Wikipedia has a couple of fun lists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_attacks
In 1970-1972 hijackings were an almost monthly occurrence.
January 1973 is when the FAA started requiring security checkpoints.
There were only 12 US flights hijacked in the 30 years following that.
So I guess the security is useful in general, but where do you stop?
The perfectly secure flight would require everyone to strip naked,
submit to cavity search and full body x-ray, wear an airline provided
gown for the duration of the flight, and put all of their belongings
into a bomb proof cargo hold.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 4/25/2017 1:04:56 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Airplane Carryon Electronics Ban
Went to Cornwall, England, bags went to Tucson.
I realize Cornwall and Tucson sound alike and look alike when printed
on the luggage tag...
Took more than a few days to get them.
From:Andy Trimmell
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 11:01 AM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Airplane Carryon Electronics Ban
Can you imagine a compartment full of laptops of passengers being left
behind like luggage always does? The shear thought of it makes me
cringe. “im sorry sir your laptop was sent to LAX instead of IND, we’ll
deliver it to your house in 3-5 business days”
From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 12:40 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Airplane Carryon Electronics Ban
Yeah I thought I'd read somewhere that they had intelligence about
laptop batteries with explosives packed inside. Not an actual device
on a plane, but someone building it.
I'm not sure if it's worth all the fuss. I feel like someone is always
going to find a way.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]>
To: "af" <[email protected]>
Sent: 4/25/2017 12:15:02 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Airplane Carryon Electronics Ban
That makes sense to me... a laptop battery seems like a pretty
obvious, and simple place to hide explosives.
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]>
wrote:
I am guessing it is a volumetric thing. Laptop batts are big enough
to do some damage if they really are an explosive. Hard to tell the
difference with an X ray machine if you do it right.
Your cell phone likely has a similar or greater amount of processing
power and communications ability. It has to be volumetric based.
Are they blocking kindle/ipad/fire type devices?
From: Forrest Christian (List Account)
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:01 AM
To: af
Subject: [AFMUG] OT: Airplane Carryon Electronics Ban
We've been remarkably politics free, and I want to keep it that way.
I know the answer to what I'm about to ask could devolve toward that
direction. I'd prefer we don't go down that path.
What I'm curious about is this:
The US is implementing various bans on electronics larger than a cell
phone being carried onboard the aircraft into the cabin. Today it's
limited to a few countries, but it sounds like it's going to get
expanded greatly. Note that this doesn't mean you can't take say a
laptop with you, but instead that it has to be checked so it's in the
luggage hold instead of accessible to you through the flight.
So the question I have is what threat this is supposed to eliminate?
The obvious concern is some sort of explosive making it's way into the
passenger cabin, but a wireless trigger for an explosive device is so
simple to rig nowadays that I don't think the physical separation of a
potential terrorist from their explosive is going to make a bit of
difference.
I can think of several other potential threats, but with the way that
they're implementing this ban, I sure can't see how any of them are
affected. Especially since you can apparently carry your larger
electronics all of the way to the gate, then have them gate check them
to be returned to you airside at your destination.
Does anyone have any ideas what threat they might be trying to
eliminate? Personally, I'm far more concerned about the risk of a
lithium battery fire in the cargo hold....
--
Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
[email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com
<http://www.packetflux.com/>
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>
<http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux>
