To wonder how people will work on planes?

[KenAdams]

The new rules about no laptops in the cabin seem very restrictive for people who are travelling on business.

AIBU to think it's too restrictive? Surely a laptop bomb anywhere on the plane will cause significant damage?

Newts
True but people will just need to take the decision to either leave them at home or package them as well as they possibly can to avoid damage.

Or (and this is revolutionary, sorry), we STOP accepting that baggage handlers are entitled to damage our stuff, or steal it, and start penalising them when they do. A few civil actions against baggage handlers who throw stuff around, steal or damage others' possessions ought to do it. It's fucking disgusting that they are paid to do a job (move baggage from A to B) and do it without care or attention and yet still get paid. I had a thread yonks ago about flying with a buggy, and was categorically told to buy a new buggy specifically to accommodate this. What the actual fucking fuck? Buy something that I expect to get lost or damaged because others cannot do their job? I think not.

Slight derail, but if laptops etc do have to be checked, this will need to be addressed. Soon.

It's only on the way BACK to the UK from certain countries. A blast in the hold is contained with special reinforced 'boxes' for the luggage.

Would the reinforced boxes contain a fire in the hold from a malfunctioning laptop?

Interview on BBC R4 this morning.
The airline industry is furious because they weren't consulted first.
And more security breaches are more likely to occur airside, due to the thousands of staff who work in cleaning, refuelling, catering etc who are inadequately screened when recruited.

....and yes fatowl I agree, the airports in developing nations are crap at baggage screening and security in general.

I don't think there's a threat at all. I reckon the head of the CIA had to sit next to a toddler who was watching Peppa Pig on an iPad with no headphones for 10 hrs on a flight and thought 'How can this never happen again?'

I saw the travel bod on BBC Breakfast.

There's credible evidence that terrorism-minded criminals are now very competent at making small and sophisticated bombs. One was detonated in the cabin of a flight (?mogadishu) last year, killing the bomber but not bringing the plane down.

So it seems there might be a limitation on how big a bang can be detonated from a small object. So perhaps that's why they're safe in the hold? Any aircrew on here who know about how fires in the hold are dealt with in-flight?

Or maybe they cannot be detonated between cabin and hold? (And perhaps adding a timer just makes it harder to conceal?)

It could be a response to chatter on the dark web, where terrorists communicate and most of the general public are blissfully ignorant of.

fatowl The risks between the airlines are significantly different though. Whilst Malaysia does have links with terrorism, it's nothing like the links the Middle East has.

They have smoke detectors and sprinkler systems in the hold.

I suspect we will be going all El Al in the coming weeks months and actually have bomb roof luggage compartments.

X Ray is likely to pick up the addition of the timer due to the copper in the wires. Don't forget your bag is X-rayed after check in as well as, sometimes, whilst you have it in your possession

The Mogadishu bomb was a laptop, which I actually think was on a timer- as the flight was delayed it detonated too early and hence the flight wasn't high enough for it too blow up the entire aircraft.

That would make sense if all carriers using these airports were affected. But they're not.

They don't all use the same ground staff.

A bit early in the morning for swearing and insults, surely?

newsflash: it's not the same time all over the world.

cantseethewoods That's just not funny.

This has nothing to do with security and everything to do with lining big fat cats pockets... To ban it from certain countries but not the if they fly US Airlines? Yes, I think it's pretty obvious where some of that money came from...

Certain countries have not been included on the UK list because it's all political... Qatar basically owns half of London (OK, that might be an exaggeration but they own ALOT in London), suggesting they are untrustworthy by putting them on the ban list could cause a fallout. The whole ban just doesn't make any sense, the terrorists could easily fly from one of the countries not on the list. It really is quite ridiculous...

To be honest, it is just another way of linking terrorism with Islam and the Middle East. The real terrorists live in gilded palaces...

The real terrorists live in gilded palaces

Ffs. Did those involved in the attacks in Brussels and Madrid and Paris live in gilded palaces?

In regards to the actual OP title - I travel quite a bit, usually long haul, and always take my laptop. I never use it onboard as I can't be bothered quite frankly, but I would never, ever, want to put it in my checked luggage. I may as well just chuck it in the nearest bin when I arrive at the airport for someone to take. It'll save the hassle of someone having to steal it out of my bag, and/or it being destroyed when the suitcase gets roughly thrown around after its checked in.

A blast in the hold is contained with special reinforced 'boxes' for the luggage.

No it's not. I think El Al are the only airline in the world that has bomb proof luggage containers.

True but people will just need to take the decision to either leave them at home or package them as well as they possibly can to avoid damage

Leaving them at home isnt an option though when you need it for work.

I can't believe people are moaning about the inconvenience and theoretical risk of theft when safety is at stake.
I would rather lose my laptop than be blown up.
No, I don't understand the hold/cabin thing either, but I am prepared to go with the experts' view if it makes flying safer.
How can people be so insular, self-centred and have such tunnel-vision?

Kids can read storybooks.

Work can surely stop for a few hours. Real books exist too as does IFE.

Honestly there is too much pandering to kids and too much emhpasis on working 24/7 these days.. time to get back to basics and your safety and that of your family, that is paramount surely.

So which would be worse, not being able to work on a plane or being blown up?

Are there any actual risks of that though? Is the rationale actually based on safety or not?
I think its unlikely.

A quick google suggests reasons why there are differences in the different countries for thee ban.

The UK has banned flights from Lebanon. Google suggests there are no direct flights from Lebanon to the US, therefore there will be a high number of passengers on Beirut-Dubai-US (or Abu Dhabi or Doha in the middle) routes, whereas you can fly directly from Beirut into the UK (not implying that the lebanese are responsible for there ban, but it does suggest reasons). The UAE/Qatar threat to the US may well be due to the connecting flights that available, whereas the UK has the direct flights available so these aren't banned.

Sooner or later it will be easier to cruise to your destination. No baggage restrictions etc.

Possibly quicker too in the long run. That is lighthearted BTW. T may prove true eventually!

But

The authorities are clearly doing this for a very good reason, and if it helps to save even one life, then I don't actually care how many people have to suffer the minor inconvenience of being separated from a screen for a few hours.

If you have to work during the flight, then prepare in advance and use pen and paper. Alternatively, read a book - a proper paper one. Watch the in-flight movie film, do some colouring-in, gaze out of the window, whatever.