New US & UK Laptop/Tablet ban on up to 8 countries

[juddles]

Honestly, we went to Iraq War because of the Intelligence of the Bush Government. Weapons of mass destruction they said. I marched against the Invasion. From that date onward I treat 'intelligence' with a dose of a reality check.

Sorry Pushka, but "intel" is a central part of a whole myriad of endeavours to improve safety, etc in many facets of life. The fact that a pilot can furnish an anonymous report of a safety breach / dangerous situation, is also "Intel" that certain people use to improve something. "Intel" in the modern form is the attempt to get as much possible information which can be used to action something, develop procdures, etc, etc, etc. "intel" is used every day by every number of entities to improve things. Given the huge range of professions, situations, applications that the term involves, how on earth can you say that "intelligence" is something you treat with a dose of "a reality check"? What on earth allows you to even consider weapons of mass destruction history with current aviation safety issues???

In my experience the position of naysayer/doubting Thomas is the easy one. It requires no knowledge, no responsibility, and most of all absolutely no accountability.

Maybe, just maybe, some intelligent people who devote their career to saving lives actually believe there is a threat? Just saying that as a potential concept

 

[opusman]

"Intel" has by definition failed to prevent all terrorist incidents that have actually happened. Where is the evidence that it's succeeded in preventing anything?

 

[drron]

Well in Australia there have been quite a few found guilty of the intention to commit terrorist acts.
As to Iraq and WMD you seem to have forgotten Saddam used WMD against the Kurds-gas attacks.Where did those supplies go.
And to those saying this is a commercial ban-how many US airlines serve those airports.Hint it is less than 1.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

From that date onward I treat 'intelligence' with a dose of a reality check.

But ignoring intelligence can have catastrophic consequences. MH is on the record mocking military intelligence as an 'oxymoron'. I think in some cases erring on the side of caution is better than outright dismissal.

 

[Skyring]

But ignoring intelligence can have catastrophic consequences. MH is on the record mocking military intelligence as an 'oxymoron'. I think in some cases erring on the side of caution is better than outright dismissal.

Intelligence provides information vital to success. Sun Tzu could not stress more highly the value of information. It is the difference between winning and losing.

Losing in this case results in an airliner destroyed in spectacular fashion, the usual tragic pictures of wreckage, front page stories of grieving relatives and so on.

Winning is utterly invisible. It is business as usual.

Now it may well be that intel was uncovered of plots to destroy airliners in flight by exploding a laptop or a pair of expensive headphones or whatever. Maybe they even found devices set up to do just that.

But where is the rationale for banning these specific devices on specific routes on specific carriers? That sort of intelligence is useless after a few days, especially where the rules are published. The black hats will just choose routes that are not subject to restrictions.

The fact that no American carriers are included in the ban convinces me that it has more to do with moving passengers onto American airlines than it does with security. American TSA security is all very well, but it is often hamfisted, dogmatic, and lax. (Especially the latter, I guess.)

Emirates, for example, is one of the carriers affected by the SA ban. Emirates has never lost an airliner to terrorism. This cannot be said for the major SA carriers.

Intelligence is only one half of the picture. The big picture involves making wise use of it, and I cannot see wisdom having much involvement in this current situation.

 

[Denali]

Ummm, Bose headphones now banned as well?

https://www.ausbt.com.au/bose-banned-us-uk-inflight-electronics-ban-includes-headphones

 

[LordGarlic]

Ummm, Bose headphones now banned as well?

https://www.ausbt.com.au/bose-banned-us-uk-inflight-electronics-ban-includes-headphones

I can only say..... OMG......((speechless))

 

[Pushka]

I can only say..... OMG......((speechless))

That will bring out some angst here.

 

[Comoman]

Ummm, Bose headphones now banned as well?

https://www.ausbt.com.au/bose-banned-us-uk-inflight-electronics-ban-includes-headphones

The article is contradictory - does it apply to flights from the UAE to UK or not? It says it does, but then adds the Qantas flights are not affected?

 

[opusman]

The article is contradictory - does it apply to flights from the UAE to UK or not? It says it does, but then adds the Qantas flights are not affected?

Applies to all flights the laptop ban applies to (i.e. it's nothing new, the ban was always on electronics larger than a smartphone, it's just no one had specifically worked out this meant some headphones would be affected as well).

 

[AisleSeat]

So is this only noise-cancelling over-ear headphones that rely on electronics for noise cancellation? I can picture everyone with over-ear headphones getting the third-degree by security.

 

[opusman]

If they have a battery and are bigger than a smartphone, I guess.

 

[Comoman]

Applies to all flights the laptop ban applies to (i.e. it's nothing new, the ban was always on electronics larger than a smartphone, it's just no one had specifically worked out this meant some headphones would be affected as well).

OK

but the article states: "The regulation applies to direct flights from selected countries to the USA and the UK, including the UAE, although Qantas' services between Australia and London via Dubai are not affected."

Didn't think the laptop ban was from the UAE to the UK?

 

[opusman]

Didn't think the laptop ban was from the UAE to the UK?

It isn't, as yet. Bad phrasing.

 

[DavidFlynn]

OK
but the article states: "The regulation applies to direct flights from selected countries to the USA and the UK, including the UAE, although Qantas' services between Australia and London via Dubai are not affected."
Didn't think the laptop ban was from the UAE to the UK?

That's correct, and is as the article says.

In the line "The regulation applies to direct flights from selected countries to the USA and the UK, including the UAE" – that UAE ref is embodied within the US ban but not the UK ban, hence why it was called out as not an issue for QF travellers.

 

[juddles]

"Intel" has by definition failed to prevent all terrorist incidents that have actually happened. Where is the evidence that it's succeeded in preventing anything?

OMG! I will withdraw from this debate as I think it would be a more valuable use of my time to cut my toenails

 

[esseeeayeenn]

This is ridiuclous. Such headphones are mostly padding, the real size of the hard section containing electronics is smaller than most smartphones.

 

[DavidFlynn]

This is ridiuclous. Such headphones are mostly padding, the real size of the hard section containing electronics is smaller than most smartphones.

Yep. I raised exactly that point with the TSA media officer this morning – was the issue the size of the overall product or the component containing the electronics, as the latter is typically a small circuit board inside one earpiece and smaller than a smartphone. She replied that their measure is of the entire device. Hence why the in-ear Bose QC20s pass but not the larger over-the-ear models such as the QC35s.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Yep. I raised exactly that point with the TSA media officer this morning – was the issue the size of the overall product or the component containing the electronics, as the latter is typically a small circuit board inside one earpiece and smaller than a smartphone. She replied that their measure is of the entire device. Hence why the in-ear Bose QC20s pass but not the larger over-the-ear models such as the QC35s.

Again demonstrating that their measure is unrelated to the real risk advanced as the rationale for the ban.
I should point out that this won't affect me at all as I don't have any plans to travel on any affected routes.
I prefer to visit countries where the language and culture are different.
I have never been particularly interested in visiting the US and any interest I did have is rapidly waning.
When I fly to Europe I prefer to fly straight to the continent and avoid the taxes involved in a transit through LHR.
The only reason I would fly to LHR is to fly via DXB on QF metal which is not subject to the measures anyway.
Which is a long winded way of saying I am not whinging at the personal inconvenience but the inconsistency of the measure and the reasons for it annoy me.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Again demonstrating that their measure is unrelated to the real risk advanced as the rationale for the ban.

The authorities that delay and get caught by some mind-numbing atrocity are always criticised for the delay, and those that decisively implement change intent on protecting those they risk alienating, are invariably criticised for being stupid ... where does that leave those souls with the burden of thwarting evil and protecting the innocent?

There's always going to be some "square earth" believer that argues change is unnecessary. Perhaps it is, but unlike some others, I'd prefer not to risk my, and my families lives on a hunch.