Originally Posted by MSY-MSP

To jump back in to the conversation and to again answer some of the questions that were asked above as well as to provide some additional commentary.

Someone mentioned up thread about why Russia hasn’t been targeted since they have a large number of extremists in their country. My guess is that the western governments don’t see them as a big threat to the west because they are more likely to target Russian interests as opposed to Western interests. Not to say that could be used as a base to attack Western interests. But by the end of this exercise, they will be in the restrictions as well anyway.

One question that was asked was why are battery devices being targeted and the issues with detecting explosives in them. From my understanding what the bad guys have figured out what to do is replace some of the cells of the battery with the explosive material. They also figured out how to make the explosive material look like a normal cell in the battery. They have acquired or have access to, from what I understand, airport quality x-ray scanners and are using this to compare their modifications with an unmodified baseline. The authorities believe that they have gotten this to the point where it is extremely difficult to identify the modification via x-ray. Because the bad guys have to only replace a part of the battery cells, the device can still fully operate as intended, thus defeating the power on and show it works prior test. The explosives can still be detected by trace explosive techniques and via the higher powered CT type devices. This is why the particular devices have been targeted.

We are starting to hear and read comments from other countries about the potential for a ban on these devices. This confirms what I have been hearing that we are on the verge of a worldwide set of restrictions on these type of devices on board aircraft. I think we will hear something later this week via a joint EU/US announcement of the restrictions. ICAO will likely publish a similar recommendation around the same time, after which it will be adopted by most if not all countries, either by regulation or default. Since the restrictions will be worldwide, trying some circuitous routing won’t really matter.

It does look like the rules will be fairly draconian. It will severely limit the number of devices that a person can bring with them. The burden on security checkpoints is going to be very high. The rules are likely going to require swabbing of all electronic devices. It seems there will be no limit on “micro” electronic devices, e.g. hearing aids, watches, and devices of that size. There will be a limit on large electronic devices, e.g. laptops, cameras, and the like. This number will likely be limited to one per passenger. The two open questions that I have heard are how are they going to classify devices such as ipad mini’s and small e-readers. The big ones of these fall into the laptop category. There is debate on these hybrid sized devices. The likely place is that they will fall with the laptops, but it is possible they will fall with the phone restrictions. It looks like the phone restriction will be no more than two phone sized devices.

It further looks like that there will be a ban on these items in the hold as well. As I have mentioned previously, the EU is close to banning these items from the hold, if the cabin restrictions are implemented. Further, I have heard from several pilots who have basically have said they won’t fly the planes if the hold is full of batteries like this. One of them mentioned that many planes don’t have a way to fully keep these devices from bouncing around in the hold, and that he believes that the bouncing in the hold is more likely to cause the device to experience thermal runaway. Currently there is no system that can put out one of these fires in the hold.

The restrictions will be applied to medical devices as well. The ADA has a carve out for what is considered “direct threats”. That is in section 12111, and would apply to aircraft security regulations promulgated by the government. Specifically, “The term “direct threat” means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by reasonable accommodation.” The regulations limiting electronics would be based on the “significant risk” side of things. This would be similar to how in the initial days of the liquid ban, prescription drugs and such had to be checked as well. The regulation will list what devices are permitted, and medical devices will likely be permitted devices. However, the limitation on the number of devices will apply. So the person with the medical device will likely have to decide between the medical device and the laptop. The limitation on the number of devices is based on the ability to do the screening of the devices needed for them to be cleared. Each extra device will add more time to the screening process and increase the waiting times.

I do think that we will have somewhere between 5 and 30 days before the rules come to effect. I think into the US will come sooner, and then the roll-out to the US checkpoints will come towards the later end of this. The only reason for the delay on the domestic side may be related to the ability to screen these items in some relatively fast manner.