Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
BREAKING NEWS: Possible new TSA rules in effect after terror attempt
After yesterdays terrorist bomb attempt on a Northwest Airlines flight, it was only a matter of time until the government came up with new rules designed to "keep us safe". Air Canada has published these rules, though the TSA has not officially released them yet, so it remains a possibility that someone jumped the gun.
The new rules a going to be horrible to deal with - passengers will no longer be allowed to get up out of their seat for the final hour of a flight. You will also be prohibited from accessing your carry-on items during this period or from holding any items in your lap.
This is potentially a big one - it means you can't use your laptop, read a book or magazine, or even grab a toy or bottle of water during the final 60 minutes of your flight. If true - this is a massive inconvenience for all passengers, all based off one terror attempt that should have been prevented if terror watch list measures had been properly followed.
In the coming days we'll most likely hear more from the TSA on these new rules, and whether the "final hour" rule is indeed a new hassle we'll need to deal with. Obviously, we'll keep you updated when we hear more. In the meantime - if you are abroad, and plan to fly to the United States, be prepared for long delays and multiple security screenings.
Chalk this up to another win for the terrorists - even though they (thankfully) did not manage to blow anything up, they will once again forever change the way we travel.
UPDATE: We're hearing rumors that electronics are being banned from international flights traveling to the U.S., and that passengers flying into the US are limited to one handheld bag per person.
UPDATE 2: For those wondering how Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab got past security, the explosive device apparently had no metal parts, and the individual pieces were sewn into Abdulmutallab's underwear.
UPDATE 3: According to a memo from the TSA to US Airways, the TSA has ordered airlines to perform a "pat-down" screening of all passengers on inbound international flights, "concentrating on upper legs and torso." Chris Elliott has the full text of the memo outlining the new security measures.
UPDATE 4: Inflight entertainment has been banned on all international flights.
UPDATE 5: Police take into custody a second person after report of suspicious activity on Delta/Northwest flight 253 from Amsterdam, only two days after the Abdulmutallab incident.
UPDATE 6: The "suspicious activity" by the second person, also a Nigerian, was locking himself inside the airplane's lav. No actual explosive device was discovered on the flight.
UPDATE 7: As of December 28 at 8am EST, electronics are still allowed on international flights, despite reports to the contrary. As of this update, the TSA has not updated its website with anything more specific than,
UPDATE 8: It looks as though the new international flight rules will be in effect through December 30, 2009. It's unclear at this time if they'll remain in effect into 2010.Passengers flying into the United States from abroad can expect to see additional security measures at international airports such as increased gate screening including pat-downs and bag searches. During flight, passengers will be asked to follow flight crew instructions, such as stowing personal items, turning off electronic equipment and remaining seated during certain portions of the flight.
UPDATE 9: Two passengers, "described as Middle Eastern, [who] were acting strangely and talking loudly to each other in a foreign language" were detained yesterday after a flight from Orlando to Phoenix. Questioning and a search of their belongings turned up nothing suspicious, and the men were released.
UPDATE 10: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano admitted this morning that airline security failed in allowing a Nigerian on a terror watch list and allegedly armed with explosives onto a Detroit-bound flight. This comes only 24 hours after her insistence previously that "the system worked."
UPDATE 11: Our inside source in the industry now reports that inflight entertainment has been restored as well as the ability to move about the cabin inside of an hour to landing.













Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
TMThomas Dec 26th 2009 5:12PM
It is obvious that these new rules, if true, were arguable concocted by someone who got all paranoid by this one incident and who has no sense of logic or practicality. Just try and consider what happens if I need to use the lavatory before the landing? 1 hr is a pretty long period of time from that perspective. Will be still be denied to get up? Would I be expected to relieve myself in the seat?! And just tell me what is the point behind passengers not being allowed to access their stuff from under their seats/stowed in the seat back in front of them? How will a handful of flight attendants even enforce this rule in a big plane filled with hundred plus people. If I really want to, I can easily access my carry-on and hold it without the 2/3 attendants even noticing it. And will Air Canada/TSA even bother explaining what specific security risks they can prevent which these proposed measures? They appear to be merely trying to cover for the fact that their airport screening procedures are inefficient by randomly taking away from passengers' inflight freedom.
Steve Dec 28th 2009 8:47AM
Absolutely agree.. We AGAIN are reacting just to react, to provide the illusion of increased security, while providing only irrelevant new restrictions which succeed only at making air travel increasingly less convenient, more expensive, and slower, at a time when our American aviation industry is suffering the most.
It used to be that the average American was just a lemming looking for the government to protect them, but increasingly, people are asking WHY are my freedoms being impacted, WHY is it costing me more, WHY is it taking me longer to get through the airport, and HOW exactly is forbiding me from reading a magazine or going to the bathroom during the last hour of a flight going to provide me more protection from the terrorists?
It seems to me that this plane was saved by quick thinking passengers and crew, and since it is impossible to know ahead of time what every terrorist MIGHT try, that may well be the best solution. I know the solution isn't to stop a toddler from drinking milk during the last hour of the flight... *IF* they're even allowed to carry it on.
Wake up, America - Your government; BOTH parties, has NO WAY to make you 100% safe... It's impossible, so we need to DEMAND to stop giving up rights in the name of safety...
-Steve
http://www.bothsidesarewrong.com
petey Dec 26th 2009 5:22PM
This is just plain idiocy. This doesn't help improve safety at all. And I there was talks that this takes effect only for international flights? Do I need to remember 9/11 flights were ALL domestic flights..
petey Dec 26th 2009 5:24PM
Typo:
And I heard there was talks that this takes effect only for international flights?
Scott Carmichael Dec 26th 2009 5:26PM
At the moment I don't think anyone knows for sure. This is all based off an update from Air Canada, and they do not mention International only.
Jason Dec 26th 2009 9:36PM
Singapore Airlines announced the same new rules for flights bound for the U.S.
http://bit.ly/7ChP1F
I oh so look forward to my next flight to the u.s. in a couple weeks.
Nick Dec 26th 2009 10:16PM
SIA spokesperson: "One hour before the plane lands in a US airport, all passengers must be seated, and should not have any baggage near them or be covered with any blanket. The inflight entertainment system would also be turned off."
This lunacy needs to be stopped. The measures listed above have no impact on enhanced inflight safety in any way. If you really want to eliminate risk, be more efficient at the airport security frisking, but don't impose plain stupid rules inside the plain. That achieves nothing.
Sam Park Dec 27th 2009 2:15AM
Well, I am writing this sitting in the lounge at the Narita airport. All this happened while I was overseas, and I have not heard much about what the fallout was going to be. This is just one more ineffective "measure" thought up by some idiot sitting in an office named Homeland Security - doesn't it sound like the Nazi Fatherland, or the communist Motherland? How can we keep going on with this idiotic notion of "securing" ourselves? These simple minded idiots' foolproof security method would be for us to all fly naked. Remember we couldn't use real butter knives - only plastic ones? Oh, I guess they finally figured that out after a couple of years. I just heard from the next passenger that there was no entertainment system because of the new "rules" on his flight here. How the hell does that help security? You know, US air carriers are not even in the same playing field when it comes to entertainment systems and on board service - I guess this "security" measure should really help them level the playing field finally. Talk about one inept organization conspiring with another....
NJ Dec 27th 2009 2:55AM
Totally agree with what you said Sam Park. These new security measures have no meaning whatsoever. I mean - not allowed to cover your lap with a blanket - really??!! Even a child can see through this joke of a regulation which has no benefit at all. They need to adopt some common sense before people start rejecting air travel thereby pushing this sick industry into further financial trouble.
LA Dave Dec 27th 2009 3:24AM
Well, I am currently waiting for my connection flight to Los Angeles via Paris. It'll be interesting to see what Air France has in store for me on board.
Angeline Dec 27th 2009 12:02PM
What I don't get are the restrictions during the final hour of the flight. If some crazed fanatic wants to blow up the plane they could do it at any point during the flight. I think this last guy just couldn't work up the courage to do it, but knew he had to do it before landing.
Sue Dec 31st 2009 7:43PM
Angeline, you are right. The terrorists will do their business before that last hour of the flight. Who's to say they won't use the bathroom in the first hour to concoct their bomb. Then the TSA will say we cannot use the bathrooms on the plane at all. I guess it would be a good time to buy stock in Depends,because we will all have to wear them.
msbpodcast Dec 27th 2009 8:06PM
Might as well forget about flying and take a train.
The only way we can fly safely is nearly naked and drunk off of our asses or drugged into oblivion.
Civil aviation is a dead issue. Fuggedaboudid... It was nice while we had it but now we don't. Deal with it.
Lets force Amtrack to upgrade their service, tracks and roling stock. We can even do that in the best way that can't be ignored, with our money.
In China they've got a train that gets 250+ miles per hour.
We could/should/would refit the Acela Boston to DC corridor with those trains and move the Acela trains out to regions with less traffic.
That would be fast enough for most people and they'd get to tide in some comfort instead of waiting for hours to sit in uncomfortable, over-priced seats in a tubular tin can which may or may not be late, which may or may not be safe which may or may not have room to take us anyway.
Screw the 'burbs anyway.
Lets move back and make our cities livable again.
jess Dec 27th 2009 9:04PM
you nailed this right on the head. air travel is solving one problem with a highly incongruous solution at the expense of it's PAYING CUSTOMERS. i would take a train any day over a plane, regardless of travel time, if only to assure my comfort. however, this would hinge on amtrak making those changes, because as it stands currently, the airlines practically hold a monopoly on tolerable long-distance travel. but if they want to sacrifice my comfort, time, and patience while i turn over 300+ dollars of my hard-earned money, sorry, no thanks. i'll be driving henceforth.
as for the international flights...well...i'll take my chances crossing the atlantic on a log raft at this point.
loldongz Dec 27th 2009 8:14PM
I wonder what'll happen, if some guy is caught with a stick of dynamite up his rectum...
Seriously, as long as there are people out there willing to give up their lives, there will not be absolute security, ever. And as long as we try, as we are so incredibly afraid, the terrorists will win.
irlandes Dec 27th 2009 9:39PM
I worked for 31 years on avionics electronics. I also flew not a lot, but maybe 100,000 miles in my lifetime. I announced in 1968 that air travel was a passing fad, to the horror of the airline reps who worked with us. Too fragile; too easily crashed. Too easily shut down by weather. If we had spent the money on rail travel that we have spent on air travel, we would be using high speed trains for everything except across the ocean.
My last flight was when the pilots of a twin turbo prop forgot to start the second motor when we left the gate at O'Hare. Several passengers got nervous and when the stewardess passed, I asked why the other motor wasn't running. She admitted she did not know, and a minute after she went out of sight, they started it, thus running an engine start check list at 40 mph on the back taxiways of O'Hare field in the dark. It was obvious they were about to attempt a take-off on one motor. I did write customer relations, who answered she was unable to get an explanation for taxiing without the motor running, and she said she was going to refer the matter to Chief of Operations. Heck, I knew why it wasn't running. They forgot it.
Normally, my trips ran around 1:4. That is, no matter how long the trip was, I could have driven it in four times the total transit time by plane. The best I ever did was a trip from Miami to my home in the Midwest. I ran to the plane to my home town, and got on just as they shut the door. This plane was running like 3 hours late, that is, it had been scheduled several hours earlier, and I got on by the skin of my teeth, so I made it with a 1:7 ratio.
An efficient train system at even 100 miles an hour would only take twice as long, house to house, as air travel. While you wait in the airport for TSA to torture you, the train would be 200 miles gone. And, if it takes 1.5 hours by taxi to an airport, that is 350 miles gone. Add 2 hours at the other end, and that is 550 miles by train from town center to town center. Without even counting airplane travel time.
One important change would need to be made. The old 100 mile work day for train crews would have to be scrapped.
I retired in 1997 and have not taken a plane since. If someone dies, they do the funeral without me, or wait until I get there. Tough cookie.
Just Helpin Out Dec 28th 2009 12:22AM
Just had to comment... Ive been a commercial pilot for 11 years now so I can give you a bit of backgroung on how a "single engine taxi" works. Ive flown the BE-1900D and EMB-120, both turbo props and am currently flying an Airbus 320 series. It is very common, as in almost every day, that I leave the gate with one engine running. ESPECIALLY at an airport as busy as O'Hare. The fuel savings is significant... The only situation where I'd agree that they 'forgot' is if you actually started down the runway and had to taxi off because of the 'oversight'. The time required for an engine to "warm up" before take-off is only 2 minutes for the Airbus and probably shorter for the prop. So starting it on the back taxiways as you say is actually a smart move and an everyday occurrence. Id be happy to answer any other questions you may have as its important for people to have good information.
lmao Dec 28th 2009 9:12PM
Lol, i bet you really thought you were some kind of hotshot reporting this minor oversight... Single engine taxi is standard procedure on most airlines at congested airports.
Do you honestly think you somehow caught a mistake that 2 pilots with countless checklists that cover everything from engine start procedure, to RPM / Oil pressure checks, airspeed and power checks and everything else imaginable somehow missed?
Wow.. you sir need a reality check, take a look in the mirror, you are not the bad*** that you think you are. But hey, i bet it makes a great story: "The Time I Saved the Plane from Disaster" LOlolol
diane Dec 27th 2009 10:55PM
The TSA are idiots and about as efficient as a bag of rocks. I'm not talking about the grunts who do their work and what they are told. I'm talking about that idiot Napolitano and the morons that she directs. Instead of knee jerk stupid reactions that are nothing but a facade we should have had body scanners in place at every airport. I guess Obamass is too busy spending money on pork projects as bribes for his health care bill then to spend a few bucks on truly effective security devices. And how about some bomb sniffing dogs? Most of them are more intelligent and effective than the average TSA administrator. And how about some better intelligence efforts? Even this guys father tried to warn the US. Oh no, its just easier to foist even more stupid restrictions on travelers. With all the incredible technological advances surely there are less primitive ways to deal with screening.
Sasha Dec 28th 2009 5:51AM
I just cannot believe that so many people are so oblivious and careless. We grow in a selfish society, very selfish indeed. Everyone thinks how inconvenient that is for him or her. If your child, parent, brother or sister, or you, was on a flight like this, you would definitely think differently. I believe, that is what "2012" is all about. We are coming to the age where everyone is opposing the rules; people are antagonistic and adverse. No rules, no laws, no order. Anarchy, this is what is going to bring the world down, no any Mayan predictions or mysterious events. Do you really want to live? Those who create the rules, are doing whatever possible to keep you guys safe, and protect your rights to live, but no! the human being is never grateful, and can never be pleased. Can you personally help? No. Do you have any better suggestions? No. People take but do not like to give away. Like if you obey those rules the world is going to come to an end. It is for your safety for God’s sake! It is just few hours inconvenience but in the end of the day you will get there safe and alive. Yes, those rules will not stop the terrorists, but we have to keep trying, we have to! Every little thing is better than nothing!
Or.. the Human, with its oblivion, carelessness, and inconsideration will be heading towards its self-destruction.