That's a good thought regarding the lenses. It might be worth checking in
a while how the foreign counterparts of TSA are reading the ban.
(It's often hard to argue with those.)
As for the camera, the primary concern is not about damage but about
theft. A valuable item in the suitcase has a high potential of being
removed from there.
Worse than that, there is yet another factor.
With connections, the likelyhood of a suitcase being lost is far from
zero. When you have a valuable item in it, and you are flying
from/to/through countries with low salaries and/or high level of
corruption, the chances of the suitcase being lost become very
significant.
So, even if your camera is insured, you are increasing chances for the
headache related to the rest of your belongings.
With the disproportionally low financial responsibilities that airlines
carry for each lost suitcase, the airlines have rather low incentives to
guard the luggage, or to track it properly.
In today's electronic world, when you can see (close to) real-time
tracking of FedEx and UPS packages, - you'd be surprised that the airlines
(at least many of them) do not track the movement of luggage in real time.
I.e. they cannot see where the last scan was.
My understanding is that the only reason for the bar codes on the luggage
tags today is just for sorting. (Or, maybe they have some capability to
research those scans offline.) It looks like, unlike Fedex and UPS, they
have no financial incentives to introduce tracking.
(Cf. USPS has finally implemented real-time tracking of packages to
compete with Fedex and UPS, despite being reluctant if not defiant for
many-many years.)
Igor
Gonz Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:51:32 -0700 wrote:
Can't you carry your lenses on board and check in the camera with no
lenses? I would think that the lenses would be more fragile, esp
since you can wrap the camera in clothing and put it in your suitcase?
The lenses shouldn't be considered conventional "electronic device"
since they have no battery even though they may have some chip or
motors inside.
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Igor PDML-StR wrote:
Since the most recent on the devices in the carry-on on certain airlines from
some destination, I've been thinking that a few options for flying are no
longer available for me.
As far as I understand, in addition to the laptops, DSLRs (and any other
cameras besides cellphones are prohibited in the carry-on as well.
And as we've discussed before, it would be extremely risky to place a
DSLR+lenses into a regular checked-in suitcase.
Two of the banned airlines have (or rather had) a potential for me flying
their flights: Emirates and Turkish Airlines.
I've never flown Emirates due to the routing/pricing, but always wanted
because of their reputation.
Turkish Airlines, on the other hand, offers competitive pricing for flying to
Europe (connecting in Istambul), and since they are in the aliance with
United, I've used them on a couple of trips recently, both business and
personal.
It is interesting that Emirates just came up with a solution that *might*
work:
(USA Today:)
https://goo.gl/G0HQrj
http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/2017/03/23/emirates-rolls-out-laptop-handling-service-response-ban/99543956/
With Turkish Airlines, whose Customer Service attitude is so "laid back" that
it neglects "customer" and to some degree "service", - I am not sure if I
would trust even such a solution. -- I mean I wouldn't be sure that my camera
bag will not walk away between the gate and the cargo.
And then for any airline, there is airport ground operations personnel on the
arrival to US.
Igor
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
