notquiteaff

Lengthy story on NBC Today this morning, making the connection to the "still on the table" laptop ban. Excellent timing

MSY-MSP

So thinking about why the US is appearing to back down from the laptop ban, a couple things came up in a conversation with a friend at DHS last night. First the ban is not off the table. It is still very much a plan from TSA, but also the statement that the “laptop”ban is scrapped is not completely wrong either. So the restrictions that would be implemented would be 1+1. Because it would be implemented as 1+1 it wouldn’t “ban” laptops, just limit them. It is completely playing with semantics on this, but it allows both sides to “claim” victory in the negotiations that weren’t negotiations. Oh and apparently someone at DHS liked the 1+1 as it was “catchy” just like 3-1-1.

The second thing that this person mentioned to me, was something I hadn’t fully appreciated in previous conversations, is the completeness of the EU position on this. The EU was saying no to having the items in the hold, while the US wanted them in the hold. That position was what I though stopped the US from going forward with the ban at this time. However, there is possibly a second position that the EU had brought forward that may have been the actual reason DHS backed off. The EU basically said, (unconfirmed), that if you impose this ban, it will apply both ways, and further that any person who has access to any aircraft or articles intended for any aircraft bound for the EU must have gone through a security screening equivalent to that imposed by EU airports. Further, those individuals could not have contact with persons who were not screened to those same standards, after they were cleared. The target of this position appears to be ground handlers, caterers, and other airport and airline personnel who do not currently go through any security whatsoever to access the secure side of the airport. This had it been implemented would have been a nightmare for the US to implement, and likely the US could not come into compliance with that restriction. There are too many airports in the US that would need to be overhauled to come into compliance with these restrictions. Sure it could be done by some airports, at massive inconvenience to the airlines and airports. Just thinking what airports could implement it in a short time period and the list to me is pretty small. It would take a terminal that could be completely segregated from the other parts of the airport, as well as have a perimeter around the terminal that could be secured, and also have its own baggage system. The result would have been the cancellation of almost all Trans-Atlantic air traffic between the US and the EU. This sounds to me like the EU said to the US, we see a big hole in your security system that we have tolerated, but if you are going to go this way on something we don’t agree is necessary (basically saying we have a hole on our end), then we want you to fix that hole on your end that we see. Ball is in your court US. The US blinked, because they didn’t want to the EU to control the messaging on this.

Again I cannot confirm this is an actual position of the EU or if this was actually brought forward by them. However, I can see the US blinking under this nuclear option from the EU, and re-evaluating their position, and this makes more sense to me than the it cannot go in the hold. This might be the “technical issues” related to the implementation of any level of restrictions.

chollie

Thank you for a thoughtful and informative post.

petaluma1

MSY-MSP, are you saying that EU airports screen their "backstage" employees better than US airports do?

notquiteaff

But how could they possibly implement 1+1 at US airports without gate screening or complete airport configuration?

If it's only enforced at centralized checkpoints, it's as effective of a restriction as the 100ml liquid ban.

ashill

Practical concern: if a laptop/tablet ban were implemented, what would all the airlines that have switched their flight manuals entirely to tablets (so pilots are no longer carrying around their giant paper flight manuals) do? Would those tablets be exempted from the ban?

notquiteaff

I'd think so. Pilots don't need a tablet bomb to bring a plane down if they really wanted to.

FL390

1+1 is still just as ridiculous. I can bring one phone and one laptop. What about my mouse, or the charging brick for the laptop? People are still going to pack their excess items into checked luggage without any care for the battery issues. Are they going to hand search each checked bag and remove electronics?

I'm half tempted to fire up Solidworks and the 3d printer to create a single "device" that incorporates all of my items into one body.

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.

Boggie Dog

The laptop battery fire on the NY to SFO flight should concern those who support putting these electronics in the hold where they can't be reached. Yes it was taken care of but had the laptop been down below things could have been much different.

The discussion up thread of discussing the need to screen airport workers is one that I think TSA should have been doing all along. I think EU is smack on target. If these devices are so concerning then why does TSA not fully screen everyone and everything that enters the sterile area? The simple reason is that TSA thinks its too hard. Too hard is just an excuse. If TSA demanded that the airport authority sceen these people then that is exactly what would happen. It might not be TSA doing the screening but the workers would get screened.

And I am no electronics or explosive expert but if these battery bombs are really possible why wouldn't a cell phone which might under some proposals would be allowed in the cabin not work as a triggering device?

This is one time that DHS/TSA needs to put their cards on the table for all to see. Only then will the public know if there is a real threat or if this is just more fear mongering by DHS/TSA.

McG

Airport workers in U.K. at least under go security screening every time they go airside.

spd476

Are they going to come up with a different swab test for electronics? The ones they use for people have false alarms way too often. If a piece of electronics does alarm, what happens next, shut down the checkpoint, evacuate the terminal every time this happens?

The whole 1+1 idea is going to be confusing. What will constitute one piece? I can totally see one airport allowing a laptop, power brick, mouse, and external hard drive and then another airport denying the hard drive or the mouse.

wco81

Is this a career DHS person or a political appointee like Kelly?

MSY-MSP

The idea, as explained to me, is that you get one phone sized device, and one additional device. I have no idea about power bricks for the electronic device or not. I haven't seen or heard any actual guidance that would address the power supplies for these devices. However, the other "peripherals" would definitively fall under the ban and not be allowed. Unless you chose to have your hard drive be your phone.

If the 1+1 does come to be. It would be a full ban, not just on international flights, and yes it would be enforced at the checkpoint. Of course with TSA, you never know....

Probably depends on the country. I know Australia enforces the liquid ban levels on flight crew. Other countries do not. It could be the same way with any ban. Of course their is a backup paper copies of all of this stuff on the airplane.

I need to tread a fine line here, but I can safely say they are not an appointee.

84fiero

Not allowed in carry-on or not allowed period, even in checked bag?