Originally Posted by
chollie
Yeah, I just don't see the logic behind 1+1 unless they are going to swab everything at the checkpoint and they're trying to limit what they have to swab and test. It would be even dumber than the reasons given for the 3-1-1 limitations ("it won't prevent determined terrorists, but it will make them have to work a little harder").
This whole thing is fraught with potential crazy delays. People get upset enough when TSA confiscates things at the checkpoint. I think there will be even more issues when first-time/infrequent flyers reach the checkpoint and realize their electronics are going to be confiscated, particularly when TSOs use their 'discretion' to go hopelessly overboard.
I still maintain that this is nothing more than a money grab. TSA and the folks who will get rich off this want to create massive delays to force not just the US, but the rest of the world to buy their over-priced still-limited checkpoint CT scanners. There's the possibility that the backups will also spur a rash of Precheck signups - at least until the next group wises up and realizes that Precheck doesn't guarantee the service will be available as advertised at any airport at any time. It will suck to show up at the airport with Pre and your electronics, only to find that Pre is closed or Pre-lite and you have to surrender your laptop or go back and check it.
I think people, in general, put up with the inconvenience of 3-1-1 primarily because it was just that- an inconvenience. I think only a very limited number of people actually did not fly because of it; most people just put up with the hassle of tiny bottles, buying stuff at destination, and/or checking bags instead of carrying on. I doubt many businesses cancelled travel because of it. Plus there was a financial benefit to certain groups, e.g., airport shops selling overpriced water bottles, more buy-on-board customers, etc. that the industry as a whole didn't push back a whole lot on it.
An electronics restriction like 1+1 is a totally different ball of wax- there's a very real risk of business travel reduction/cancellation if travelers can't bring electronics on board, given the very real risks of hardware/data theft if checked or forced to use loaners. Plus airlines still don't accept responsibility for electronics in checked bags. Shipping by Fedex in advance? Lot of business travelers can't afford to not have their electronics for the entire time they're in transit. What if you have a personal and work phone, and for data security reasons can't use work phone for personal stuff, and vice-versa? Are you supposed to live without one or the other while in transit? Plus if 1+1 applies to all electronics, most travelers have far more than 1+1, e.g., headphones, electric razors, portable battery, etc. etc. etc.
And as someone mentioned upthread, what about electronic flight bags on iPads for flight crews? How about electronics used by cabin crews for buy-on-board transactions? Noise-cancelling headphones provided by the airline to premium pax on some carriers? etc. etc. etc.
Considering we've already heard about the economic impact to ME3 carriers due to the laptop ban, I doubt if US3 and/or European partners would do anything other than push back vehemently- unlike 3-1-1 I don't see any upside to the commercial aviation industry for this. (for bag scanning machine makers, however, that's a different story)
I agree with some earlier posters that there will ultimately be more detailed screening of electronics, but a 1+1 restriction (or anything similar) is simply not realistic, unless the intent is long-term damage to commercial aviation industry. Or a money grab for pre-check. Of course I might be totally wrong.