artemis

You may have to weigh the costs of canceling the trip and forfeiting the already-paid costs versus what you'd be out if your uninsured gear was stolen/destroyed. It would be a complete no-brainer for me: I'd cancel the trip rather than risk a $20k loss. A Pelican case without a non-TSA lock really isn't any protection from theft.

I feel for you. (And I think the airlines should have to refund the fares of travelers who choose to cancel as a result of these restrictions, as they would not have booked those tickets if the restrictions had already been in place at the time of ticket purchase.)

Boggie Dog

Not different, just demonstrates as group we aren't willing to take the necessary steps to hold government accountable for its actions.

People refuse to not fly, bought into Extortion Check because it made their life a bit easier, and so forth, but continues to look the other way when TSA or other government agencies do things that should be questioned.

antonius66

The interesting thing is that most people are upset because they won't be able to take their electronics on the plane conveniently and people like me are upset because they would have to check a bag. I never ever check a bag internationally, and having to do so because I brought my camera (and maybe a 7" tablet at most) irritates me beyond words. Having to figure out how to pack the camera into the hold and check it and the extra risk of my stuff getting lost or stolen is infuriating. Aside from the MASSIVE inconvenience of checking a bag and the huge delays it causes...when I did check many years ago, I had about 1/5 bags seriously delayed/lost.

notquiteaff

Hahhaha.... that's funny

Should they? Sure. They should do a lot of things. Will they? Noooooo. Can't reveal our methods and intelligence.

Boggie Dog

The fact that you see my statement as something humorous isn't funny.

Go ahead and let TSA control your life.

donsullivan

Unfortunately, at this stage, rescheduling is not a practical option. The trip has been scheduled around specific events & locations for quite a long time and could not be rebuilt quickly if at all. I'm also past the cancellation deadline for some parts of it where I'd be paying penalties (some up to 100%) for late cancellation.

Part of what I'm reading indicates I could take my gear onboard on the way over, but not on the return. If that's the case I'll just check an empty Pelican case on the way over and use it for return. That way I'll at least be sure I have all my gear when I get there and it's only at risk on the return. I have a really small (smaller than my mobile phone) external SSD that I can keep with me onboard so I do not loose any of the photos.

At this point, I just want them to announce it so I can plan accordingly before I go.l It will be a mess if I have to react after I get there.

notquiteaff

See my earlier post. I will be writing my congress critters. I will curtail my affected air travel to reduce my exposure (I can reprioritize other travel) to put financial pressure on airlines to use their lobby powers.

What is your action plan, beyond stating what TSA should be required to do?

MSY-MSP

Actually, I seem to recall that Scotland Yard or someone did provide some support for the liquid ban/restriction. I can't find it now but it was a video of a couple Gatorade bottles with modified liquid explosives blowing up a container or something like that. There was a risk from liquid explosives and also at the time a likely threat that it would be implemented.

However, the initial reaction of the authorities was draconian and extreme. It took more investigation for the authorities to understand what the risk was and how to mitigate the risk. After they thought through the process we got 3-1-1. The idea was that this approach mitigated the understood threat and made it more difficult for a successful attack to be completed.

I believe there is a threat caused by improvised explosive devices hidden in laptops and the like in their batteries or disguised like batteries. Now how big that threat is is the real question. Is it being inflated? I don't know. However, it seems to me that the implication of this is that they are trying to do a measured approach on the implementation of this ban to avoid crawl back later.

There is some support from IACO that indicates that the threat is real and they are trying to work through a world wide approach to dealing with issue. There is a balancing act that needs to be managed here. The risk in the cabin vs the risk in the hold. I think that what they are going to go to as a world wide recommendation is a limitation on the number and size of battery powered electronics allowed to be brought by passengers on the plane (checked and carryon). Guess would be that IACO will limit individuals to two phone/tablet sized devices (no bigger than an iPad mini), 1 laptop sized device (larger tablets) and likely one camera/video device of a specific size. I fully expect that they will come out very strongly against the carriage of large electronics in the hold unless and until they can create a system that actually protects from thermal runaway. They will probably require that the devices be screened for explosives at the checkpoint. From this guideline I expect countries to modify accordingly namely limiting the number of devices simply from a logistics side of things.

notquiteaff

I'd probably also upload them to a cloud service and not trust that any electronic device (except, perhaps, a phone) will be acceptable. Would too much on the interpretation of an individual "security" official looking at it. E.g., my Kindle is not much bigger than some phablets, and yet I wouldn't count on getting it through.

Boggie Dog

Primarily not having to travel from Europe the US. I am active in stating my displeasure of TSA to my electeds and in others.

If a ban such as this is really necessary then so be it, but show me why it is needed.

Big_Foot

I'm in the same boat - I travel for photography mostly, have some very
expensive lenses I can not easily re-purchase if lost, and I'm pi$$ed as hell.
I think the only real option is Fedex. Pack your stuff and ship it back.
At least it's only one way, usually for us it's back home,
so you can pick a slower (less expensive) method. Pick high value with Fedex
and it doesn't require additional insurance etc.

artemis

In that case I'd bite the bullet and get the Pelican case now, just to be safe. There may be a run on them if an in-cabin ban that includes camera equipment is indeed passed, and with your trip coming up so soon you don't want to risk not being able to get the case. You can always return it or sell it on Ebay if it turns out to be an unnecessary precaution.

milepig

Explain how using a pelican case negates the strong possibility that a baggage handler will just steal the whole thing.

donsullivan

While the Pelican case certainly cannot prevent a baggage handler from stealing something, it is a mandatory step simply to protect the camera gear from damage in transit. In my case, I can't just put my camera backpack into checked luggage, it is not designed to protect the gear under those conditions. The backpack would have to go into a TSA locked Pelican case along with my laptop and iPad and other random stuff so it's protected just going through the baggage belts and on and off the planes.

FL390

What about custom's fees and duty when shipping your own gear back home via Fedex?