Avoid Heathrow Airport in London UK at all costs

[Mac Pizzle]

What is a "carnet" and who issues it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125305\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You can get it through the customs office at most airports. It's supposed to be used so that you don't have to pay any duties on your own equipment that you bring in and out of each country. You list all your gear and their serial numbers on it. When you leave the US, customs stamps it, signs it, etc. Each time you go in and out of a country they stamp it, etc.

But it seems to be the magic wand at just about every airport. Just as anyone is about to give you any trouble with anything, you tell them you are a traveling photographer with sensitive equipment, say the word "carnet" and whip out your official US customs document. Most counter people and just about all the security and customs officers in every country know what it is. They usually open it, glance at it really quick and let you go on your merry way. In Heathrow, they even escorted us to the front of the security check line so we wouldn't have to stand around with all our cases.

They take some to get and we usually use a customs broker to get ours a week or two before we need it--so don't just show up before your flight and ask for a carnet. They last a year and then have to be returned.

[Mark D Segal]

This is good to know about. I'll have to check whether Canada Customs issues them as well.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I got curious, because I had never heard of a "carnet"; so I googled "carnet" and came up with a website (Corporation for International Business) that has lots of information about carnets and how to get them and use them. It seems to cost about $200 (U.S.) for a carnet covering less than $10,000 of equipment which you are certain to take out of any country you enter within a year.

I couldn't find anything on this website about using more than one carry-on, however.

[Khurram]

This is good to know about. I'll have to check whether Canada Customs issues them as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125324\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Canda customs has a green card which is pretty much the same thing.  You need to take your equipment to the customs canada office at any airport, they record the serial number of each item and wil stamp the card.

Note that before my last trip to the USA, the customs guy (who looked like an over-zelous) summer student, wanted to see receipts that proved i bought my gear in canada before he issued the card.

[DaveLon]

Just back in Canada from a trip Toronto to Denver and back. I only fly with carry-on (two bags) and on each of the four inspections, one or more different items were questioned and looked at and only one questionable item was looked at twice.

Lines were long and slow. People were polite.

But do they really know what they are looking for?

In Canada I use the train whenever possible or drive.

Dave S

[Mac Pizzle]

I got curious, because I had never heard of a "carnet"; so I googled "carnet" and came up with a website (Corporation for International Business) that has lots of information about carnets and how to get them and use them. It seems to cost about $200 (U.S.) for a carnet covering less than $10,000 of equipment which you are certain to take out of any country you enter within a year.

I couldn't find anything on this website about using more than one carry-on, however.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah, it has nothing to do with carry-on allowances. My point was that with a carnet they let you do just about anything you want from the ticket counter to the jetway.

[Graham Welland]

As an almost daily traveller my observations of airports worldwide, but particularly those in the UK, is that they're overwhelmed due to their insistance on being more motivated to be shopping malls than efficient transit locations.

As mentioned previously, the BAA in the UK and TSA in the US introduced the liquids rules and small clear bags as a scheme to make screening practical due to the very poor infrastructure and staffing. It's got very little to do with the terror threat itself. Ditto with the single bag rule, over zealously implemented through Heathrow.

The single bag/weight rules are inconsistent. I've never had a problem with United carrying a heavy photo roll-on in/out the UK although with Lufthansa I've been forced to weigh a bag and had to remove and hand carry body/lens for the case to get from the check-in. The joke is of course that even after telling the staff that you're just going to put it all back on the other side of security they still insist on the charade.

The other farce is leaving the UK with 2 small bags where they'll allow you to combine them in a large carry-on plastic sack, barely holdable, yet they'll watch you ditch the bag once through the x-ray. I understand the psychology of appearing to be consistent for everyone (single 'bag') but it really is dumb and could be handled better.

Heck, if the BAA were to give over some of their precious retail space for more screening area and staff, I'd be prepared to pay extra for a premium bag check line where I could carry through a laptop bag and camera bag with extended security checking and a dedicated slower line. I'd willingly accept a longer wait if necessary. However, since security isn't their real goal, just a non-revenue necessity, this isn't likely to happen soon.

I read with interest the posts about rudeness of immigration staff around the world, particularly the US. I find this strange and not my experience at all; I'm a Brit based in the US so I get to stand in the same long 'foreigner' lines as everyone else plus get the photo/fingerprint treatment in/out of the US everytime too. If you're professional, courteous and respectful you'll be treated likewise. Make sure you're docs are complete before you reach the counter and the immigration folks will be just as keen to get you through as quickly as possible with minimal hassle as you will be. If you're the 100th person who hasn't filled out the forms properly that day then don't be surprised if they'll seem abrupt with you.

[marty m]

if we simply resign ourselves to be manipulated by these bureaucrats we will be manipulated - more and more. When something is foolish and inconvenient, unless people stand-up and say so, no effort will be devoted to achieving the same objectives in a more intelligent and sensitive manner.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124129\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I completely agree with Mark.  When this thread started, I sent the address for this thread to various tourism bureaus in the UK as well as Heathrow Airport.  (Heathrow could, of course, care less.  If less people fly through their airport it just makes their job easier.)

If, only if, tourism to the UK is impacted, even slightly, will enough pressure be brought to bear by the British tourism industry to changes these rules.

As I previously posted, an executive for a very expensive UK hotel chain already sent me an email where he completely agreed with the points I was making, and said that their trade association opposed these rules and would continue to lobby against them.

The fact of the matter is that the one carry-on rule is only being enforced in the UK and specifically and most zealously at Heathrow.

So, if you must travel with two carry-ons (photo equipment in one a laptop in a second) you should consider not flying to the UK; or through Heathrow; or through British Airways if it can be avoided.

And as I previously posted, airlines waive ALL liability for photo equipment that is checked.  So what United is telling you, as I posted above, is that you can only take one carry-on through Heathrow, and you must check the rest of your equipment, we assume ZERO liability for.

[Mark D Segal]

Marty - yes, but I think I wouldn't give up entirely on pressuring BAA-Heathrow admin. These airports are being run as commercial enterprises and they want volume and growth of volume. The more people who pass through, the more the shopping, eating and drinking and the higher the concession and landing fees they can charge. I think they would be very sensitive to a drop in passenger volume. But there is no motivation for this concern unless they see an imminent likelihood of it happening.

[Kevin Gallagher]

I went through this nonsense on a trip this past Thanksgiving, we flew in from JFK on American and on the return trip we were hit with this at the AA checkin counter. Fortunately we were able to consolidate my wife's purse into her one allowed carryon, and all went smoothly after that. But wait..there's more as the saying goes, check this link for the UK's next "brainstorm"

 http://crankyflier.com/page/2/

[marty m]

Thanks to Kevin Gallagher for bringing this report from The Cranky Flier to our attention.  No bags allowed! But it took quite a bit of searching through the blog to find it, so I have pasted the text below.

Bottom line -- the UK government sucks.  They must be determined to completely wipe out tourism to their country.  How else can these type of moronic plans be explained?  The British govt is setting new standards for empty-headed thinking just based on the fact that they are giving the this plan serious consideration.  I've seen lots of absurd and ridiculous actions by petty minded and dumb bureaucrats in the U.S., but this sets a new standard for mind-numbing stupidity.

From the Cranky Flier, with a link to a British press report:

 ***********************

No Bags Allowed

Ah, the UK. A great place to visit but a nightmare for airlines. The government just can’t keep its hands off the industry. In the last year, we’ve seen an expensive new green tax, a strict one-bag carry on limit, and now the possibility of no checked bags at all.

What?

Yep, I saw this article talking about the UK’s latest scheme to eliminate luggage from airports entirely, and sadly I was hardly surprised.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

The plan would involve requiring people to ship their luggage before they travel. This would create a utopian airport with no checked bags and tons of happy people.

Yeah, right.

Where to start . . . how about the cost to the customer? There are some people that already offer this service. Luggage Express, for example, is planning to offer their “cost effective” solution. That’ll run you $70 per bag with a minimum of $85 per pickup. (Um, shouldn’t it just be $140 minimum, then?) The original article mentions First Luggage in the UK with rates starting at GBP49 (yes, that’s just about US$100). With economies of scale achieved from requiring everyone to ship their bags, they say it can be reduced to GBP20 (double that to make it US$40).

Now I’m sure there’s a market for $40 (at best) per bag service, but I’m not it. And I imagine there are a ton of others who aren’t either. So if you make me ship my bag ahead, I’m not going to be happy.

Then there are the logistics to this thing. Save the environment? Not with a huge fleet of delivery trucks clogging up the roads. And how early will they need to pick your bag up in order to have it at your destination? You may not be able to rely on last minute packing anymore.

Supporters say that airplanes not having to take on luggage would reduce the weight of the plane and therefore reduce the cost to fly for you. That could, according to the article, reduce the ticket price by GBP30 (US$60). I think we all know that’s not going to happen. Those savings won’t be passed on to consumers, so it’s not worth crossing your fingers.

Ultimately, the airlines need to decide how baggage should be handled, not the government. Many airlines have started to charge for baggage, and that’s fine with me. For a nominal $5 or $10 fee, I don’t mind. But if you’re going to require that I spend $40 just to bring a bag, it will be one more thing to push me away from flying, especially on a shorter flight where driving or taking a train is an option.

[colinb]

The salient point here is that you're linking to an article in the Daily Mail. Their usual front page relates the shocking story of black lesbian welfare recipients stealing our babies. In other words, this particular "news paper" is a comic. If you can find the same information on a more reliable source then you should give it credence. Otherwise, it is strictly bottom-wiping material.

c

Thanks to Kevin Gallagher for bringing this report from The Cranky Flier to our attention.  No bags allowed! But it took quite a bit of searching through the blog to find it, so I have pasted the text below.

Bottom line -- the UK government sucks.  They must be determined to completely wipe out tourism to their country.  How else can these type of moronic plans be explained?  The British govt is setting new standards for empty-headed thinking just based on the fact that they are giving the this plan serious consideration.  I've seen lots of absurd and ridiculous actions by petty minded and dumb bureaucrats in the U.S., but this sets a new standard for mind-numbing stupidity.

From the Cranky Flier, with a link to a British press report:

 ***********************

No Bags Allowed

Ah, the UK. A great place to visit but a nightmare for airlines. The government just can’t keep its hands off the industry. In the last year, we’ve seen an expensive new green tax, a strict one-bag carry on limit, and now the possibility of no checked bags at all.

What?

Yep, I saw this article talking about the UK’s latest scheme to eliminate luggage from airports entirely, and sadly I was hardly surprised.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

The plan would involve requiring people to ship their luggage before they travel. This would create a utopian airport with no checked bags and tons of happy people.

Yeah, right.

Where to start . . . how about the cost to the customer? There are some people that already offer this service. Luggage Express, for example, is planning to offer their “cost effective” solution. That’ll run you $70 per bag with a minimum of $85 per pickup. (Um, shouldn’t it just be $140 minimum, then?) The original article mentions First Luggage in the UK with rates starting at GBP49 (yes, that’s just about US$100). With economies of scale achieved from requiring everyone to ship their bags, they say it can be reduced to GBP20 (double that to make it US$40).

Now I’m sure there’s a market for $40 (at best) per bag service, but I’m not it. And I imagine there are a ton of others who aren’t either. So if you make me ship my bag ahead, I’m not going to be happy.

Then there are the logistics to this thing. Save the environment? Not with a huge fleet of delivery trucks clogging up the roads. And how early will they need to pick your bag up in order to have it at your destination? You may not be able to rely on last minute packing anymore.

Supporters say that airplanes not having to take on luggage would reduce the weight of the plane and therefore reduce the cost to fly for you. That could, according to the article, reduce the ticket price by GBP30 (US$60). I think we all know that’s not going to happen. Those savings won’t be passed on to consumers, so it’s not worth crossing your fingers.

Ultimately, the airlines need to decide how baggage should be handled, not the government. Many airlines have started to charge for baggage, and that’s fine with me. For a nominal $5 or $10 fee, I don’t mind. But if you’re going to require that I spend $40 just to bring a bag, it will be one more thing to push me away from flying, especially on a shorter flight where driving or taking a train is an option.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142557\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Mark D Segal]

A couple of months ago I sent a very stiff statement of this whole situation to Willie Walsh, the CEO of British Airways, through the BA Executive Club (their frequent flier program). After considerable insistance on getting an answer, I received an important answer from BA Customer Relations replying on his behalf; it clarifies that we ARE allowed TWO pieces of hand-baggage, one of which is a laptop computer or a brief-case plus a regulation size carry-on. They also told me they have no control over the airport operator BAA, which decides on the allocation of space for duty-free shoping versus security staffing. (I argued that if there were less space for shopping and more for additional security agents, the queues would be much shorter and processing faster.) However, they expressed optimism that in Terminal 5 things will be better. That remains to be seen, of course. BAA makes money from renting shopping space and incurs costs for security, so the incentives are all there to screw the passengers at check-in. Anyhow, the clarity I obtained on the cabin baggage allowance is a definite improvement over "one piece only".

[colinb]

Either Mr Walsh was blowing smoke up your fundament, or he was misinformed, or the situation has changed. The airport operator, BAA, say "one piece of hand baggage" and they're the ones who get to decide, more's the pity.

Check out http://www.baa.co.uk/ and follow the link to Heathrow Airport and then "Prepare for checkin". Apparently you're allowed bring to pieces of cabin baggage so long as one of them, "a handbag" may be carried inside the other.

I'm sure flying was more elegant when Cary Grant did it on Shorts flying boats. Then again, he did it in black and white so perhaps its a toss-up.

c

A couple of months ago I sent a very stiff statement of this whole situation to Willie Walsh, the CEO of British Airways, through the BA Executive Club (their frequent flier program). After considerable insistance on getting an answer, I received an important answer from BA Customer Relations replying on his behalf; it clarifies that we ARE allowed TWO pieces of hand-baggage, one of which is a laptop computer or a brief-case plus a regulation size carry-on. They also told me they have no control over the airport operator BAA, which decides on the allocation of space for duty-free shoping versus security staffing. (I argued that if there were less space for shopping and more for additional security agents, the queues would be much shorter and processing faster.) However, they expressed optimism that in Terminal 5 things will be better. That remains to be seen, of course. BAA makes money from renting shopping space and incurs costs for security, so the incentives are all there to screw the passengers at check-in. Anyhow, the clarity I obtained on the cabin baggage allowance is a definite improvement over "one piece only".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142608\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Mark D Segal]

Well, remains to be seen. If I ever need to fly through there again, I'll carry my letter from BA with me, and if they give me trouble I'll drag it out, then we'll see what happens next. The administration of that airport is so incompetent that many of their own staff probably don't know the rules.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Well, remains to be seen. If I ever need to fly through there again, I'll carry my letter from BA with me, and if they give me trouble I'll drag it out, then we'll see what happens next. The administration of that airport is so incompetent that many of their own staff probably don't know the rules.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As to the last sentence, you may well be right, although I've always suspected that the security staff just enjoy making life difficult and unpleasant for people who might be about to go somewhere nice that they themselves can't get to.

However, BA's current policy is pretty clear. From [a href=\"http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bagcabin/public/en_gb]their site[/url]:

Passengers departing from or transferring through the UK may only take ONE piece of Hand Baggage

Due to airport security restrictions currently in place in the UK, only ONE piece of Hand Baggage will be permitted when departing from or transferring through the UK.
We will continue to keep you informed of any changes to the security restrictions.

These allowances apply for all passengers entering the UK only:

one standard-sized bag - maximum size of the bag, 56x45x25cm (22x18x10in)
plus one laptop or briefcase

Personally, I think it's all a plot to bankrupt the British luggage manufacturing industry. You'll note that while you can bring two pieces into the country, you can only take one of them out again! Those left behind, of course, are auctioned off.

Jeremy

[Mark D Segal]

As to the last sentence, you may well be right, although I've always suspected that the security staff just enjoy making life difficult and unpleasant for people who might be about to go somewhere nice that they themselves can't get to.

However, BA's current policy is pretty clear. From their site:

Personally, I think it's all a plot to bankrupt the British luggage manufacturing industry. You'll note that while you can bring two pieces into the country, you can only take one of them out again! Those left behind, of course, are auctioned off.

Jeremy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I've now noticed that. They lied to me by telling only half the truth. I've sent them a stiff return message.

[jjj]

The salient point here is that you're linking to an article in the Daily Mail. Their usual front page relates the shocking story of black lesbian welfare recipients stealing our babies. In other words, this particular "news paper" is a comic. If you can find the same information on a more reliable source then you should give it credence. Otherwise, it is strictly bottom-wiping material.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142593\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's not even very good for that!

And it is also your choice not to fly through UK airports, but sometimes that is not easy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125105\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not a choice those of us based in the UK have!

I was reading this thread just before I was due to fly abroad this June from heathrow and I decided to make life easier for myself and to accomodate my ever increasing kit by getting Think Tank Airport Addicted. I bought it on morning of flight and then spent some time working out which of the 80 odd dividers to use to best suit my needs. I was very impressed with my purchase as it seem perfect for my needs and fitted everything in and with space to spare.
One problem, it doesn't fit in the luggage size check racks. Not by much, the straps and handles stop it fitting in. After sweet talking one security guard who insisted on checking size after I had just finished repacking after X-rays and a hand search. I then had someone else come up and querry my bag, who then got the his boss to come and talk to me. But thankfully, I somehow I managed to convince them to let me through.
I emailed Think Tank about this somewhat disastrous flaw in their marketing and selling of the bag. And heard absolutely nothing back.  
Coming back from Sweden 5 weeks later, my bag was no issue at all, even after security searched my bag [I had left a pair of pliers in by accident. Pliers were allowed and the very heavy bag handed back to me no questions asked about weight or size.

On arrival at Heathrow, the baggage reclain area was simply chock full of unclaimed bags, just lying around the place and they even managed to damage my bike in a way that suggested very serious impact of some kind. Still waiting for insurance on that. BA actually took their phones off the hook I discovered, so you couldn't call regarding your claim, because they had so many. Pathetic. They still keep sending me lots of communications regarding flying with them again. Marketing needs to explain to other departments that treating your customers like crap is not the best business practice

[marty m]

A couple of months ago I sent a very stiff statement of this whole situation to Willie Walsh, the CEO of British Airways, through the BA Executive Club (their frequent flier program). After considerable insistance on getting an answer, I received an important answer from BA Customer Relations replying on his behalf; it clarifies that we ARE allowed TWO pieces of hand-baggage, one of which is a laptop computer or a brief-case plus a regulation size carry-on. They also told me they have no control over the airport operator BAA, which decides on the allocation of space for duty-free shoping versus security staffing. (I argued that if there were less space for shopping and more for additional security agents, the queues would be much shorter and processing faster.) However, they expressed optimism that in Terminal 5 things will be better. That remains to be seen, of course. BAA makes money from renting shopping space and incurs costs for security, so the incentives are all there to screw the passengers at check-in. Anyhow, the clarity I obtained on the cabin baggage allowance is a definite improvement over "one piece only".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142608\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

YOU WERE LIED TO.  IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE.  THE AIRPORT COPS AT HEATHROW WILL PULL ANYONE OUT OF LINE, WHEN TRANSFERRING FROM PLANE TO PLANE, WHO HAS MORE THAN ONE CARRY-ON, NO MATTER HOW SMALL.

I personally had that experience.  If you were told the bogus load of bull you quote several months ago, well that was the same time I encountered this.  As I originally reported, when I started this thread, other European businessmen in line with me said that this is the standard practice at Heathrow.  I SAW THE FASCIST BAGGAGE POLICE AT HEATHROW DO THIS TO THE ELDERLY WHO WERE 75 TO 80 YEARS OLD, AND JUST BECAUSE OLD LADIES HAD A PURSE AND A *VERY* SMALL CARRY-ON.  OLD LADIES NO LESS.

It is simply appalling that the CEO of British Airways would deliberately tell you such a blatant lie.

THE CEO OF BA KNOWS FULL WELL THAT BA AT HEATHROW HAS SET UP ENTIRE COUNTERS FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF DEALING WITH CUSTOMERS PULLED OUT LINE WHO MUST CHECK ONE OF THEIR TWO CARRY-ONS.  THESE COUNTERS ARE EXCLUSIVELY DEVOTED TO THEIR CUSTOMERS WHO ARE *CHANGING* PLANES.   You must first go through British passport control, as if you exiting the airport (kiss you connecting flight goodbye).  Then stand in the absurd line at lousy British Airways to check one of your two carry-ons, and then go through security again to get to your connecting flight.

Anyone who flies on an airline with a CEO who lies to his own customers is a fool.  This sets a new low for bad customer relations.

I'll say it again.  DO NOT FLY ON BRITISH AIRWAYS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.  WHEN THEY LOSE BUSINESS THEY WILL BEGIN TO PRESSURE THE BRITISH GOVT TO CHANGE THIS ABSURD POLICY.

DO NOT FLY THROUGH HEATHROW IF YOU MUST TAKE TWO CARRY-ONS

[marty m]

I by getting Think Tank Airport Addicted. One problem, it doesn't fit in the luggage size check racks. Not by much, the straps and handles stop it fitting in. After sweet talking one security guard who insisted on checking size after I had just finished repacking after X-rays and a hand search. I then had someone else come up and querry my bag, who then got the his boss to come and talk to me. But thankfully, I somehow I managed to convince them to let me through.
I emailed Think Tank about this somewhat disastrous flaw in their marketing and selling of the bag. And heard absolutely nothing back.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=142790\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thinkless Thankless Tank engages in false advertising.  When I first got the bag I measured it.  I don't recall which dimension was off, but one of the dimensions did not match the standard carry-on for domestic flights.  I also sent an email to Thinkless Tank.  They responded with photos showing the bag fitting in the chrome luggage racks.  It must have been empty because you sure can't do that if the bag is full -- as you experienced.

I used that huge bag a few times, and both times had spare time between flights.  I found a remote counter where no one was around, and used one of the chrome containers that are used to check the size of carry-ons.   What I discovered is that the The Thinkless Tank Addicted will NOT fit in those containers if full.  The problem is the depth.  Thinkless Tank says that you can put a 100-400 or 70-200 vertically.  False.  In order to jam it in to the chrome containers, I had to remove the filter and cap from those lenese to get just enough clearance.  It was that tight.  Whether that kind of pressure on the end of the lenses damages them is a good question, because you're still jamming the bag in with the filters and caps removed   I had already removed the insert in side of the cover to put stuff, as that would add to the depth.  Finally, don't stuff the straps inside the bag, leave them loose, or it will never fit in one of those chrome bins.  I also think that I had to remove my laptop to get it to fit in the chrome bin, but don't recall for sure whether that was the case.

Thinkless Tank has some slightly smaller bags for air travel, but they suffer from other really dumb design flaws.  I would like a bag that is smaller, but I can then pack their smaller side attachments in my suitcase, and lash them to horizontal webbing on the sides when I get to my location.  Just like any Tamrac or Lowepro.  Thinkless Thankless Tank doesn't include such a common sense feature on most of their bags, or didn't when I last checked six months ago.  They finally added that on their most recent bag, the one with the sliding device in the bottom half.

The other problem with the Addicted is that it is so d*** big.  What do you do with it when you get to your location?  It is just too big, bulky and heavy to use as backpack.

What we all need is a smaller backpack to carry the most expensive bodies and lenses AND carry a laptop.  And do it ALL in ONE bag to get past the fascist baggage police.

That requires a UMPC -- a very small laptop -- that can be carried in a backpack like a lens.  I have tried both the Sony and the new Samsung.  The new Samsung is very slow, but the screen is just large enough to use it as a laptop for the purpose of downloading and quickly evaluating photos.  It is very slow though.  But it works.  And will fit in a backpack.