USA and UK bans electronic devices on some Middle Eastern airline flights

smurfjed · 21-03-2017 11:25AM #1

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39333424
Strangely enough this security ban doesn't apply to US carriers operating from these airports.
Will be interesting to see if it gets extended to some of the airlines that stopover in Ireland.

Subcomandante Marcos · 21-03-2017 11:29AM

So all flights from specific airports, accept US carriers from those airports, will have a ban on any electronic device bigger than a mobile phone?

Will this include things like noise cancelling headphones?

Noxegon · 21-03-2017 12:29PM

Subcomandante Marcos wrote: »

Will this include things like noise cancelling headphones?

Noise cancelling headphones are larger than cellphones, so probably.

IMHO this is about the fact that US carriers can't compete with the ME3. Banning laptops will disproportionately affect high value business passengers who may well choose other carrier as a consequence.

Buffman · 21-03-2017 12:47PM

Sounds like another pointless ban for PR and business purposes. I'm surprised it wasn't announced in a 'tweet'.

The fact that they're just banning them from the carry on/cabin makes it completely pointless. How do they think the checked baggage travels? (Unfortunately with the current administration that's a serious question!)

Assuming that the US airlines passengers go through the same security procedures are the other airlines at those airports, the targeting of only non-US airlines makes it pure protectionism.

If there is differences in airport security for US airlines at those airports, would it not be easier to get the non-US airlines to the same security level as the US ones at those airports?

Lithium batteries are already banned as cargo shipments on passenger flights by the ICAO, which may lead to the situation of passengers having to remove batteries (not possible on some devices) and put them in carry on, while checking the device.

The AVH has a good article which points out the increased risks to safety of putting lithium batteries in the hold.

US Administration directly endangers safety of flights for terrorism prevention:

plodder · 21-03-2017 12:56PM

Buffman wrote: »

Sounds like another pointless ban for PR and business purposes. I'm surprised it wasn't announced in a 'tweet'.

The fact that they're just banning them from the carry on/cabin makes it completely pointless. How do they think the checked baggage travels? (Unfortunately with the current administration that's a serious question!)

I was wondering that too. The stated reason could be that checked baggage is subject to more rigorous CT scans at US airports, whereas hand baggage is only X-rayed. But, then what about incoming flights? How can you guarantee this would be the same at foreign airports?

Assuming that the US airlines passengers go through the same security procedures are the other airlines at those airports, the targeting of only non-US airlines makes it pure protectionism.

If there is differences in airport security for US airlines at those airports, would it not be easier to get the non-US airlines to the same security level as the US ones at those airports?

Agreed. It does seem like tokenism designed to favour US airlines.

ahbell · 21-03-2017 02:49PM

UK now following suit

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39343971

Richard Hillman · 21-03-2017 04:34PM

I don't understand this at all.

Just say you are flying from Istanbul to Ethiopia, that's ok but if you are flying from Istanbul to the U.S, it's not ok?

If it is that, then what is there to stop Terrorist 1 getting through security for his flight to Ethiopia and handing his device to Terrorist 2 going to U.S after security?

Are the security supposed to stop everybody with a large device now? Does this ban stand up for people using the designated airport as a stopover from a non-designated airport?

It makes not sense. It's unworkable. If you want to bring down a plane using your laptop contraption, all you have to do is buy an extra ticket. I doubt ISIS are so money strapped that they will pay for a flight to the US can't afford a ticket from Istanbul to Athens on another airliner as a decoy.

john boye · 21-03-2017 05:35PM

smurfjed wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39333424
Strangely enough this security ban doesn't apply to US carriers operating from these airports.
Will be interesting to see if it gets extended to some of the airlines that stopover in Ireland.

What US carriers actually fly to any of those airports? I know I'm probably wrong but I can't think of any off the top of my head. I know AC fly to Istanbul but they're not American obviously.

J.pilkington · 21-03-2017 05:49PM

Uk have followed suit, linked article in OP has been updated.

kc56 · 21-03-2017 06:54PM

john boye wrote: »

What US carriers actually fly to any of those airports? I know I'm probably wrong but I can't think of any off the top of my head. I know AC fly to Istanbul but they're not American obviously.

None. No direct flights by US carriers from these airports.
The UK ban on the other hand affects several UK carriers including BA.

Can't understand why the major ME airports are included. Is their security inadequate?

Buffman · 21-03-2017 06:56PM

Buffman wrote: »

The AVH has a good article which points out the increased risks to safety of putting lithium batteries in the hold.

US Administration directly endangers safety of flights for terrorism prevention:

AVH has also updated it's headline and report.

USA und UK require electronic devices larger than smartphones to be checked in from certain countries/airports

john boye wrote: »

What US carriers actually fly to any of those airports? I know I'm probably wrong but I can't think of any off the top of my head. I know AC fly to Istanbul but they're not American obviously.

Good question, I'd assumed a lot do, but it appears that none do and all routes have been dropped in the last few years. Last one I can see is United to Dubai last year and they didn't pull any punches in their statement about why it went.

Due to Gulf carriers' expansion and a recent U.S. government decision, we are discontinuing our Washington Dulles-Dubai service. Our last departure from Washington, D.C. to Dubai will be on Jan. 23, 2016, and the last departure from Dubai will be on Jan. 25, 2016. Our joint venture partners Lufthansa Group and Air Canada will continue to serve Dubai.
Even though we successfully operated the Washington-Dubai route for the past seven years, the entry of subsidized carriers such as Emirates Airline and Etihad Airways into the Washington, D.C. market has created an imbalance between supply and demand to the United Arab Emirates. As they've added subsidized capacity, our Washington-Dubai route has become less profitable.
In August, the General Services Administration (GSA) announced that it awarded the U.S. government contract for 2016 on the Washington-Dubai route to JetBlue, a codeshare partner of Emirates. We formally protested this decision but were ultimately unsuccessful.
JetBlue has no service to the Middle East and no presence in the region. Its codeshare partner, Emirates, will be solely operating this route and will be carrying an estimated 15,000 U.S. government employees, including active duty military personnel, whose official travel is funded by U.S. taxpayers.

“It is unfortunate that the GSA awarded this route to an airline that has no service to the Middle East and will rely entirely on a subsidized foreign carrier to transport U.S. government employees, military personnel and contractors," said Regulatory and Policy VP Steve Morrissey. “We believe this decision violates the intent of the Fly America Act, which expressly limits the U.S. government from procuring commercial airline services directly from a non-U.S. carrier. For the Washington to Dubai route, JetBlue merely serves as a booking agent for Emirates."

For months, we've been speaking out about the ways unprecedented government subsidies to Etihad, Emirates and Qatar Airways distort competition and threaten U.S. airline jobs. We continue to call on the Obama administration to request consultations with the United Arab Emirates and Qatar to ensure Open Skies agreements are being enforced.

Atlantic Dawn · 21-03-2017 07:19PM

How can the UK act alone in bringing in these restrictions, surely it should be EU wide once they are still in the EU?

john boye · 21-03-2017 07:48PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

How can the UK act alone in bringing in these restrictions, surely it should be EU wide once they are still in the EU?

That's a good question too, this just seems increasingly political the more you think of it. If they suddenly bring in security sanctions against Norwegian carriers then we'll know something's up!

Buffman · 21-03-2017 09:32PM

The list of airlines affected by this is getting quite large.

UK ban:

Six UK carriers:
British Airways

EasyJet

Jet2.com

Monarch

Thomas Cook

Thomson

Eight overseas carriers:
Turkish Airlines

Pegasus Airways

Atlas-Global Airlines

Middle East Airlines

Egyptair

Royal Jordanian

Tunis Air

Saudia

US ban:

The nine airlines affected by the US ban are Royal Jordanian, EgyptAir, Turkish Airlines, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Kuwait Airways, Royal Air Maroc, Qatar Airways, Emirates and Etihad Airways.

This illustration from the BBC article shows how farcical this ban is. By setting device size limits, they're giving target design specifications to anyone who might be interested in such things.

john boye · 21-03-2017 10:10PM

Odd how the UK changes don't effect some of the airlines that the US have impacted like the ME3 and RAM. You'd assume they'd have the same Intel if that's what it's based on.

Gringo180 · 21-03-2017 11:21PM

Buffman wrote: »

Good question, I'd assumed a lot do, but it appears that none do and all routes have been dropped in the last few years. Last one I can see is United to Dubai last year and they didn't pull any punches in their statement about why it went.

Sounds like somebody got a nice fat brown envelope to award that route to Emirates Airlines.

Richard Hillman · 22-03-2017 12:11AM

Looks like Canada are getting in on it too.

http://jrnl.ie/3298325

This is really, really bad for business flyers. The only way this could possibly work properly is if there is an all out ban for all airliners. The likes of Ryanair and CityJet will be jizzing themselves, now that their business flyers will have to avail of the extra luggage option.

Locker10a · 22-03-2017 12:17AM

This is very odd indeed, at my company they have a big thing about electronic devices going in the hold, its the one area crew can't access should a lithium ion battery fire start. And thus they don't really like having these items in the hold etc.

ED E · 22-03-2017 12:24AM

Buffman wrote: »

That actually bans some phones. Mine is 155mm and is on the normal side of phablet.

Irish Steve · 22-03-2017 12:33AM

There's going to be a lot of people who are very unhappy with this in respect of being separated from their laptops, in that it's not just the laptop that's important, it's also the data it contains, the potential problems that will be caused by the loss of a laptop in hold luggage doesn't even bear thinking about, and the other issue will be the one of potential damage, given the way that most airport handling systems drop bags into the chutes for the flights, I wouldn't be happy to see my laptop being bounced around some of those systems.

If I have to put my laptop in the hold to take a local flight, I am going to have to look closely at finding a way to removed the hard drive from it before it goes in the hold, so that if (or more likely when) it gets damaged (or lost) I will at least still have the critical data that I depend on, and the reason I take the computer in the first place.

From the little that's been said on the media tonight, this is a badly thought out scheme that is unlikely to achieve the result that the planners expect, and it will cause a lot of problems for a wide range of travellers.

Buffman · 22-03-2017 01:22AM

The logistics of implementing this will be headwrecking too.

If it's done at security screening they'll have to segregate banned and not banned destinations, if it's at the gate they'll have to set up some sort of secondary screening. And taking a few 100 items off passengers boarding the likes of an A380 and putting them in the hold could take hours.

And with the likes of Easyjet they'll be asking you for £45 a go to check a bag at the gate.

Atlantic Dawn · 22-03-2017 01:25AM

I can see laptop rental desks opening up in destination airports in the same way people currently rent golf clubs on arrival.

robyntmorton · 22-03-2017 08:59AM

Coming soon:

All electronics will be required to be placed in luggage.

No luggage will be permitted onboard (checked or carry on) This will be flown along behind in a cargo aircraft.

All cargo flights will be subject to enhanced screening. This will delay luggage 2-3 days.

All passengers will be sedated prior to departure.

Meal service will not be served.

Remember, this is for your protection.

</Orwell>

All joking aside, I can't see how they are ever going to make this work, especially where the profitable business customers are concerned.

positron · 22-03-2017 09:18AM

Buffman wrote:

This illustration from the BBC article shows how farcical this ban is. By setting device size limits, they're giving target design specifications to anyone who might be interested in such things.

And looks like my Huawei P8 Max is too big (18 cm tall, not bad for a 7" screen phone). Darn stupid American administration and the UK copycats.

Without tablets allowed onboard, I would imagine even more would switch to flying Emirates/Etihad for their 10" ICE systems in economy class. How else are we supposed to keep kids occupied during 7+ hour flights?

JCX BXC · 22-03-2017 09:57AM

I'd imagine we'll now see increased demand for indirect flights, through say DXB/AUH/LHR/CDG etc.

J.pilkington · 22-03-2017 11:00AM

Emirates recently hit a real flat growth spot (ceiling?) and eithad seem to be reviewing their model with large continued losses from their European acquisition companies and recently changed boss(got rid of an Irishman) this won't help them at all. They need their a380s and 777s to have a high passenger yield for their hub model to survive.

They have already started cutting routes such as to s.America something never seen before so maybe their blank cheque days are coming to an end and the shieks are demanding some return on investment

plodder · 22-03-2017 11:16AM

Years ago I remember laptop screening at some airports was a bit more sophisticated (at some locations) than it is now. IIRC it was Zurich where they did a swab test, made me power it on and show it working. They also weighed it, and checked against a manufacturers chart that it was the right weight. Time consuming obviously, and that was maybe 20 years ago, when few people traveled with them. But, I can see them eventually doing something similar, for some passengers at least.

Atlantic Dawn · 22-03-2017 11:42AM

I can't really see how it is going to work, they will either have to segregate all flights at these airports going to UK/USA and remove all the banned devices at security check-in or else at the gate when people are boarding the airline will have to check/screen every piece of carry-on luggage and remove the devices to be put in the hold which will be incredibly time consuming.

Then when all this is in place a person could if they wanted simply drive to a neighbouring country to the banned countries and get a flight to the USA/UK and bring their electronic device dodgy or otherwise with them.

smurfjed · 22-03-2017 11:59AM

We were trying to convince our boss to bring our training back to the USA, but right now i don't see the point. So that's one multi million dollar contract lost to US industry. I wonder how many more companies will do the same.
Flights to the USA from most ME airports already had secondary security screening at the boarding gate so baggage was x-rayed twice. Now laptops in checked luggage won't be checked at all.
Final gripe, who is going to pay for an expensive laptop if the baggage goes missing?

stargazer 68 · 22-03-2017 12:05PM

You are lucky to get your luggage in one piece from some airlines and now you are supposed to trust them with electronics too! Aside from that we are coming into the summer season when the ME empties of expats - glad I wont be on a flight with bored kids!

J.pilkington · 22-03-2017 12:08PM

Dovies wrote: »

You are lucky to get your luggage in one piece from some airlines and now you are supposed to trust them with electronics too! Aside from that we are coming into the summer season when the ME empties of expats - glad I wont be on a flight with bored kids!

And insurance companies will generally not compensate you for damage / loss of checked luggage and even if they will they have a large excess and will make it painful and offer a pittance

Irish Steve · 22-03-2017 12:10PM

smurfjed wrote: »

We were trying to convince our boss to bring our training back to the USA, but right now i don't see the point. So that's one multi million dollar contract lost to US industry. I wonder how many more companies will do the same.
Flights to the USA from most ME airports already had secondary security screening at the boarding gate so baggage was x-rayed twice. Now laptops in checked luggage won't be checked at all.
Final gripe, who is going to pay for an expensive laptop if the baggage goes missing?

The much more likely scenario is that the expensive laptop will be damaged, and the inconvenience of that will mean that I for one will not be prepared to put a laptop through checked, both for safety and cost reasons, I know just how brutal the automated handling systems are in most modern airports, and that's before the bags get to be thrown into or out of bins or on to trollies, or baggage belts. The only way to safely ship a laptop as hold luggage will be in a foam lined aluminium case, the cost of doing that on some carriers will mean it will possibly be cheaper to buy a tablet at the other end, and carry a USB memory stick or drive with the critical data on it. Trusting "the cloud" with critical personal data just is not an option for all sorts of reasons.

robinph · 22-03-2017 12:18PM

If there is such a problem with security at those airports then just threaten to ban any incoming flights from those airports until they improve things, which will happen very, very quickly with the threat of that loss of business to the airlines and airports.

But it's impossible for the airport to be doing the screening in the way the US/ UK are asking unless they have completely separate terminal buildings for flights to just those locations. Banning laptops on flights from one location is pointless if you are not doing it from every location. The policy is purely to annoy the airlines/ countries being targeted and can't have any positive security consequences if other flights are not having the same restrictions place on them.

stargazer 68 · 22-03-2017 12:23PM

Nothing stopping anyone from driving from Saudi over the Causeway into Bahrain and flying from there to the UK on British Airways or Gulf Air.

Don't think they have thought this one out!

robinph · 22-03-2017 12:33PM

Dovies wrote: »

Nothing stopping anyone from driving from Saudi over the Causeway into Bahrain and flying from there to the UK on British Airways or Gulf Air.

Don't think they have thought this one out!

Or just getting on a flight to somewhere else. Does it really make much difference if a flight from Bahrain to Sydney or from Bahrain to New York falls out of the sky? Same result for the terrorists either way and they have essentially hit the same target, just slightly different accents.

kc56 · 22-03-2017 12:34PM

The US ban mentions cameras. Imaging checking 10,000+ euro worth of cameras and lenses into checked baggage? Image further you are transiting and your flight originates in Africa, India etc? Travel insurance mentions carrying valuable items in your cabin luggage; what happens if you kit gets damaged/stolen?

jackinthemix94 · 22-03-2017 01:11PM

kc56 wrote: »

The US ban mentions cameras. Imaging checking 10,000+ euro worth of cameras and lenses into checked baggage? Image further you are transiting and your flight originates in Africa, India etc? Travel insurance mentions carrying valuable items in your cabin luggage; what happens if you kit gets damaged/stolen?

I don't think the U.S. Government has a f**k to give about people belongings, TBH.

J.pilkington · 20-04-2017 03:18PM

The US airlines will love trump for his ban as it's impacting the ME carriers. Demand on Emirates US bound flights down 33% since the announcement.

As far as I am aware the first major retreat from a market (they have retreated a bit in South America but nothing of this scale). Goes to show that the blank cheque culture is being scaled back.

Also not good for the already under pressure a380 as deliveries continue to join the Emirates fleet all / most intended of these were intended to be on new / growing routes.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39640473

smurfjed · 20-04-2017 04:12PM

The US airlines will love trump for his ban as it's impacting the ME carriers. Demand on Emirates US bound flights down 33% since the announcement.

I think that it has more to do with US Visa issues rather than the electronic ban.

Growler!!! · 20-04-2017 04:43PM

smurfjed wrote: »

I think that it has more to do with US Visa issues rather than the electronic ban.

By reducing the number of flights they are also freeing up flight deck crew to be used elsewhere in the network as all the US flights were crew heavy.

USA and UK bans electronic devices on some Middle Eastern airline flights

Comments