this appears to be a temporary measure in response to last week's events. i imagine that before its expiration on 30-dec-2009 that it will be replaced by a refined and more permanent security directive.
i think we can expect interactions at security checkpoints and at boarding gates to be inconsistent while things get sorted out.
it will help everyone if we try to be patient and respectful towards everyone we interact with.
This toilet restriction stuff may lead to a surge in Depends sales. I have no idea if they would have been of any use to the poor fellow who had explosive diarrhea from food poisoning though. What a choice he was faced with: run to the toilet and cause an incident, or poop in the aisle and cause an incident, or poop his pants and cause an incident. Now that last one you might think wouldn't have been so bad, but strange odors on a plane with everyone on hair trigger? Anyway you slice it this had no easy solutions.
gmanedit makes a valid point about people peeing in their seats. My speculation is that the airlines will not be doing such a thorough job inspecting the seats (I have often found trash in the seat pouch) and so it will happen that people will be sitting on pee soaked chairs. Now, I don't think that generally people will state they pee'd the seat when it happens because:
The airlines will act as if this isn't an issue and not do anything unless a peson complains. I expect that the actions the airlines will take, if any are going to be:
- They are embarrassed
- They are afraid they will be billed
- They are angry with the Airlines
- Offer a barrier to the passenger to place on the seat
- Offer a new cushion
- Offer a new seat (if available)
What I think they will assiduously avoid is testing the seats for wet spots, as discovering such could delay the flight turn around time. Also, I can see people intentionally peeing in their seats upon sitting down for a free upgrade to first class. Airline travel is getting flushed down the loo. :p
I have a very low confidence in the practices of most airlines and find the security at airports to be an ineffective imposition that does nothing in terms of real security and is mostly a nuisance for decent people. In general, I find the system suspect, and contemptible. The error of being politically correct as opposed to effective remains a mainstay of a rather expensive and ultimately ineffective security sideshow.
The model I would suggest is the one used by the safest airline in the world: El Al. They know their passengers. Background checks are run, names are compared to intelligence, they know who is sitting on that plane. Maybe they can take over things here? :rolleyes:
We'll see what many of you have to say when a terrorist blows up a plane. USA (not Canada) is a target and protecting the public is a complex issue. Most of you on this thread seem have only your own narrow interests to consider.
I disagree, PM4HIRE. I don't think anyone is suggesting that security be compromised to increase comfort and flexibility in travel, but rather the frustration is over the inadequacy of the current system which seems to be at least tacitly ineffective in stopping terrorists while the TSA harasses old ladies in an effort to appease political concerns that they should appear not discriminate. I think we can all agree that security measures are needed, but further than that, for the taxes spent, many feel that the return has been abysmal.
Originally Posted by PM4HIRE
My position is that profits and politics are taking a front seat to security and safety and I would like to see that changed. Less security theater and more actual security. The best way I know of has been the El Al method of vetting passengers thoroughly before they ever set foot on a plane, weeks ahead of departure. It works. Making people hold their pee not only doesn't, but is ultimately counterproductive.
The poor state of airline security and safety has led me to drastically reduce my air travel. It's a sad state of affairs when Amtrak starts looking attractive. :rolleyes:
Since when are Tom Bihn customers experts on airline security issues? My point is that "it is what it is so deal with it". Times like these you need to be alert and flexible, as opposed to thinking you know and control all the variables in this situation.
The backlash was so great against the in-flight rules that many have already been changed.
The TSA now says you can get up during the last hour of flight but must remain seated when the cabin crew insists on it. (The reason for the one hour rule, believe it or not, is because they were afraid if a plane was blown up, debris would fall on a populated area. They also realized people can tell when a plane starts to descend.)
The in flight entertainment system including GPS navigation can now be turned back on. (see above.)
Some foreign airports are still restricting how much carry on you take.
The U.S. government is finally admitting, after stating yesterday that the system worked, that they may have botched this one.
Extra searches on the ground will continue.
Luckily, this knee jerk reaction, like the one after the shoe bomber, is ending.
More security on the ground is understandable. But if they do a good job on the ground, why do they have to treat all passengers like possible terrorists?
The reason is simple: Most people running these government agencies, regardless of which party is in power, are political apppointees who are owed a favor by the President for helping them get elected. They're not really qualified to do the job.
I'm not one to roll over, play dead and follow blindly what the government says. They are not doing what's in the best interest of the people, they are doing what's in the best interest of getting themselves re-elected. And if it's security theater that works, then we get security theater.
And you are not an expert on airline security?
No, but I listened to interviews with people who are and have said most of the in-flight rules the TSA initiated this weekend were ridiculous.
These are people who have spent much of their adult life in the law enforcement/security/intelligence fields. Not the political appointees running the TSA and Homeland Security.
If you wish to believe everything the government tells you, go ahead. I prefer to think independently. I prefer to listen to real experts and not politicians.
I think that the frustration of this past week is that some of the measures seemed draconian or bizarre, or at the minimum, were not explained well or at all. There was much confusion over the 1-hour rule, and even with the new suggestion of wanting to avoid a crash over populated areas, I'm still skeptical - surely it's not always that only the last hour of flight is over cities.
I've read in many places that maybe we should copy El Al. First, it's not only El Al, but every airline that operates out of Israel, including United, Delta (at one time, not sure about now), and Lufthansa. None of them has had a major security incident in many years.
Second, security procedures there are extremely extensive, and I don't think are practical or scalable to the travel volume in the US, or many countries. In Israel during the time of suicide bombings a few years ago, you even get wand-ed going into shopping malls and supermarkets, and it's just not something we can do here.
The one thing I wish we would do away with is the shoe check. It's probably the most inconvenient and slowest step in security check, but for some reason, it's not done in Israel, despite the intense scrutiny they apply to everything else. Whatever technology they employ to eliminate the shoe check, I wish we would bring it to the US.
Hopefully things will have calmed down for our trip to Seattle in June.
I have prepared myself and have all the electronic and camera items in clear TB organizers. Also a snake charmer for the chargers, etc.
I'll section off the electronics into the Ruck's sack and medium cafe bag. I'll keep these bags separate going through screening. Then, I will put them in my Ego as a carry on.
I use the Ruck's sack and medium cafe bag as a combo daypack during outings. The Ruck's sack carries jackets,rain gear, etc. The cafe bag is used to carry things I need to get to quickly. The partenership works out quite well. Plus I can carry the Ruck's sac or cafe bag only depending on my needs.
And the Ego is available if I need more room than the combo Ruck's sac and cafe bag.
Unfortunately, there is only one group of world citizens causing the problem. They need to be profiled, not someone's grandmother.
No more carry on bags
Well, regardless of we personally think of how our society should or should not deal with terrorism, the reality is there will be no more one-bag/carry on travel for flights from Canada to the US (unless you can stuff all your travel items into a laptop bag) for the intermediate future.
Update to Security Measures
As a result of a terrorist incident on Northwest Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on December 26, 2009, additional security measures were put in place at Canada's airports for flights to the United States.
On December 28, Transport Canada put in place enhanced security measures for passengers on flights bound for the United States. Effective immediately, US bound passengers are not allowed to bring carry on bags into the cabin of the aircraft, with some exceptions. Passengers may carry with them the following items: medication or medical devices, small purses, cameras, coats, items for care of infants, laptop computers, crutches, canes, walkers, containers carrying life sustaining items, a special needs item, musical instruments, or diplomatic or consular bags.
What's happening for domestic flights within the US?
Hmm, well I guess I should have bought that Federation of Planets Diplomatic Pouch I saw at a Star Trek Con when I was in High School. :p
Originally Posted by ozone
I wonder though, if one puts say a CPAP machine in their carry-on, with all their other stuff, does that exempt the bag and allow transport in cabin? I know they are exempt, but they generally come in their own case for transport. What if the machine was placed into one's regular carry-on bag? More a point of curiosity as I will not be traveling by air soon. I have been looking at Amtrak though, and am considering building a vacation around a USA RailPass. That looks like it might be a fun way to travel, see the country, etc. Anyone ever travel Amtrak? Ever use a RailPass? Any feedback on such? Tips? Ideas?
As far as U.S. domestic flights, there are no changes to the carry-on rules. The only difference is increased screening on the ground.
I believe the "no carry on" rule put in place by the Canadian government is only temporary. (Westjet's statement about it says the rules are in place until Thursday.) It may be that there are so many flights from Canada to the U.S. that Canada can't mobilize the manpower fast enough for the extra screenings. With no carry-ons, the lines will move faster. (This is just a guess on my part.)
Many short haul flights from Canada into the U.S. are being canceled. The delays are extensive.
I am reminded of a very nice statement I once heard: "You [modern] people will never know the pleasure of traveling. Sure you may have the pleasure of arriving, but not traveling."
That is a great observation. Thanks for sharing it. :)
Originally Posted by Akilae