most damage and set it off far more easily. The real problem is that the bomb makers are getting more and more sophisticated at producing IEDS that are very difficult to detect, the fear is that they have managed to find a way to secrete a bomb inside a laptop so well that airport security would very likely not find it. In the event that that happened then an entire plane load of people could be killed. I don't have a laptop but I do travel with an iPad and I'm used to having to get it out so that it can be x-rayed so that they have a much better chance of seeing if it looks suspicious, on my most recent flight after they had already done that and just before boarding someone asked to see it and ran what I assume was an explosives detector over it just to be absolutely sure.

 

It seems to me that there may well in fact be good justification for a ban, however the way that this whole thing was announced and has been carried out is not good, furthermore I cannot understand why US carriers seem to be exempt unless this has been done for commercial advantage. I also don’t quite understand why the US and UK bans don’t apply to the exact same countries, airlines and airports, that doesn't make much sense as we are both responding to the same intelligence. Likewise if the US is banning cameras why is the UK not also doing so? I'm glad I'm not just about fly via one of these airports because I might well be somewhat confused as to exactly what is allowed and I how should carry it to ensure it arrives in one piece at the other end and doesn't get stolen. However inconvenient all of these things are you should always remember to blame the terrorists and not the security people who are just doing their jobs and thank them, even when you are annoyed and wondering why they've picked on you and why it all takes so long. Better to be inconvenienced than blown out of the sky.

 

As many people are thinking baggage handlers of the sticky fingered variety will be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of all the valuable electronics that will be in people’s hold bags now. No doubt the guys who operate the baggage wrap machines will also be rubbing their hands together. Perhaps we should all be buying shares in companies like Pelican and Pacsafe who will no doubt also be doing good business as a result of this.

 

I am afraid until someone can develop a foolproof method of detecting explosives problems like this will just go on, the awful events that have just occurred in Westminster outside our parliament in London just illustrate that we have to take the issue of terrorism very seriously, :angry: :(

Edited by inyathi
7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(facepalm) wondering how much more this could grow before my trip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think US carriers are exempt only because there are no direct flights on a US carrier from any of the countries of origin on the list (Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Jordan, etc.)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points @inyathi And the savings on flights would allow you to buy a secure case or two which cannot be broken into - although of course it could still manage to get lost. I believe that shipping your camera gear (I buy and have sold camera gear internationally so it's not as frightenig as it sounds) to your ground operator in your destination country or to be collected from the airport office of an international shipping company would be an option, although bloody inconvenient, and whether the savings would be sufficient to cover potential taxes (worst case in Thailand is 7% VAT but you could be looking at a lot more in Africa) is debatable. Who wants to be the first too!!!/

 

You need to look for silver linings (bargains on flights). Sounds like it is here to stay, or at least for a while.

 

Shares in Pelican........don't think they are available but good idea.. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think US carriers are exempt only because there are no direct flights on a US carrier from any of the countries of origin on the list (Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Jordan, etc.)

 

 

That's only because they could not compete with the ME airlines ....... Emirates for one has a huge market here in the Sub-continent and a lot of people travel to the US via Dubai for work and otherwise ........ Who wants to fly Continental or Delta???? they are awful!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

be cautious when packing if regulations suddenly change

 

  • leave room in your main checked bag for your camera in its padded camera bag
  • make sure that you have a lock, make sure it is a TSA lock if you are going through the USA
  • think bag wrapping, I asked someone in Nairobi why it is so popular, the answer was to stop someone else adding narcotics to my bag
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • think bag wrapping, I asked someone in Nairobi why it is so popular, the answer was to stop someone else adding narcotics to my bag

This is the main reason I am wrapping our checked luggage whenever travelling to any of the destinations that have very strict anti-drugs law!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@@xelas - that's a scary thought!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading about all the reasons why this ban is poorly thought out, of which there are many. This seems to be the norm these days in the US.

 

The one I thought was the best example of why this is a ridiculous ban was the example of two associates going through security at the same airport, booked on different flights, one to the US/UK and another to a non-electronic banning location. One can carry a laptop through security and hand it off to his associate that is flying straight to the US or UK once in the terminal.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are paranoid about the security protocol in many of these airports - TSA should have their own security in some of these major airports that serve several US routes on a daily basis ( Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha). I'm sure those cities will happily pay their bill!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


© 2006 - 2017 www.safaritalk.net - Talking Safaris and African Wildlife Conservation since 2006. Passionate about Africa.