thedigitalbean wrote:
All that you say is true, however I would pose the same question to you.

How many incidents of airline terrorism have there been because of maintenance technicians or baggage handlers? How many times have jumbo jets been shot down by surface to air missiles?

In contrast how many airliners have been hijacked or otherwise blown up by terrorist passengers?

If it were to easy for the terrorists to infiltrate the technicians or to fire a SAM at a plane, don't you think they would be doing it now?

911 using planes as missiles was a first which had never been done before. Terrorists always look for things that have never been done before.

How easy is it to become a baggage handler? It's as simple as filling in an application form. The same for becoming a steward/stewardess onboard a plane. You undergo a modicum of training and then go live. Let's look at the London underground terrorists - which of them was a suspect? None - they all had solid backgounds.

People whining that workers aren't security checked (they are) are the same kinds of folks complaining on other threads when workers are asked to be part of the security effort and to watch for strange occurances, breaches, etc. Yeah, that whole Big Brother thing kind of sucks, until the planes stay in the air.

And it makes the assumption that thieves aren't patriots, don't fly on the same planes, don't have family and friends on the planes, etc.

The most constructive use of this thread is practical ideas for photographers to get their gear through the system in one piece, accepting the new restrictions for all our safety - rather than the (admittedly intriguing) discussion on how and who can destroy the plane.

The Fedex idea is pretty good - whereas I for one would be less inclined to rent, as one is unlikely to get the exact mix of gear preferred. (although again it's at least a way to get the job done).
Insurance is obvious - but what a hassle if it's needed!!

It is a fact of life that a percentage of hold luggage gets pilfered, but I gather you aren't allowed to lock luggage, or at least if you do you'll find the locks broken at the far end...
The airlines should be pressured to provide a "premium secure" luggage checkin option (at a price), where they take a little more interest in its survival...

But what do you do when traveling with $30K of gear to an underdeveloped country? Fedex or other shipping is not practical. Only 12 days to go and I am getting very nervous this policy may spread to other European airports. What to do, give up the $15K nonrefundable trip?

EB

thedigitalbean wrote:
In contrast how many airliners have been hijacked or otherwise blown up by terrorist passengers?


Don't you mean terrorist ARAB MUSLIMS?

Let's just kick THEM off the flights. Problem solved.

EB-1 wrote:
But what do you do when traveling with $30K of gear to an underdeveloped country? Fedex or other shipping is not practical. Only 12 days to go and I am getting very nervous this policy may spread to other European airports. What to do, give up the $15K nonrefundable trip?



Pray your trip doesn't go through the UK?

Honestly, I'd look into Fedexing the gear to as close to where you're going as possible. And, reconsider which gear you're going to bring.

I work in the Airport Operations Center in Toronto. I do see the resaons for the limitations at this point, I also see the linitations easing in the near future. I feel that this is a knee jerk reaction till better screening procedures are put in place. OH yea no water bottles or gel type liquids alowed on board from Toronto.

Rhys wrote:
a lot of crap...

Mate, you're a bloody idiot.

Firing a SAM from a moving light aircraft in to the side of a Jumbo?! Haaaaa! That one's just gold.

And you really believe that you just fill in a form and become a baggage handler? Honestly, tell me, you believe that? Do you know any baggage handlers? Ever applied for a job in the field yourself? You're talking crap.

As for your "I'm looking for ferries to the US" comment a few pages back, ah, jeez, that was priceless. You going to ride the ocean waves for 3 days just to avoid the one in a million chance of something happening to you on an aeroplane? Haven't you heard of icebergs?

In 6 weeks I'm flying from Canada to Spain via Gatwick, for a birding and photo trip. As far as I can make out, at least on the BA leg from Gatwick to Malaga, I'll be restricted to 1 bag, with a max. weight of 50lb. I intend to bring my d70and Tamron 200-500 lens, + binoculars, and pack them carefully in that 1 case (unless they have relaxed carry-on restrictions by then, which seems doubtful). My wife will also have bins in her case, and I'm planning on getting a super-zoom digicam (?Sony DSC-H5) for her to take as well, and which I can use if my case gets rifled or goes missing. The chances of having 2 cases stolen on the same flight should be much less than the chances of either one (I'm not a statistician, but I think square roots are in there somewhere).

I am hoping that if hand-luggage is still banned, then they add the weight of what would have been the hand luggage to the allowable weight of the checked baggage.

I can afford to insure my gear, but I wouldn't want the frustration of 10 days birding in southern Spain and not even take it in the first place!

Any other ideas/ solutions?

Also - unless people are an airline executive or terrorrism expert, can we keep the thread on topic, and leave idle, politcal and racist speculation for elsewhere?

Richard
__________________

Judging by all the news reports both from the aviation authority and from press releases the ban on all hand luggage will be in place for a long time to come .
Living as i do in the South East and close to Gatwick and Heathrow these restrictions will mean the end of the ''freedom'' we've had up till now with stuff we can pack into overhead lockers .
All you can do is the make sure your valuables are safely secured and insured , not as easy as it sounds i know , but thats the world we live in now .
Just as 9/11 changed America , this will change the face of flying as we know for the foreseeable future .

Brian

A few weeks ago the wall street journal reported the some airline companies are start to making profit again, after watching yesterdays news report I think they back to the red again. Air travellers are tire of all that B.S., I don't think I want to go on board if I have to check my Canon gears. Insurance is no good to me if my camera is damaged at my destination.

rkane wrote:
I work in the Airport Operations Center in Toronto. I do see the resaons for the limitations at this point, I also see the linitations easing in the near future. I feel that this is a knee jerk reaction till better screening procedures are put in place. OH yea no water bottles or gel type liquids alowed on board from Toronto.

How are they going to screen for liquid gels, though, other than hand-searches? That's going to be a PAINFULLY slow process.

Rhys wrote:
I'm looking now to see what ferries go between the UK and US. I can't say flying really appeals to me what with baggage theft etc.

Wasn't one of those ferries called Titanic or something?

The baggage theft thing is vastly over-hyped. I've never had any problems, neither do I know anyone else who has. Surely any professional would have their gear properly insured anyway? My cover includes hire of replacement gear in the event of theft, which may be worth investigating for those considering the options.

But inconvenient how these restrictions may be, consider this. If you've got gear insurance and the gear is stolen, it gets replaced. The same isn't true for life insurance ....

Andy

Insurance is useless when you are travel to another place, especially if your important gears got stolen or lost.

Ex. 1. Your laptop is lost and you're going to an important meeting with a big business deal.

Ex. 2. Your 600mm lense is damaged when you are somewhere in Africa and nearest repair shop is over 1000 miles.

And making a claim may take over a month to get result. Bottomline is I feel safer to have my expensive toys on board with me.

You need to have a proper pro insurance policy for your gear.

DavidP wrote:
rkane wrote:
I work in the Airport Operations Center in Toronto. I do see the resaons for the limitations at this point, I also see the linitations easing in the near future. I feel that this is a knee jerk reaction till better screening procedures are put in place. OH yea no water bottles or gel type liquids alowed on board from Toronto.

How are they going to screen for liquid gels, though, other than hand-searches? That's going to be a PAINFULLY slow process.


And what about committed terrorists that hide bottles of explosive liquids in body cavities? Are they going to do cavity searches on everybody?

DavidP wrote:
rkane wrote:
I work in the Airport Operations Center in Toronto. I do see the resaons for the limitations at this point, I also see the linitations easing in the near future. I feel that this is a knee jerk reaction till better screening procedures are put in place. OH yea no water bottles or gel type liquids alowed on board from Toronto.

How are they going to screen for liquid gels, though, other than hand-searches? That's going to be a PAINFULLY slow process.


During the x-ray process I think they can see ottles of liquid. It would then be hand searched and rejected I think.

The reasons for the new security measures really don't have any bearing on the affect of the new measures. The fact is that these new procedures are in place, and people need to do what they can to protect their equipment. To that end, I will share what insight I have.
In the USA, use the TSA approved locks on your luggage. Supposedly only the TSA can open them. These won't prevent TSA employees from stealing your belongings, but it should make it less likely that other baggage handlers will.
Outside the USA, I think you can still use any locks. Locks can be broken of course, but they may help.
I know for a fact that at London Gatwick, items are being stolen by the baggage handlers inside the airplane cargo holds while they are being loaded. The better the locks, the safer you will be, up to a point. The locks may not be the weakest link. It may be the zipper handles that you are attaching them to.
The other major concern is that your equipment could be damaged by rough handling. All you can do is pack things extra well so they can withstand anticipated impacts.
As far as being allowed extra checked luggage, be aware that the airplane cargo holds only have so much space. With all the extra luggage being checked, the likelyhood of the airplane not having enough room for your suitcase will increase slightly. Your suitcase may not get there when you do.

halie wrote: In the USA, use the TSA approved locks on your luggage. Supposedly only the TSA can open them.

An ASMP member posted on that site that over the past few years he has had his TSA locks simlpy cut off, and that was while travelling domestically.

With all the extra luggage being checked, the likelyhood of the airplane not having enough room for your suitcase will increase slightly. Your suitcase may not get there when you do.

Very true. During an NPR interview, an airline industry spokesman indicated that the aircraft design and baggage procedures are designed for a mix of carry-on and checked baggage. If everyone went to all checked baggage, there simply isn't enough room in the holds.

jjlphoto wrote:

With all the extra luggage being checked, the likelyhood of the airplane not having enough room for your suitcase will increase slightly. Your suitcase may not get there when you do.

Very true. During an NPR interview, an airline industry spokesman indicated that the aircraft design and baggage procedures are designed for a mix of carry-on and checked baggage. If everyone went to all checked baggage, there simply isn't enough room in the holds.


I wonder what would take priority when there is more to go in the holds than will fit on a particular flight: passengers' luggage or air freight? Since air freight is revenue-producing, I'd guess the money-maker.

The bottom line on current baggage restrictions on flights from the UK is is on the DfT website here...

... but effective from 04:30 tuesday 15.08.07 if you read the BAA website? (which conveniently won't link )

35cm (13.5 inches) wide x 45cm (17.5 inches) long x 16cm (6.5 inches) high.

That's the new baggage size.

Essentially that's a laptop or a small camera bag - not both.

I give up on flying. I'm taking the boat.

See, I'd love to take a boat across an ocean or two, but I don't know of anything other than luxury cruises, and that's pretty cost prohibitive. I've heard a lot of people offer up similar sentiments but does anyone have a resource for this kind of travel, or is everyone just being silly?

Ah. You need to get a cabin on a cargo ship. They're about 100 Euros per day. It takes 7 days to cross the Atlantic.