Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I find it real interesting UK didn't add Qatar or UAE to the list. Both of those nations have a large amounts of their nationals who own homes in the UK and frequently vacation there. loll

Still think this ban is unnecessary and creating a headache. These are 12+ hour flights. They should at least allow tablets.

And why no cameras?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Smells like more BS from the camp of Dear Leader Trump...

But hey, who knows, maybe DHS isn't lying and there is "new intelligence" that makes this legitimately necessary.
Oh puuhlease give it up with the anti-Trump rhetoric. Would you have made this comment if DHS under the Obama administration had introduced such measures?

Aren't you glad and reassured this administration is taking action on new intelligence, to keep us safe?
 
From the news story I listened to, questions involved why the direct flights were involved. It would take no brains to just use connecting flights to circumvent the ban. Also by forcing all those laptops & their batteries in one location, they were making an exceptional large bomb on a plane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Aren't you glad and reassured this administration is taking action on new intelligence, to keep us safe?

It's only good intelligence when it benefits Trumps narrative, otherwise it's fake news. The last thing anyone thinks of when it comes to this administration is reassurance.


As far as the actual implementation, I think it's a great idea. But bad for those who travel for business purposes.
 
Oh puuhlease give it up with the anti-Trump rhetoric. Would you have made this comment if DHS under the Obama administration had introduced such measures?

Aren't you glad and reassured this administration is taking action on new intelligence, to keep us safe?

No, I wouldn't have, because DHS typically didn't do stupid sh*t at the direction of President Obama.
 
It's only good intelligence when it benefits Trumps narrative, otherwise it's fake news. The last thing anyone thinks of when it comes to this administration is reassurance.....
With all due respect, speak for yourself. The corruption, lies, deceit, and incompetence that have gone on under previous administrations is mindboggling. I find it refreshing to hear the truth for a change.
[doublepost=1490135556][/doublepost]
No, I wouldn't have, because DHS typically didn't do stupid sh*t at the direction of President Obama.
We have no way of knowing whether this measure is, as you put it 'stupid sh*t'. Time will tell if this was warranted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: webbuzz
Really very odd. Family of 5 with huge smartphones will be fine - one person with a Kindle is a no-no. That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Maybe there genuinely good intelligence that would explain it if they could say, I guess?! But it's hard to imagine how this really achieves anything that bad guys couldn't work around quite easily. Well I hope it stops anything bad it's aimed at stopping anyway, however inexplicable it seems.
 
Really very odd. Family of 5 with huge smartphones will be fine - one person with a Kindle is a no-no. That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Maybe there genuinely good intelligence that would explain it if they could say, I guess?! But it's hard to imagine how this really achieves anything that bad guys couldn't work around quite easily. Well I hope it stops anything bad it's aimed at stopping anyway, however inexplicable it seems.

Exactly, this is so specific, and so targeted that I find plausible that they have some good intel about this. And other nations are also joining or thinking of joining which means that there is something going on.
 
More nonsensical security theatre from the Drumpf administration and the department of Homeland Insecurity. This is what you get when you let fools run things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
So consumer electronics packed with explosives are safer in the cargo hold? Huh?
Yes. In hold, inside luggage, surrounded by other luggage or in luggage container. In the cabin the laptop could be held against skin of aircraft or window and exploded. Explosion inside luggage in hold would be less likely in all probability to pierce aircraft skin.

We are talking about explosive the size of battery. This is not a large amount. Especially as some of the space would still need battery to power laptop when security checks that it is functional.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda
NO Tweet from Trump.

This is NOT a Trump action, otherwise he would be all over it, claiming how he is stopping Radial Islamist from blowing up airplanes, etc, etc.
Trump loves take credit for everything big, and this is big.

The fact he is silent shouts he does not want to take credit because some it affects places he does big business with (but allows action to play safe).


What Trump does NOT do that says as much as what he does do.

 
So does this mean I can now check all of my camera batteries rather than being required to bring them onboard in my backpack?
 
So does this mean I can now check all of my camera batteries rather than being required to bring them onboard in my backpack?
Are you flying direct from those particular countries, on those particular air carriers. You do realize this is very specific to non stop flights from limited locations to US and probably Great Britain.
 
There is something strange about this ban. A tablet battery does not have enough volume to hold a deadly amount of PETN. Terrorist organizations, unlike the lone wolf, are not interested in killing 6 people and blowing a hole in the fuselage.
Pan Am 103 was crashed by a PETN/RDX bomb, detonated by timer or barometric device, in a Toshiba boombox, with an initial 20" hole expanding to remove the aircraft flight deck. Very unlucky placement. Anywhere else could have been survivable. I do not recall an estimated weight being published.
This is a cover for something else.
Re some previous posts: Baggage holds are pressurized. Fire extinguishers are installed but not likely to deal with an intense Lithium Ion Battery fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Are you flying direct from those particular countries, on those particular air carriers. You do realize this is very specific to non stop flights from limited locations to US and probably Great Britain.

A plane is still a plane. If this ban shows that lithium batteries can actually be place in checked luggage, then it's fine on any other plane, too.
 
Well, at least they got Saudi Arabia this time around.

Yep. Saudi = birthplace of Islamic Jihadism and birthplace of 9-11 and Al-Qaeda.


But I already know the result. All the rich Saudi billionaire businessmen (there are tons of them) will howl in protest, then they will bribe the Trump administration, and then Trump White House will eventually exempt Saudi Arabia once more.
 
As a Marine, please explain how having these bomb-packed devices in the cargo hold makes anyone safer.

Speculation on my part, but someone probably figured out how to make a bomb out of a lithium ion battery with what would be available to her or him while sitting on a passenger airplane. So you wouldn't need to bring the device yourself. You could hijack the plane and use any device anyone brought on board.

So I don't think the concern is someone hiding a bomb in a tablet or laptop. I think it is someone being able to use a tablet or laptop battery to make a bomb once on the aircraft.

Allowing smartphones was a compromise. They figured it would completely end relations with these countries if they tried to do that and that the threat from a smartphone battery wasn't as great as from are larger battery.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.