New airline rules

[cruz chic]

Very true, lorekauf, but the trip was already booked and paid for......

 

Maybe we'll just do more trips to Cuba and less US cruises.:)

I'm in the same "boat" as you....I'm committed to 2 cruises (Feb. and Apr.) but the Oct.2010 one is hanging by a thread right now. I'm tempted to cancel it right now out of shear frustration. I LOVE cruising and it's going to be very hard to me to do something else. That said....this is just not right.

[hylasgirl]

For those that aren't aware it's us lucky Canadians and International flyers that can no longer bring a carry on. It makes no sense that the those flying within the US are still able to take carry on. It should be a level playing field.

 

 

A level playing field? Are you serious? Jeeze!!! You are complaining that people in the U.S. flying within the U.S. (most likely on U.S. carriers) should have to do the same thing and abide by the same rules as you and you don't even live in the U.S.? Bummer...

[Koshlong]

I'd just like to say, as a Canadian, that I'm not angry with Americans or America. Unfortunately someone in the US Intelligence community screwed up (as anyone, anywhere can do from time to time) - and this kid was able to make an attempt to carry out a terrorist crime - which, frankly, if he had been successful I'm sure conversing about carry on vs. no carry on would not even be on the radar.

 

As it sits, we Canadians seem to be paying the price - probably because we're closest to American borders, we're accessible, friendly and cooperative; frankly I would think there would be more concern about people travelling to the US from overseas than from Canada, but it wasn't my call; so, I'm a bit inconvenienced for a while and someone, somewhere feels safer as a result. If that's my contribution then you're welcome - always happy to help:).

 

In the meantime, I'm sure it will get all sorted out and things will settle down to whatever the "new normal" will be.

 

As to the mouse/elephant thing; I've never seen our country as a mouse and I've never considered the US to be an elephant - but if I remember my childhood cartoons correctly............weren't the elephants afraid of the mice??:D(and that was a joke before somebody flames me).

 

YaYa

 

I believe the "mouse and the elephant" comment was first made by our late PM Pierre Trudeau........to one of the US presidents.

[HWY 101]

You see that being connected by this large land mass does sometimes require polite debate...

 

Happy Holidays...Now get back to work or so my wife said...:cool:

 

[cruz chic]

A level playing field? Are you serious? Jeeze!!! You are complaining that people in the U.S. flying within the U.S. (most likely on U.S. carriers) should have to do the same thing and abide by the same rules as you and you don't even live in the U.S.? Bummer...

Maybe you should go back and read post #25...she made a good point. The planes used in 9/11 were all domestic flights....so....I don't understand your point.

[IRL_Joanie]

This is shaping up into one of the biggest "international incidents" I hav seen on CC.

 

The point is.........if TSA really wants to be "politically correct", they should inflict the same rules for flights originating in the US as they do for flights originating everywhere else.

 

Trust me, when you're a mouse living in permanent conjunction with an elephant......the mouse does what the elephant says. And that is why we are so angry.

 

By the way, we did drive. We're in FL to board the Noordam on Monday.

 

 

I agree 100% with the fact that the rules should be for ALL people flying worldwide!! Not just to be politically correct, but to be fair to all travelers. And to not have us under the same restrictions is just wrong, wrong, wrong!!

 

I agree that it is not fair how the TSA/US Governent (?suggested/mandated?) rules since 12-25-2009 for those people arriving from outside the USA are being treated by their government is reading of the US statements of how to do this or how to do that... Hope that makes sense....

 

Again I agree that it is completely wrong. BUT it is not just Canadians that are suffering under these new changes to security. It is people from all over the world and it should be ALL of us under the same restrictions.

 

Joanie

[sail7seas]

Terrorists are not concerning themselves with fair. :rolleyes:

 

[HWY 101]

 

we should fight like they do imo..

[pris993]

We should not over react. The rule change was only for flights from Canada to the US relative to carryons.

 

I wish all countries would follow Israel's protocol on security. It seems to work. I have flown in and out of Israel 15+ times over the past 30 years. No problems what so ever..

 

Carryon are not a problem here.

 

We will continue to carry a carryon as long as we can because we always carry "dress" clothes in a garment bags. If this isn't possible we will simply check another bag and pay extra.

 

We were in Paris when the last major incident happened in England and had to learn to back differently on our return flight to the USA relative to liquids.

 

I think we will all adjust to whatever rules are put in place.

 

We could keep it simple, if we followed Israel's approach. I don't care about political correctness. Let's get real.

[luv my cruises]

Have been reading all the posts and decided to throw in my thoughts on this topic. Now if they were telling me I could not board the plane wearing underwear, then okay I'm down with that and I get it. LOL However, I fail to see how the carry-on bag even relates to the initial failed attempt in the first place. I have many of the same concerns that other Canadians here have and will have to take the biggest purse they allow so that I can put my $500 camera and other electronics in. It is going to be a pain in the butt for sure. :eek:

[MightyQuinn]

I wish all countries would follow Israel's protocol on security. It seems to work. I have flown in and out of Israel 15+ times over the past 30 years. No problems what so ever.. <snip>...

We could keep it simple, if we followed Israel's approach. I don't care about political correctness. Let's get real.

So well said Pris. When I heard about the terrorist attempt of Dec 25/09 & the subsequent additional security measures, my thoughts immediately went to El Al & Israel. I also think there are lessons to be learned & best practices to be followed from other countries who have "been there, done that".

 

Here's an interesting summary of the Israelification of security as presented by the Canadian newspaper The Toronto Star. When fear becomes outrage. Food for thought for sure.

 

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother

[DizzyDallasDi]

I just had a thought about people flying to/from Alaska/lower 48. Let's say you board in Anchorage, with a carryon, headed for DFW and have to change planes in Vancouver. How will the Anchorage passenger's carryon be handled? Presumably, flights out of the US are not affected by the "no carryon" rule, only flights from a foreign port into the US. So, I guess the Anchorage passenger will have to check his carryon when he changes planes in Vancouver? Can you imagine the ire of the Vancouver-boarding passengers if the Anchorage passenger strolled on with the carryon he boarded with in Anchorage !! :eek: This sounds like a logistical nightmare.

 

Thoughts anyone?

[Host Walt]

I just had a thought about people flying to/from Alaska/lower 48. Let's say you board in Anchorage, with a carryon, headed for DFW and have to change planes in Vancouver. How will the Anchorage passenger's carryon be handled? Presumably, flights out of the US are not affected by the "no carryon" rule, only flights from a foreign port into the US. So, I guess the Anchorage passenger will have to check his carryon when he changes planes in Vancouver? Can you imagine the ire of the Vancouver-boarding passengers if the Anchorage passenger strolled on with the carryon he boarded with in Anchorage !! :eek: This sounds like a logistical nightmare.

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

United and Alaska Airlines connect in Seattle, American in Portland and Delta/Northwest in Minneapolis.

 

It would be very unusual for a US carrier without a hub operation in Vancouver to use that airport for connecting flights, especially when the rules for international flights are so complex.

[DizzyDallasDi]

United and Alaska Airlines connect in Seattle, American in Portland and Delta/Northwest in Minneapolis.

 

It would be very unusual for a US carrier without a hub operation in Vancouver to use that airport for connecting flights, especially when the rules for international flights are so complex.

 

Walt - Thanks for responding. I can rest tonight knowing that Alaska travelers will be safe with their carryons secured in the overhead bins. :)

 

Diane

[brfan]

Just out of curiosity but do all these new regulations exclude people from loading up their pockets in cargo pants and jackets? I can fit a small pocket book, a cell phone, camera, iPod, wallet (and likely a baggie with meds) all in pockets. Then couldn't you still take a purse and a laptop?

 

Just wondering if anyone knows. :D

 

~ BJ

 

While I'm not sure what you say would be allowed. However I'm not sure it would be a good idea, since the last hour passengers are not allowed access to their personal items. They have to be placed in the overhead containers. Not sure if I would want to have my stuff up their loose - easy to be damaged and easy for someone to take it once you land.

[world~citizen]

Terrorists are not concerning themselves with fair. :rolleyes:

 

 

I think people are talking at cross purposes here.

 

The problem is there appear to be inconsistencies in policy that as you can see, are upsetting to some.

 

On the 26th for example we flew from Toronto to Boston.

 

In Toronto we went through the standard metal detector and our carry-on bags were x-rayed. Pretty standard.

 

Then we went off to a room where my wife and I were patted down from top to bottom, not once but twice. Lets just suffice to say it was very thorough. The contents of our carry-on were inspected, as were the contents of our wallets. We were searched simultaneously, and if I stepped too close to my wife during the process I was ordered away under apparent threat of censure or perhaps arrest, I don't know.

 

Under the circumstances, I have no problem with any of this in principle.

 

What struck me as odd was that in Boston, we only had the walk through a metal detector and carry-on x-ray. There was no pat down. No examination of our waistbands or collars or...

 

The Toronto search was many times more thorough.

 

Why then the restriction to seats on the flight out of Toronto but not in Boston? Why are the new carry-on restrictions not applied equally in both countries? Or to put it more bluntly, if everybody else has to do it, why not those flying on domestic US flights also?

 

This is the nub of the problem as I understand it.

 

And I don't know the answer. It seems whoever does know the answer isn't (yet) telling. I wish they would.

 

Again I don't envy CATSA or TSA their jobs. It is a necessary one and they do it professionally.

 

Unexplained inconsistencies appear to exist though, as I hope I have been able to explain.

 

Smooth sailing to you...

[HWY 101]

a vedieo? those are valuable these days... fortunately I live in a 50 percent property state... tiger... I need you soon..

 

Happy Holidays.. now get back to work:cool:

[sail7seas]

I think people are talking at cross purposes here.

 

The problem is there appear to be inconsistencies in policy that as you can see, are upsetting to some.

 

On the 26th for example we flew from Toronto to Boston.

 

In Toronto we went through the standard metal detector and our carry-on bags were x-rayed. Pretty standard.

 

Then we went off to a room where my wife and I were patted down from top to bottom, not once but twice. Lets just suffice to say it was very thorough. The contents of our carry-on were inspected, as were the contents of our wallets. We were searched simultaneously, and if I stepped too close to my wife during the process I was ordered away under apparent threat of censure or perhaps arrest, I don't know.

 

Under the circumstances, I have no problem with any of this in principle.

 

What struck me as odd was that in Boston, we only had the walk through a metal detector and carry-on x-ray. There was no pat down. No examination of our waistbands or collars or...

 

The Toronto search was many times more thorough.

 

Why then the restriction to seats on the flight out of Toronto but not in Boston? Why are the new carry-on restrictions not applied equally in both countries? Or to put it more bluntly, if everybody else has to do it, why not those flying on domestic US flights also?

 

This is the nub of the problem as I understand it.

 

And I don't know the answer. It seems whoever does know the answer isn't (yet) telling. I wish they would.

 

Again I don't envy CATSA or TSA their jobs. It is a necessary one and they do it professionally.

 

Unexplained inconsistencies appear to exist though, as I hope I have been able to explain.

 

Smooth sailing to you...

 

 

I have no idea why you had a more thorough search in Toronto than U.S. Maybe you and your wife met a 'profile' that Toronto airport had an alert about? Who knows? My mother and I met such a profile many years ago when we returned from a trip to Bahamas. We were in Boston Logan's Customs area and until the Inspectors realized we were not who they were seeking, they separated us and questioned us for at least 30 minutes. I knew we had nothing to hide but still it was unpleasant.

 

My Comment about Terrorists are not concerning themselves with fair is just what it says.

 

Janet Napolitano (sp) said there will not be consistency and no one should think the inspectors at one airport are not doing their job because it was done differently at another airport. They want the inconsistency and lack of predictability.

 

Who of us here has the training, background and have been briefed re: current intelligence as to who, how and what in terms of inspections and regulations? We do what we are told or we don't fly.

 

No one promised us fair with anything in life.

Sounds like you endured a miserable experience that none of us would like.

[world~citizen]

I have no idea why you had a more thorough search in Toronto than U.S. Maybe you and your wife met a 'profile' that Toronto airport had an alert about? Who knows? My mother and I met such a profile many years ago when we returned from a trip to Bahamas. We were in Boston Logan's Customs area and until the Inspectors realized we were not who they were seeking, they separated us and questioned us for at least 30 minutes. I knew we had nothing to hide but still it was unpleasant.

 

My Comment about Terrorists are not concerning themselves with fair is just what it says.

 

Janet Napolitano (sp) said there will not be consistency and no one should think the inspectors at one airport are not doing their job because it was done differently at another airport. They want the inconsistency and lack of predictability.

 

Who of us here has the training, background and have been briefed re: current intelligence as to who, how and what in terms of inspections and regulations? We do what we are told or we don't fly.

 

No one promised us fair with anything in life.

Sounds like you endured a miserable experience that none of us would like.

 

Well as I said we really didn't mind it. We met no profile. Thats how it is to fly to the US now. That was the point of what I was trying to say, but I must have expressed myself poorly. Its not that we object to the increased security at at airport, but we are puzzled at the seat restrictions and carry-on rules when Toronto security was far and away more thorough than that in Boston. Then, on top of everything, overseas connections are routinely lost.

 

There as I say is the rub, the old whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander thing - a double standard is what people are trying, without success I see, to draw attention to.

 

But this seems to be a hot button issue with political/patriotic/partisan ramifications for some and I think I will just step back from this one.

 

Smooth sailing...

[cruz chic]

Well as I said we really didn't mind it. We met no profile. Thats how it is to fly to the US now. That was the point of what I was trying to say, but I must have expressed myself poorly. So on top of everything, overseas connections are routinely lost.

 

There as I say is the rub, the old whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander thing - a double standard is what people are trying, without success I see, to draw attention to.

 

Smooth sailing...

You explained yourself VERY clearly.....and you are right on the mark. It amazing to me how something can be turned around to look like something else. The rules are different...and they should not be.

[world~citizen]

You explained yourself VERY clearly.....and you are right on the mark. It amazing to me how something can be turned around to look like something else. The rules are different...and they should not be.

 

When we got on the plane they were not yet restricting carry-ons. That was a good thing given the way we set ourselves up to travel that day.

 

Its funny, a lot of the time I do not travel with checked baggage (not for a cruise of course) because of all of the delays and mishandling of baggage which is at least in part related to security. I got pretty good at packing an 8 kilo carry-on.

 

Now, flying to the US at least, checked baggage is what it is all going to be about.

 

Things get curiouser and curiouser.

 

Smooth sailing to you...

[OldCodger73]

For those people who are still uncertain what everyone is talking about, here's a link to the Alaska Airlines' site with an explanation.

http://www.alaskaair.com/as/www2/flights/Irregular-Operations.asp

 

On that page is a link to the Canadian site:

http://www.catsa-acsta.gc.ca/Page.aspx?ID=77&pname=measures_mesures&lang=en

 

Note that the Canadian site says "temporary". Of course we all know how temporary often becomes permanent.

 

We have a coastal cruise coming up in April, I think it's the same one the original poster is on. We have a return flight from YVR booked. Since I travel with a fully stocked camera bag, the current carry-on restrictions are a no go. Right now I'm in wait and see mode as what to do. The flight is booked on a full flex fare, so I can cancel without any penalty.

 

The whole TSA keeping us safe, preventing terrorist attack thing reminds me of the old elephant joke that goes something like this:

 

"How do you hide an elephant in a cherry tree?

 

I give.

 

You paint it's toe nails red.

 

What!?

 

It must work, have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree?"

 

It's clear that TSA bungled the last two terrorist attempts, it was observant passengers who where the last line of defense.

[sail7seas]

......snip> it was observant passengers who where the last line of defense.

 

 

And a great big thank you to that brave, quick thinking/reacting Dutch fellow. He deserves tremendous appreciation IMO

 

Oh I so love the Dutch!!

[happyglobetrotter]

It makes me smile when I see people complaining about this new rule in advance for a 7 or 10 day cruise starting in weeks or months.

 

I am leaving from Canada tomorrow for a 114 days World cruise. And I have managed to put in my size acceptable computer bag, my small laptop, my pouch of jewellery, my cameras, my Ipod, my papers, my wallet, a lipstik and powder, all my 5 prescribed medecines and vitamins supply for 116 days, etc, I still have room for a sandwich or 2 and a granola. I am on a 3.5 hours flight.

 

I am going on vacation, why worry so much.

 

I have my 2 regular suitcases for check in with 10 diffferent formal outfits at a grand total of 80 pounds.

 

I am told that if needed, I could have exceeded the weight allowance as well as check in a carry on. I am with Air Canada.

 

Life is good.

 

Louise

 

 

PS It also makes me smile when I hear that the Dec 25th attack was stopped !!!! It was not stopped and it is only by luck (or ignorance from the bomber) that the bomb did not go off. It was never discovered by any security check en and most likely all the many restrictions on millions of passengers will never be enough to stop one or 2 lunatics !

[GLP]

I just had a thought about people flying to/from Alaska/lower 48. Let's say you board in Anchorage, with a carryon, headed for DFW and have to change planes in Vancouver. How will the Anchorage passenger's carryon be handled? Presumably, flights out of the US are not affected by the "no carryon" rule, only flights from a foreign port into the US. So, I guess the Anchorage passenger will have to check his carryon when he changes planes in Vancouver? Can you imagine the ire of the Vancouver-boarding passengers if the Anchorage passenger strolled on with the carryon he boarded with in Anchorage !! :eek: This sounds like a logistical nightmare.

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

We flew out of Anchorage last July, after our 7 day Alaska Cruise. We had to fly to Seattle as Alaska Air does NOT land in Vancouver.

 

The ones I am wondering about are those, from the US, who are currently at the Junior Hockey games in Saskatoon. They will no doubt get a surprise when they check in a the airport and are told they are no allowed carry-on luggage.