Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 839 posts

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#361

Post by Halan »

n4r9 wrote: post #349
Halan wrote: post #344

How is this news? A lot of airports in Europe had had this for years and even in England there were terminals within the major hubs where this was already the norm

Heathrow is by far the largest airport in the UK, with several times more flights per day than any other, and flights to a broader range of destinations. So it affects a lot more prospective fliers. I looked up European airports and found some mention that Rome and Milan also have this new equipment, but they're both still significantly smaller than Heathrow.

Gatwick already had it too, at least a part of it.

The fact Heathrow got 30/40% more traffic than other airports in the same continent already having it doesn’t make the news worth all this noise.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#362

Post by michh »

stephen_g wrote: post #212
BrenBarn wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt that most people are happy with the tradeoffs of safety vs. convenience provided by the TSA. The general idea of x-ray, metal detectors, sure, that's all good. But the stuff with taking off your shoes, small containers of liquid, etc., no. I think if we reverted to a simpler system with fewer oddly specific requirements layered on top, most people would not feel significantly less safe, but would fe…

The thing about shoes is just dumb anyway - I don't know if there was some period of time where it was required elsewhere around the world but I never experienced it. Literally the only times I've ever had to take off my shoes were during the two times I've visited the US (vs. a over a dozen trips to European and Asian countries). Liquid restrictions were also lifted in my country four or so years ago for domestic tr…

I flew out of the UK twice in relatively short succession in ~2018 and the first time was out of London City: did not have to take off my shoes. I was pleasantly surprised by this and concluded common sense had prevailed and it was no longer necessary. The second time was Gatwick, and based on my prior experience I did not take off my shoes. I got yelled at because "everybody knows you have to take off your shoes at the airport!". Then got subjected to an extra search of my luggage as punishment. Of course there was a razor in my bag of toiletries (one of those Gilette cartridge ones with a million blades - not an oldschool safety razor) and promptly 'got got' for that as it could have potentially injured the person searching my belongings. 0/10 would not recommend.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#363

Post by wouldbecouldbe »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #71

This just adds confusion as to the purpose of all this. The motivation behind the liquid limits is that there are extremely powerful explosives that are stable water-like liquids. Average people have never heard of them because they aren’t in popular lore. There has never been an industrial or military use, solids are simpler. Nonetheless, these explosives are easily accessible to a knowledgeable chemist like me. The…

Schiphol at Amsterdam had this for a year or so, you could bring any type of liquid and leave everything in the bag. But they reverted the liquid rule, if I remember correctly, because of the confusion it caused.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#364

Post by dxdm »

nottorp wrote: post #204

Okay but for personal toiletry stuff you need the rule scrapped at both ends of your trip.

Don't be sad. One step at a time. One more trip-end to connect to other trip-ends. Or do you want to wait with roll-out until the whole world is ready to do it at the same time? Always look on the bright side of life. :)

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#366

Post by thomassmith65 »

The comments here insinuating that airplane terrorism is a non-issue would make for a good chapter in Carl Sagan's Demon-Haunted World.

Yes, after 9/11 airports did introduce 'security theater' methods. That is a fair.

No, worrying about airplane terrorism is not pearl-clutching. The most likely explanation for its decline is that the changes the establishment made were effective.

The establishment successfully dealt with the difficult problem of airplane terrorism, thereby leaving the public free to take it for granted and complain about the establishment.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#367

Post by n4r9 »

Halan wrote: post #361
n4r9 wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heathrow is by far the largest airport in the UK, with several times more flights per day than any other, and flights to a broader range of destinations. So it affects a lot more prospective fliers. I looked up European airports and found some mention that Rome and Milan also have this new equipment, but they're both still significantly smaller than Heathrow.

Gatwick already had it too, at least a part of it. The fact Heathrow got 30/40% more traffic than other airports in the same continent already having it doesn’t make the news worth all this noise.

Yes but Heathrow has around twice as many departures per day (edit after your edit:) than Gatwick.

This is on BBC news. Heathrow is twice as busy as any other airport in the UK. It's the easiest major airport to reach from London (other than LCY which is not that "major"). I literally know people who are leaving from Heathrow this week and are affected by this. C'mon, it's newsworthy.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#368

Post by lbreakjai »

reeredfdfdf wrote: post #187
closewith wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they don't stop bombings (there are much better targets for that, which don't involve killing the bomber), I think you should read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_airliner_bombing_a... The only reason you believe aircraft bombings aren't being stopped is because you live in a world where rigourous security has stopped all aircraft bombings.

Yeah. The "security theater" absolutely does play its part in stopping attacks. Without it, airplanes would be an extremely easy target for any nutjob to commit mass murder in. They wouldn't even necessarily need a bomb, anything that can cause a big enough fire mid-flight could be potentially catastrophic. Over past few decades many airliners have crashed because out of control fire in the cabin / cargo hold. I real…

Once you pass security, you can buy as many very flammable bottles of alcohol as you'd like

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#369

Post by James_K »

thomassmith65 wrote: post #366

The comments here insinuating that airplane terrorism is a non-issue would make for a good chapter in Carl Sagan's Demon-Haunted World . Yes, after 9/11 airports did introduce 'security theater' methods. That is a fair. No, worrying about airplane terrorism is not pearl-clutching. The most likely explanation for its decline is that the changes the establishment made were effective. The establishment successfully deal…

Are we to worry about train terrorism also? Shop terrorism? A person might bring a bomb to any crowded space, it simply is not practical to check all of them.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#370

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

imcritic wrote: post #345
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once at a security checkpoint to a museum in Shanghai, they saw my water bottle, and then told me to take it out and drink from it.

Was it just you? Or do they apply the same policy for every visitor with a bottle of liquid?

I saw them do this to a few others in line.
Post reply on HN