Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

U.S. flights without laptops? Unlikely

Domestic airlines would fight measures that would turn off its lucrative business passengers, experts say.

By JEAN HELLER
Published August 11, 2006

	[Times photo: Ken Helle]
	Tampa International Airport: Lines backed up Thursday at Airside C when security was tightened after the reported terrorist plot to destroy several airliners in flight with liquid explosives was broken up in Britain. Full coverage: Fighting terror in the air
	[AP photo]
	Airline passenger Anton Gerasimov takes a drink of his champagne Thursday before boarding a flight to Russia at San Francisco International Airport. Travelers were asked to dump all liquids.
	NEW RULES Liquids are banned from carry-on luggage and cannot be taken through security checkpoints. That includes drinks, toothpaste, perfume, shampoo, hair gel, suntan lotion and similar items. Drinks purchased in the airport cannot be carried onto flights. Baby formula and medications will be allowed but must be presented for inspection at security checkpoints. All shoes must be removed and placed on an X-ray belt for screening. Passengers traveling to the United Kingdom should contact their airline for information about extra security measures. Laptop computers, mobile phones and iPods were among items banned on British flights.

Would American business executives fly if they couldn't take their laptops and cell phones?

Would kids behave themselves on long flights without the distraction of electronic games?

Would anybody be willing to pack valuables such as DVD players, iPods and cameras in checked baggage?

These were questions travelers across the country were asking Thursday, hours after British officials broke up a plot to bomb airliners en route from the United Kingdom to the United States.

The perpetrators planned to carry aboard a combination of liquids that are harmless by themselves but together create an explosive cocktail, authorities said.

As a result, a major change in security rules greeted early-morning passengers arriving at airports across the United States. They were not allowed to carry on board liquids, gels, ointments and pastes.

Britain went further, banishing carry-on bags, laptop computers, cell phones, iPods and other electronics from airline cabins on flights originating within that country.

There was speculation that these additional restrictions could spread to the United States.

Aviation experts say Americans proved after the terrorist attacks of 2001 that they are adaptable. While they might grumble at more extensive security, they will get used to it - even if it means giving up their electronic appendages.

But at least one industry expert said the airlines will never let it go that far.

"They'll tear out their galleys, turn them into onboard offices and rent computers before they take laptops away from passengers completely," said Tom Parsons, founder and CEO of Houston's bestfares.com. "They're not going to do anything to discourage their frequent business passengers."

Stuart Klaskin, an international aviation consultant from Miami, said he spends 150 to 200 days a year on airplanes and gets most of his work done on his laptop in the air.

"I haven't checked a bag in 20 years, and I'd hate to start now, especially if I have to put my laptop in it," Klaskin said. "But at the end of the day, if that's the only way to take them along, we'll adapt. We can't stop traveling because we can't take our carry-ons into the cabin."

For now, the only new restrictions facing domestic and most international passengers are the bans on liquids. The exceptions are those international travelers who will be returning to the United States on flights that originate or stop in the United Kingdom.

For instance, when British Airways Flight 2166 left Tampa International Airport on Thursday evening for London, passengers were allowed to take carry-ons aboard as well as their electronic gear.

On the return flight, they will have to pack it all in checked bags.

Tampa passengers were surprised but generally not angry about the new security and delays of up to 95 minutes.

"Whatever security measures they want to take, I'm not as concerned about my lip gloss as I am about blowing up," said Aubrie Kerr, 20, who was flying from Tampa to Houston.

The new requirements seemed most frustrating to parents traveling with young children.

Meagan Dorton, 22, flew to Tampa from Kansas City, Mo., with her 21-month-old daughter, Lydia. Before boarding, Dorton had to throw out Tylenol she packed for Lydia, who is teething. She also dumped out Lydia's juice.

She was glad not to have to give up all of her carry-on luggage.

"I wouldn't like that, especially traveling with a kid," she said.

Parsons, of bestfares.com, said Americans would never tolerate the sort of restrictions the British have created or the multiple interviews, searches and baggage checks El Al passengers undergo in Israel.

"We're a fast-food economy," Parsons said. "We get irritated when we're told to take our shoes off."

If the U.S. government attempts to impose restrictions like the British now have, the airlines will fight them, he said.

"I would expect the airlines to push back hard," Parsons said. "They don't want air marshals on board anymore because they're taking up revenue seats. You think they're going to tolerate anything that deters the business travelers who pay top-dollar fares?"

Klaskin said he doesn't expect the tighter restrictions to spread, and he thinks they delays will ease.

"The hassle we've seen today will sort itself out pretty quickly," he said. "It only happens until people get used to the new routine. And at some point down the road, the screening apparatus is going to get enough better that people will be able to take along the necessities in the cabin."

Parsons and Klaskin agreed that the success in thwarting the plot is cause to feel safer.

"We don't have the world's best security or anything close to it," Klaskin said. "But it seems we're doing a pretty good job getting in front of the bad guys. The British authorities stopped this thing. The system worked."

[Last modified August 11, 2006, 01:40:39]