No cameras coming back to the USA via Delta (Page 3): Ok Elliott, First, while it looks like a false alarm, the U.S. gov. is at least considering expanding such a ban to include...

GregWCIL Loc: Illinois

Ok Elliott,

First, while it looks like a false alarm, the U.S. gov. is at least considering expanding such a ban to include European countries.

We are going to Africa (and hopefully back) this summer. Our flights connect through Europe. (I'm very glad I didn't choose the cheapest flights which were through Dubai.) So I share your concerns.

I have looked at Pelican cases and researched them at length. I would feel very safe about my equipment as relates to physical damage. (The previous poster talking about using wire tires in addition to TSA locks had a good idea.) In terms of theft protection, I wouldn't be too worried either. Odds of theft are very slim and I have good insurance. Literally if I call them they give me approval on the phone so I could get replacements (or rent) right away.

Some of the posters here seem to be a little myopic in their views. The idea I wouldn't keep checking exotic (to me) places off of my bucket list just because I have to check my camera is just silly. Hell anything you do after you get out of bed each morning has risks. We insure those we don't want to cover ourselves. And the idea that a Pelican style case invites theft was likely made by someone who doesn't travel much. I've seen hundreds of them come through the luggage carousels. I'm sure they contain a variety of expensive equipment. Others here commented they would hate to travel some place and have their camera gear lost ahead of vacation. I would to, but the proposed ban is only on flights INTO the U.S.

I do have some questions yet about Pelican cases unrelated to security. First, I've seen camera backpack reviews (I use a backpack now) that show putting the full pack inside a Pelican case for travel. I wonder if that is enough padding. I looked at a Pelican case at a camera store last week and I would have no qualms about shipping things using the Pelican foam padding.
Second, once you go the Pelican case route you are somewhat inviting carry-on problems even on flights that might allow camera gear on board. Many of the regional planes will not physically fit a full size carry-on. I don't worry about it with the backpack since I can always stuff a couple of lens in my coat pockets so I can squeeze it smaller.
My final question is about what exactly might be banned from the cabin. I doubt that bringing lenses as carry-on would be a problem. Remember they just said electronics. Plus you can hold a lens up so a TSA agent can literally look through it. If I can carry on my lenses, I would be more relaxed since they are more specialized and harder to replace. In fact, if I had my lenses I could get by even if I had to buy a cheaper temporary body to put them on.

mainshipper Loc: Hernando, Florida

I have used a ThinkTank Airport International rolling case https://www.thinktankphoto.com/collections/airport-series/products/airport-international-v3-0 that I try to carry on but have been forced to check it several times on international flights mainly due to weight. It does not look like a camera bag, has built in TSA locks, and is quite durable. Although it's a bit pricey, it might be an option with the new rules that are probably going to happen. I don't like checking my valuables on a flight any more than the next guy but if you want your gear to travel with you you will need to adjust. Personally, I cringe at the thought of traveling anywhere by air but it's one of those necessary evils we must accept.

mainshipper Loc: Hernando, Florida

GregWCIL wrote:

Ok Elliott,

First, while it looks like a false alarm, the U.S. gov. is at least considering expanding such a ban to include European countries.

We are going to Africa (and hopefully back) this summer. Our flights connect through Europe. (I'm very glad I didn't choose the cheapest flights which were through Dubai.) So I share your concerns.

I have looked at Pelican cases and researched them at length. I would feel very safe about my equipment as relates to physical damage. (The previous poster talking about using wire tires in addition to TSA locks had a good idea.) In terms of theft protection, I wouldn't be too worried either. Odds of theft are very slim and I have good insurance. Literally if I call them they give me approval on the phone so I could get replacements (or rent) right away.

Some of the posters here seem to be a little myopic in their views. The idea I wouldn't keep checking exotic (to me) places off of my bucket list just because I have to check my camera is just silly. Hell anything you do after you get out of bed each morning has risks. We insure those we don't want to cover ourselves. And the idea that a Pelican style case invites theft was likely made by someone who doesn't travel much. I've seen hundreds of them come through the luggage carousels. I'm sure they contain a variety of expensive equipment. Others here commented they would hate to travel some place and have their camera gear lost ahead of vacation. I would to, but the proposed ban is only on flights INTO the U.S.

I do have some questions yet about Pelican cases unrelated to security. First, I've seen camera backpack reviews (I use a backpack now) that show putting the full pack inside a Pelican case for travel. I wonder if that is enough padding. I looked at a Pelican case at a camera store last week and I would have no qualms about shipping things using the Pelican foam padding.
Second, once you go the Pelican case route you are somewhat inviting carry-on problems even on flights that might allow camera gear on board. Many of the regional planes will not physically fit a full size carry-on. I don't worry about it with the backpack since I can always stuff a couple of lens in my coat pockets so I can squeeze it smaller.
My final question is about what exactly might be banned from the cabin. I doubt that bringing lenses as carry-on would be a problem. Remember they just said electronics. Plus you can hold a lens up so a TSA agent can literally look through it. If I can carry on my lenses, I would be more relaxed since they are more specialized and harder to replace. In fact, if I had my lenses I could get by even if I had to buy a cheaper temporary body to put them on.

Ok Elliott, br br First, while it looks like a fa... (show quote)

Your call for reason should be accepted by all. I also use zip ties on all my bags just as an indicator that the bag was opened if nothing else. Regarding lenses being part of this, I would not expect DHS/TSA to weigh the rationale you suggested as that thought process is beyond those folks.

FrumCA

Anyone flying on an air carrier flying out of the airports listed below are subject to enhanced security procedures.

TSA has instituted and Change to international travel carry-on items:

Evaluated intelligence indicates that terrorist groups continue to target commercial aviation and are aggressively pursuing innovative methods to undertake their attacks, to include smuggling explosive devices in various consumer items. Based on this information, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly and Transportation Security Administration Acting Administrator Huban Gowadia have determined it is necessary to enhance security procedures for passengers at certain last point of departure airports to the United States.

These enhancements apply to 10 specific airports. The affected overseas airports are: Queen Alia International Airport (AMM), Cairo International Airport (CAI), Ataturk International Airport (IST), King Abdul-Aziz International Airport (JED), King Khalid International Airport (RUH), Kuwait International Airport (KWI), Mohammed V Airport (CMN), Hamad International Airport (DOH), Dubai International Airport (DXB), and Abu Dhabi International Airport (AUH).

The aviation security enhancements will include requiring that all personal electronic devices larger than a cell phone or smart phone be placed in checked baggage at 10 airports where flights are departing for the United States.
For the latest information, maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, refer to these links:

DHS Factsheet - http://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/03/21/fact-sheet-aviation-security-enhancements-select-last-point-departure-airports

DHS Questions & Answers - http://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/03/21/qa-aviation-security-enhancements-select-last-point-departure-airports-commercial

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

OK, Elliott, here's my out of the boundary solution. At least this would work for me. Instead of taking my Nikon D800, I'd take my Nikon F, Hasselblad 500c with 3 backs, and a couple of lenses. Put them in the bag I usually carry on and that's it. I'm set to go. I'd just request that the film is hand-inspected instead of going through x-ray.
--Bob

elliott937 wrote:

Okay guys, I started a hypothetical Q&A about ... (show quote)

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

jerryc41 wrote:

..... The next step will be having people fly naked, with cavity searches before boarding.

Thanks for that visual over my morning coffee!

jmizera Loc: Austin Texas

speters wrote:

I always had at least 1 or 2 bodies and several lenses go into the luggage besides the one I took into the cabin, and so far I never had any issues. I got a hard shell Pelican case inside a regular travel case and so far no one ever messed with it!

I have a large Pelican that holds all my video gear. I carry it on when I can (or could?) but I've checked it many times too. It has wheels and a handle that pulls out.

leftj Loc: Texas

elliott937 wrote:

Letmedance, I appreciate your optimism, but the link misses my point. My point is: What experiences have UHH members had with durable and safe cases for camera equipment, when that equipment must travel below the cabin? That is the information exchange I'm hoping for.

Your point was "no cameras coming back to USA via Delta". Not what kind of case to use below cabin. The fact is you just swallowed fake news. Admit it.

HOHIMER

May be time to go 'old school'.

cthahn

Do not fly Delta.

dpfoto Loc: Cape Coral, FL

Perhaps the best alternative would just be, DON'T fly DELTA.

leftj Loc: Texas

dpfoto wrote:

Perhaps the best alternative would just be, DON'T fly DELTA.

Unfortunately you may not have a choice. They may be the only airline that will get you to a particular destination. Anyway that was fake news so it doesn't really matter.

ajcotterell

GOOD LUCK with having a camera (or other valuables) in the luggage compartment. Not only is checked luggage subjected to the tender mercies of the ramp monkeys handling the cargo, we must remember that DELTA really stands for "Don't Expect Luggage To Arrive."

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

elliott937 wrote:

Okay guys, I started a hypothetical Q&A about ... (show quote)

Reading the replies I would also use a Pelican or similar case. I used a Zero Halliburton case for many years while traveling. With the issue of theft and being forced to check the camera those cases I would use. But I would empty all my CF cards from the equipment and the cases and carry them on board. The camera can be replaced but the photo memories cannot be replaced nor reimbursed.

Bigmike1 Loc: I am from Gaffney, S.C. but live in Utah.

When going through security I have had the TSA people have me turn the camera on to show them that it is a working camera and not a bomb. I don't see why that couldn't become standard procedure at all airports. They could set up a special line just for checking cameras.