New Security Checks

[Pookie]

I would hazard someone made a typo at BA.

[steph_goodrum]

That seems a bit odd because if the others are going to allow you to take a device onboard when you can't switch it on then what's the point of the check? I assume they will let you travel but hold onto the device but even that approach seems to have flaws.

All this isn't actually new and I recall a similar process a few years ago when there were much more frequent secondary security checks just before you actually boarded the aircraft and it does still happen occasionally before this latest move. I would expect these checks to operate in the same way and, while there will be many more of them, not everybody will be subject to it. I think you'd be crazy to have a device that you can't switch on but I just don't see the airlines and airport security being able to cope with checking every passenger's individual devices. "When asked" seems to be the key phrase.

Christmas before we had a bit of hassle when boarding at Gatwick as they had changed our seats and moved us upstairs so we got to our seats, having the steward taking our bags off us because the overhead locker isnt big enough upstairs for them and stored them. We'd just sat down and got comfy when somebody came up to us from the gate check area and siad he was really sorry but as they had been changing our seats and busy with that they had not noticed that we had been "pre selected" for random extra security check , so we had to collect our bags and go all the way back to check in area and have them checked etc. We were told that when flying to the USA when the passenger list is sent they are given a list of names they have to show they have screened as well as their own random selection. When we got back to our seats (they did escort us both ways with a cheery "excuse me VIPs coming through" so we didnt have to stand in the line waiting to board again there was more fuss because I dant taken my coat down with me and there were great debates whether we'd have to take it back. (Didnt in the end). They said it' just there waying of throwing in another random way to catch anything untoward, but I wonder what the chance of them actually picking the right name "at random" would be?

[floridadreamvilla.co.uk]

That's not what I said. Other carriers will not let you take a device on board that won't switch on, but may let you travel, although you could well be subject to further questioning.

That seems a bit odd because if the others are going to allow you to take a device onboard when you can't switch it on then what's the point of the check?

[Katys Grandad]

That's not what I said. Other carriers will not let you take a device on board that won't switch on, but may let you travel, although you could well be subject to further questioning.

No, I did understand what you were saying and my second sentence qualified what you have selectively quoted from my post.

It seems to me that BA aren't taking any chances at all with devices (or their owners) that can't be shown to be OK by powering them up. As you say, the others seem to be prepared to make a judgement on allowing passengers with or without their device onto that particular flight dependent upon the individual circumstances. While it seems a little harsh at first sight, I think BA are probably doing it right and at least as a fellow passenger I might feel a bit more secure. Any deviation from that must, however slightly, have the potential to compromise overall security.

I don't think BA have made it fully clear what the position of others whom are traveling with the individual who might be prevented from boarding is. In my experience, they normally don't like others to hang around while the secondary checks are made and usually expect them to board so they might not even be aware of what's happened. I can see some problems with large groups where the person at the back of queue is selected and denied boarding.

[floridadreamvilla.co.uk]

Very good . I always find it's much better to just quote the part of a post that is relevant to my reply than quote whole posts as anything other than that and I'd be accused of selectively quoting, which I'd obviously not want to do [msnscared]. I'm still working out why you even put that sentence I quoted in my post above as it's so obvious that was not what I was saying, so why even bother to mention it.

Let's get the discussion back on topic please .

No, I did understand what you were saying and my second sentence qualified what you have selectively quoted from my post

[cash]

wonder what would happen if you bought something electrical in one of the airport shops such as an I PAD or even a phone which I doubt would have any life in it and then be told at the gate you cant take it with you as it wont switch on ??????

[Katys Grandad]

This is being handed to BA's customers from today:


Dear Customer

We have been informed by the US Government of additional security regulations for customers flying from London to the United States.

All US-bound customers are asked to arrive in good time for the various stages of their journey including check-in, main security search areas and at the boarding gate.

Although there will be an increased level of searches, the main change to existing policies is that customers with any electronic devices (mobile telephones, tablets, e-books, laptops etc) may be required to demonstrate that they are powered up and can be used.

Any customer who is unable to deomonstrate that their devices are functioning, will not be allowed to fly to the US on their scheduled flight.

If you are connecting to a US-bound flight through any London airport the please do all you can to ensure that you do not use up all the power on your electronic device on your first flight.

There will be limited charging facilities at London's airports and your devices' plug/power supply may not be compatible with the UK's power network.

There are no changes to how customers can use their personal electronic devices while on board the aircraft.

We apologise if these extra seraches lead to any flight delays but the safety and security of our flights will always be our over-riding priority.

While travelling we advise that you keep checking our website for the very latest information.

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

Yours faithfully

Customer Service Manager.


Nothing really new in that but it at least confirms what BA are doing and any thoughts that they might have knee-jerked with their strict policy are shown to be unfounded.

[Katys Grandad]

wonder what would happen if you bought something electrical in one of the airport shops such as an I PAD or even a phone which I doubt would have any life in it and then be told at the gate you cant take it with you as it wont switch on ??????

Covered in SDJ's post 11 above I think. I'll bet Dixons are really chuffed with all this.

[Laurel Oak]

Looks like Virgin are taking a different view to BA. They say :

"Customers may be asked to turn on personal electronic or battery powered devices in order to demonstrate how they work. If, when requested, you are unable to turn your device on, you will not be able to travel with your device".

Looks like you will just lose your device.

Can you put electronic devices such as kindles in hold luggage ? I believe you could prior to the recent announcement.

[E. Cosgrove]

I think you can but I wouldn't do it, too easy to be "acquired" when your luggage is is opened for a random check. That happened to my camera the one and only time I put it into my case