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

371–380 of 839 posts

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#371

Post by aa-jv »

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…

Its not just for explosives, by the way. Its also for solvents - for example, mercury, which could be used to weaken the airframe very easily.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#372

Post by qingdao99 »

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?

This is/was fairly common, I've experienced it on the Chinese subway a few times and I've seen a few clips of it happening online. No idea if it's official policy or not, though.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#373

Post by James_K »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #303
fc417fc802 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting to contrast this with my experience flying out of China. I was taken to a private room and shown the digital colored X-ray of my bag on which a box had been drawn around an empty lighter, I was asked to remove it myself and hand it over, and I went on my way. All in under 5 minutes, no pat down, no fuss, and no one physically rifled through my belongings. (Granted I was a tourist so that might w…

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.

So if a suicide bomber can drink explosives, they will be fine. As long as it's not poisonous within a few hours, should be no issue.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#374

Post by gampleman »

jeffwass wrote: post #293
michaelt wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airport prices in the UK for recreational travel work like so: Flight from London to Barcelona: £16 Bottle of water past security: £5 Train to airport: £26 Taxi enters drop-off area for 30 seconds: £7 A person who wants to get the advertised flight at the advertised price has to be very careful.

Even in your own car dropping off your friends or family at a UK airport (at least the London ones) requires paying a £6 fee now. Just to get to the dropoff area, even for 30 seconds as you say. But hey, at least the luggage carts are free…

In Edinburgh the (small, we often need 2) luggage carts are now £2.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#375

Post by thomassmith65 »

James_K wrote: post #369
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.

It's difficult to take down a skyscraper with a train.

Yes, 'shop terrorism' can be a problem (see: the UK during the Troubles).

I do agree with the implication that society must tolerate a certain amount of terrorism to avoid turning into a police state. That does not mean that airplane terrorism, without strict security, is so rare that we can ignore it.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#376

Post by nottorp »

dxdm wrote: post #364
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. :)

My deodorant isn't available in those small travel containers :(

And it's the only thing i really care about, I can do with any random toothpaste and shaving foam that i buy on arrival.

But maybe it will happen in my lifetime.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#377

Post by drob518 »

somat wrote: post #355
drob518 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still need metal parts, notably a gun barrel capable of holding extreme pressures until the bullet gets up to speed. That isn’t plastic. The grip and frame might be plastic, but not the barrel.

the handle on roll type luggage. not the actual handle but that is where you would hide a long piece of thick wall tube. not that a long piece of would be nessacery. a short one would do, the point being the metal detectors do not stop you from bringing metal into the airport.

Of course. Lots of metal goes through the detectors. The point is that the detectors “see” it and that’s then your chance to catch it. Whether you actually do or not is another question. But 3d printing a gun doesn’t give you a “plastic gun.” Btw, this is the same reason why the “Glocks are plastic guns that go through metal detectors unseen” stuff in the 1980s was always a myth. Glocks have a polymer frame but they always have a metal barrel.

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#379

Post by throwaway290 »

koshergweilo wrote: post #279
throwaway290 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they don't stop weapons (lots of airports outside the US have simple metal detectors for that.) There are 3D printed guns.

Don't you still need metal bullets for the 3d printed gun?

No idea. I only replied to the guy saying that "metal detectors stop weapons". Which is false.

The evidence is in US law. Because they would be undetectable, 3d printed guns are required to have some metal inserted into it to be legal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D-printed_firearm#United_Stat...). I think a guy who can 3d print a gun and wants to bring it onto a plane could probably skip that step;)

Re: Heathrow scraps liquid container limit

#380

Post by Halan »

n4r9 wrote: post #367
Halan wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah and 50% more than Rome, but overall less than all airports already doing it in Europe. This news made front page out of two things:

1) English people do not know anything about continental Europe

2) Americans do not know anything about Europe

Post reply on HN