Surely not - according to Donna you should be feeling more secure !Originally Posted by Twirly
RE; locked cases...I don't know if they're allowed to open locked cases. But they do. We locked our cases on the way back from holiday and were picked for a random search, they didn't notify us (I'm sure they're meant to) and just cut off the lock.
I'm flying next weekend...I'm nervous at the best of timesI'm hoping things might be ok with the hand luggage (they did say temporary measures...) but if they're not then c'est la vie.
xXx
I put a lock on my case, but its more to stop it from unzipping in transit. But its not anything incredibly expensive, if there was an essential security check I would have no problem with them breaking it off - as long as there was documentation to show that had been done officially (rather than someone trying to break into my case, not that there would be anything worth taking!).
Yes, I have sympathy with travellers but it's about time airlines started to limit what you can take on as hand luggage as passengers are beginning to stretch things a little bit. Am I the only one getting fed up with passengers classing suitcases as hand luggage and taking them on board or getting clouted on the head/ shoulders with backpacks as people make their way up the aisle? Also, have we become so dependent on our electronic gadgets that we can't do without them for the duration of the flight?
Rant over.
Hmmm. I'm about to go to Chicago for a series of hands-on photography seminars and part of what I'm meant to take is a regular camera, lenses & laptop. Because of the new regulations, I'm now only taking a point & shoot camera. Normally, I would have taken my kit on board as part of my hand baggage because it's so valuable, nickable & essential to my earning a living as a photographer. Very kindly, US photographers have already offered to loan me a camera & lenses (people I don't even know). So I'm probably one of those people who bring a smallish backpack as hand luggage (conforming with airline regulations), but there are very logical reasons for this.
Its not the passengers who class them as handbaggage, its the airlines and luggage manufacturers - those 'suitcases' are sold specifically as 'cabin baggage'.
The airlines have been encouraging this with the 'no weight restriction (within reason)' policy of Easyjet or the 'pay £5 per item of checked baggage per flight, but wouldn't it be easier to just take hand luggage' approach of Flybe. (They even were pointing out just how much you could fit into hand baggage, how many items of clothing etc). They've wanted people to just have hand luggage with no bags to check in as this speeds up check in - you can print your boarding pass from the webpage when you book and not have to check in at all. These are both 'budget' airlines, I don't have as much recent experience of the other airlines who may not have the same approach, though I know other airlines have 'self check in' options at airports, which again would only work if not checking any baggage on.
But this isn't just for the duration of the flight, its from check in to baggage reclaim. Sure, only another few hours, but time during which you might want to be in contact with someone to tell them if you are delayed and aren't going to make that meeting, or listen to your Ipod while waiting to board. (Not that I would do that, I don't have an Ipod.)
It is easy to get caught up in how something may affect the here and now and we often forget to consider how it may affect the future.
Ok you might not be able to do the things you had planned during your journey, but at least you will still be alive to enjoy your holiday/clinch that business deal etc when you do eventually arrive. Surely a few hours deprived of some of lifes luxuries is a worthy sacrifice in return for the chance to carry on living!
And as for those people that may be meeting you I am sure that they would rather the inconvenience of waiting several hours for you to arrive safely than to turn up and find that you will never ever arrive no matter how long they wait!
However that's just my opinion and luckily enough for me I am not planning on travelling by air in the near future! For those of you that are I hope that your journeys are not to stressful and that you arrive at your destination safely.
That's a very relevant perspective, however if you are looking at that way - into the future - and this doesn't continue - then surely we are just as unsafe again? Will they keep all the measures (eg travellers having to take off their shoes to be X-rayed) in place at every airport in the long term?
Its not really about being deprived of luxuries in airports - there is everything there you need if you want to pay for it. (I've experienced airports without the 'luxuries' - endless queues in hot African airports, 6 hour delays with nowhere to buy water or food). But air travel has been marketed as a quick and convenient way to travel, so causing inconvenience is going to hit the airlines. Which is good of course, as its not a green way to travel - the government are trying to get people to cut back on air travel - maybe they've hit on an extra angle!
It's a good point. Of course (and yes, I know, it's easy for me to say, I'm not stuck at Heathrow) there are much worse things in the world than a bit of inconvenience. But once you start taking these measures, they almost never get relaxed.
The "Ring Of Steel" traffic measures around the City of London were introduced nearly 15 years ago to combat the IRA. The measures are still there, and in fact I think they've recently been increased. Similarly, we used to have rubbish bins in the Tube stations, now we don't. Small things, admittedly, but real.
Now, these measures are fair enough, after 7/7 - but what about the several years' of terror-free activity we enjoyed in the late 90's - early 2000's? No relaxation then.
Surely you're not suggesting that our government could be so underhand?!? :shocked icon:But air travel has been marketed as a quick and convenient way to travel, so causing inconvenience is going to hit the airlines. Which is good of course, as its not a green way to travel - the government are trying to get people to cut back on air travel - maybe they've hit on an extra angle!
Seriously, I reckon a lot of people are re-thinking their plans for foreign holidays in 2007 - I know I am - simply because of the extra hassle. Who knows, maybe the Great British Holiday will see a revival...
Of course, there are significant risks in flying for several hours with insufficient fluids (e.g. increased risk of DVT). So maybe being able to carry water on board isn't such a luxury after all.
It's because of this that I'm guessing the airlines will work out a solution to the water issue in fairly short order. I don't believe the current situation is tenable - if someone gets seriously ill because they got dehydrated during the flight, I'm sure the lawyers will quickly get involved.
To prevent people taking incendiary devices into shops, all bags, including handbags, used to be searched when going into major shops in NI. This stopped years ago, presumably when the threat was considered to be greatly lessened. Last night several shops in Newry were gutted by fire, and others badly damaged, by incendiary devices that had been planted in the shops. I don't think that means they are going to bring back bag searching though.
What's the 'ring of steel'? We used to have security gates in Belfast to get into the main shopping area - most cars weren't allowed in and you had to walk one by one through a 7ft metal turnstyle to get in/out. Do you mean something like that?
People certainly don't mind a little inconvenience when compared to the threat of their plane being blown up. The thousands whose flights have been cancelled today probably understand the reasons behind what happened. One local woman interviewed on TV tonight said she wouldn't mind being strip searched if it meant she was safe on the plane.
However after a while, when the threat seems less imminent, people will be less understanding.
I can do with out my technology if required - but when I'm normally looking at 5 hours min travel time - from Check in to landing - being with out my computer or book to read is about boredom and being able to make effective use of my time. Especially if I am travelling on a budget airline with out movies.
And if I was heading home I would be facing approx 20 hours with only my wallet and passport to while away the hours - as well as risking the theft or damage of my computer and jewellery much of which can not be replaced going through check in luggage.
Yes I value my life in that i like to be alive - I also value my life in that I want to live it the way I want to and not be dictated to by some faceless bunch of maniacs. I would rather face a longer security check and be allowed to take hand luggage - they used to make you take your laptop out of it's bag and remove it's battery to allow better x-ray I would be happy to go through that and turning it on to show that it worked - if it meant that I got to have something to do on a long haul flight
Maybe on the other hand some people would prefer the convenience and accept the (likely small) increase in risk of being unlucky (especially for small planes), ( and a lot more would if they took a balanced view of risk ).
We trade risk for convenience on the roads all the time.
It may often be the case, that more people will die due to the effects of the attempt to increase safety (perhaps in this case delays to important functions, lack of access to medicines / water / more risky alternative routes etc), than would have of the original risk in any case.
Personally I'll take a dim view of flying if the airlines don't offer everyone noise cancelling headphones now we cannot bring them on.
It's interesting to note that according to The Register, the US's response to this morning's events (and the events leading up to them) is not to ban all hand baggage, merely to prevent passengers from travelling with unidentified liquids. No other restrictions are in place, it says.
No, it's more like a set of traffic diversions combined with lots of CCTV and police - see here for details.
It basically meant that if you travel from North London to SouthEast London, it's OK, but it's a pain the other way round, lots of one-way systems and diversions.
They are listening !!
BAA have introduced checks now on all cabin bags. They have little contraptions which are essentially cages. If your bags fit in them then its fine. If not you have to check them in - interestingly not judged on weight. They had an amnesty up until the 1st August but now it is compulsory. As I fly regularly (unfortunately) it has affected me quite a bit.
I was a little guilty of taking aboard huge amounts of hand luggage. It just made it so much easier for me when I am only visiting the UK for a short while. I could get off the plane and stroll through baggage reclaim. Sweet. Not any more.
I had to laugh. Last week one of the other guys from here flew back to the UK with a present he had bought. It was a solid bronze elephant model. On its own it weighed 8kg!!!!!!Bearing in mind that BAs restrictions are 6kg for cabin baggage he did well to get that on board on top of his laptop etc.
As for recent events, Im just hoping that they are able to relax the rules for the time I fly back. I need things to keep me occupied during my flights i.e. my books, dvds etc.
They do provide as many drinks as you like really. However, they only keep a certain amount of litres on-board due to weight and storage space. Not sure how much they could increase this by if they had to.
Interestingly, the airport here in Mumbai started doing full body searches about a month ago. At the gate every person must unlock their bags, remove their shoes, receive a pat-down search and submit their hand luggage for inspection. It did mean we were late taking off but nobody minded.
Louisa was flying back to Edinburgh yesterday from Southampton. Just thought I'd mention: once you get past security you can buy whatever you like from the shops (note: since they are doing secondary searches on some flights to the US this might not be the case for those flights) and take it on board. I'd keep a receipt though just in case.
So as long as you are willing to put up with starting another book from a limited selection then at least you have something to read if your plane is delayed for 6 hours.
Really? That makes a difference (to me anyway). Does that apply to water as well?
My biggest concern though is still the 'lost luggage' scenario. I've had my luggage not be on the same flight as me at least twice - fortunately always on homeward trips and it was delivered within 24 hours. But that's on routes with many daily flights. If my case doesn't make it today for example, I won't get it till tomorrow teatime. Fortunately being collected - otherwise that could have left me going to catch a bus/train, with my purse in a clear plastic bag, looking for somewhere to buy a more solid bag, umbrella, toothbrush etc, payphone. Hopefully my case will make it as my dance shoes are in it!
1 in 100 items of checked on luggage are lost. That's bound to go up in the current situation. Best thing is not to take anything you really don't want to lose.
In particular, don't take anything you couldn't manage without if you didn't have it at the other end. Oops - that's not going to work too well is it?
Things seem to be getting worse, have just heard the latest BA Announcement :-
Until further notice BA has halted all flights from the UK.
BA announced: "I aint getting on no god damn plane you crazy fool!"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
![$vboptions[bbtitle]](images/master_col.bmp)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks