for those of us who occasionally transport
our models as baggage on commercial
airline flights. It is one for which we are
going to have to gather as much data as
possible before we can have any hope of
overcoming the problem.
For years it has been common to build
transport boxes for models and to check
them as baggage when going to a contest,
or even simply on vacation. This has
usually worked well, with an occasional
small charge being imposed. In a few cases
I’m aware of it took some fancy talking,
and sometimes pointing out the possibility
of the airline losing the travel fare, but
being unable to get the box transported was
rare. I’ve even heard of a few times when
the airline’s pilot stepped in to save the day
for the traveling aeromodeler.
As of January 1 that will change, and
the problems may become much greater.
As of then, all checked baggage will be
subject to a similar level of screening as
the carry-on items, including running it
through the scanning machines. This may
present unforseen problems. What if the
model box won’t fit through the scanner?
The assumption is that such items will be
hand-searched, but how do the inspectors
get into the box, as the passenger will in all
likelihood not be present?
That is one logistic problem, but there
appear to be a few technical problems that
are much larger. All who travel regularly
on airlines have seen, or have been the
subject of, a hand search of our persons
and/or our carry-on luggage. Most of us
who carry a laptop have had it “sniffed,”
where they use a device that detects
explosives that might be hidden in the item
being examined.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t
mind this being done, as it is done for the
safety of all. However, when this process is
I WANT TO start this column with a
correction to an earlier column. Two
months ago, I wrote of the attempt to cross
the Atlantic with a model airplane, and the
column was well received by many. But
many jumped up to point out that it was a
Vickers Vimy that made the flight rather
than the Curtiss NC-4, and a very small
number pointed out that the pilots were
Alcock and Brown rather than “Alcott” and
Brown.
I admitted to being guilty, and many had
a good laugh, including me, at your
“historically challenged” president. I was
surprised that I would have misidentified
the airplane, but I simply figured it was one
of those “senior moments” we suffer from
occasionally. I even received some ribbing
that at least I spelled the name of one of the
pilots correctly! (That was a low blow!)
Overall, all had a good laugh, including
me. Now for the rest of the story.
I have a habit of rereading what I have
written for the last couple of columns
before I write a new one to avoid repeating
a subject, to avoid conflicting statements in
those cases where I might address a subject
again, and to avoid one of those
aforementioned “senior moments.”
This time in reading the unedited
column I sent to the magazine, I didn’t find
any reference to the Curtiss NC-4! I did see
the misspelled pilot’s name, but no
reference to the aircraft that they flew!
As I write this, where the NC-4
reference came from is a mystery to me! I
went back and reread it, and even used a
word search to look for it, but it simply
wasn’t there!
I can only guess that someone at the
magazine decided to “help” the column and
insert the aircraft designation. All this time I
have been pleading guilty to those who sent
in E-mail, and I was innocent! I only hope
whoever put that into my column has as
much of a laugh as I have gotten out of this.
Another part of that column was
questioned by a few, by pointing out that an
aerosonde named Liama, now in the Seattle
Museum of Flight, crossed the Atlantic in
1998. Of course, they were right that Liama
accomplished that task, but it was not a
model airplane. To qualify for a world
record as a model airplane, the aircraft
must weigh no more than 5 kilograms
(11.023 pounds) at takeoff.
A potential problem looms on the horizon
A potential problem
looms on the horizon …
Dave Brown AMA president
President’s Perspective
applied to all of the checked baggage, they
will encounter a few unforseen problems.
I have received a number of calls
concerning transporting models on
commercial airlines before the 100%
inspection regulations are in effect, so I
envision more problems in the future. It
appears that those who have had problems
so far were simply chosen for a random
search, and most likely those with baggage
problems had model boxes randomly
chosen.
The biggest problem might be that
something in or on a typical model
occasionally triggers the sniffers that are
looking for explosives, and that item will
not be put on the flight. We do not know
what it is that triggers the sniffer, nor does
it happen every time. It seems random, but
when the baggage becomes subject to 100%
screening, it’s going to become dicey.
The biggest problem will be when
someone gets to the event but is not able to
get the box onto the return flight! This may
affect only a few members but it will affect
those members in a big way.
We do not know what will happen in
this area, and we do not have enough
information to make many
recommendations, so we must work
together to overcome this problem.
So far, all I have heard of are people
who have encountered problems, so it’s
impossible to know what they are doing
different from those who are able to travel
with a model box. We need to gather
information from everyone who tries to fly
commercially with a model box. We need
to know as much as possible about your
experience and the particulars of the models
involved. It could be almost anything that
triggers the sniffers from glue, to exhaust
residue, to covering, to who knows what.
Any information you can provide us will
help us help your fellow modelers. If there
are members out there who have any
professional ties to this process, we would
appreciate your help in this.
I don’t even want to imagine the effect
this could have on getting the competitors
for the 2004 Control Line World
Championships (to be held in Muncie,
Indiana) here and back home!
I received a call from an old friend who
heard that “the airlines” had added any
internal-combustion engine to the
prohibited list! I can’t confirm or deny that,
but I will look into it.
Anytime you hear such information, try
to be specific as you report it. If we knew
the particular airline, the particular airport,
or even the particular flight, we could avoid
creating more problems by chasing a rumor
or planting ideas in the minds of those
March 2003 5
Continued on page 148
03sig1.QXD 12.19.02 2:09 pm Page 5
Edition: Model Aviation - 2003/03
Page Numbers: 5
