01 JUN 2017: All the chatter of late about widening the banishment of “anything larger than a smartphone” from aircraft cabins, reminded me of a conversation I had a couple of years ago with a former El Al airport security executive. By virtue of living under the constant threat of attack, the Israeli flag carrier probably knows more about effective aviation security than the rest of the industry put together.

We had been discussing the US Federal Air Marshall (FAM) programme, something he described as, “a totally ineffective and extremely expensive charade.” At the time, the US $900 million per annum programme managed to put FAM’s – who always work in pairs – on about one percent of all US flights. But it was what he said next that really stuck with me.

He explained how, among other measures that, “for security reasons,” he wouldn’t discuss, El Al screens 100 percent of airfreight shipments – even those from ‘known shippers’. This is done before loading by effectively ‘baking’ every consignment in a special simulator, a bombproof chamber that mimics the various triggers that can be used to detonate a bomb in flight. These include things like air pressure, temperature and even the sound from the aircraft’s engines, which increases greatly on takeoff and landing. As he put it, “Spending all that money on meaningless measures in the passenger cabin instead of improving the level of security on what goes in the belly underneath it, is a cruel joke.”

Chillingly, he then added, “Let’s face it, if someone gets an explosive device into the airplane’s hold, the FAM’s are just two more names on the fatality list.”

So, against the backdrop of these words, let’s consider for a moment the Department of Homeland Security’s notion of moving any electronic devices bigger than a smartphone into the baggage compartment on all European services. The current ban on iPads and laptops affects about 350 flights per week from the Middle East and North Africa: If it were to be extended to all US – Europe services it would impact almost 400 flights per day!

In a nutshell, it makes no sense. The rush to banish laptops and tablets from the cabin is based on the fear that they could in theory be used to conceal explosives. This is true – just like all the other things that have caused previous bouts of airborne paranoia like shoes, underwear, bras, breast implants and any gel or liquid in more than a three-ounce container. In the latter case, one can carry on four three- ounce containers, just not one of 12 ounces! In this case of Federal ‘laptopophobia’ however, banishing all those lithium-ion batteries to the hold, only serves to transform a small terror-driven risk into a very real, much larger, every day danger.

Perhaps Homeland Security should read the Scientific American article from December 2014, which stated, “Earlier this year, the FAA also expressed concerns about transporting lithium-ion batteries in aircraft. Consumer batteries like those in laptops and cellphones could pose an explosion risk should a thermal runaway occur when batteries are packed close together, tests showed.” One should also note the reference to “laptops and cellphones” – and this was a couple of years before the Samsung Galaxy Note 7’s lithium-ion batteries took to demonstrating the dangers of spontaneous combustion!

But outside of the less than convincing safety concerns, this kind of initiative, if enacted, would have a lot of far-reaching complications.

Between 60 and 90 percent of long-haul passengers are estimated to take tablets and laptops on board with them. So, aside from the fact that these devices are used on board for entertainment and/or work, banishing them to checked-baggage would create some complex logistical nightmares for passengers and carriers alike.

• The airlines’ most cherished, high-yielding transatlantic customer is the road warrior who travels with a wheelie and a briefcase. Even on three or four night trips, these people don’t check bags! And even if they did, they’d never dream of putting their precious laptop in there for fear of it being smashed or simply never being seen again.
• Mandatory checking of laptops and the additional baggage count it will create will upset the entire ground-handling applecart: More baggage handlers, slower baggage delivery times and with it, extended aircraft turn times. Ka-ching, Ka-ching!
• If forced to check a bag, the road warrior is going to figure they might as well throw in an extra suit, sweater and pair of shoes – in fact make that two sweaters for extra laptop padding.
• Heavier average bags means higher takeoff weights, which means greater fuel burn, which means higher operating costs and higher fares.
• Airlines have been steadily moving away from expensive, high maintenance, inflight entertainment systems as more and more passengers bring their own IFE along with them. Oops!
• And if passengers cannot bring their own computing power on board are the airlines going to be expected to supply substitutes? The cost and logistics of that don’t bear thinking about.

So, other than that, it’s really not a bad idea. And as was pointed out in an earlier article, why not extend it to US domestic flights as well? If Americans are the supposed target, there’s guaranteed to a much higher concentration of them on a Buffalo to Baltimore flight than any trip over the Atlantic.

Oh yes, if such a crazy ban were to be imposed, for the business traveller there is of course one more possible outcome. Video-conferencing is pretty darned good these days!