Hmmm? Isn't it? Banana?

Travel

Marvellous. As soon as I plan to travel back to England, there is a security alert.

Fuckflaps.

I have decided to fly back next Thursday (arriving Friday morning) for a week and this has created some turmoil in my decision process. With all this talk of having to put everything electronic in the hold, do I take my MacBook? I have seen the gorillas that load and unload the planes, and the best packing in the world can't help a laptop that falls off the side of a conveyor belt, can it? Even if it doesn't actually dent it or anything, the shock can't be good for it.

I am thinking I won't bother, as it goes. After all, both places I am staying for any period have internet access (admittedly both are dial-up - yuck) and I do only really need it for social emails. It's not like I am dependent on it for business or anything. But there is something fundamentally galling about having something that I have become so dependent on placed in the 'risk it or not have it' category. But regardless, not having it for a week is better than not having it because it is smashed, or worse, having it develop a loose connection that cannot be reliably proven to be due to the air travel... That'd suck arse.

I suppose that without the laptop, I could travel considerably lighter - one week of clothing + ipod + camera and spare card. It would preclude my need to carry a backpack if there is no way that I can take it on the plane with me on the way back, I guess. It would be very inefficient to carry a case big enough to take the backpack just for the way back, after all.

What I don't understand is the x-ray checking process of such things as these. Surely if a laptop is x-rayed, you have the potential to tell if it is genuine? Also, why is this done manually? Why not have a data file of an x-ray image of the machine (manufacturer provided perhaps?) which could allow the comparison of the image by computer for anomalies? I never understood how an operator could look at an X-ray of a laptop and have any possibility of assessing its correct function. Surely computer analysis and matching, with further investigations of (a much smaller percentage) anomalies (turning on the laptop and the like) would be more efficient? And doubtless more accurate in terms of assessing the equipment.

The x-ray data set could be added to by any manufacturer, or from a manufacturer supplied control sample, for any electronic device common in air travel - ipods, personal CD players, radios, organisers etc. It is in the interests of the manufacturer ("approved for air travel"?) and in the interests of the airlines - better security checking from a more detailed knowledge base.

In addition, if laptops and electronics are potentially dangerous, then surely the extra investigation and ability to individually examine the contents of hand luggage is better than just throwing it in the hold? You could slap a machine with a timer or a pressure sensor to initiate a device, and it is much less likely to be discovered than one in the hand luggage.

It all seems like knee jerk "be seen to be doing something" to me. If laptops, phones and ipods are really that dangerous, why would they be allowed on the plane at all. It's not like timers and remote triggering is completely unheard of, is it?

I think I will be sending my Macbook for its repair and battery replacement when I am in England. Much safer there than in Ug the Plane Packer's hands, I suspect.

posted by Brock @ Friday, August 11, 2006