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

UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 252 posts

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#171

Post by grecy »

deegles wrote: post #149
locallost wrote: post #12

I flew yesterday and in the plane realized I had some water from my daughter in the backpack. It was scanned and missed of course. And why wouldn't they miss it, it's a waste of time anyway. But at least they harassed a 3-year old to stand in a certain way to get scanned and fail at it. Unrelated, but I've come to believe it's a form of social welfare. So much policing for nothing, not just airports, wars on drugs et…

I had to throw away my nice Leatherman Micra (because of the tiny blade) at an airport because I forgot it was in my carry on, only to sit at a restaurant next to the gate and be given a full size serrated steak knife with my meal...

If you have time, you can go backwards out to the regular airport and mail yourself anything you don't want to throw away.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#172

Post by cjrp »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #145
cjrp wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even at airports where you have to take things out, there are ways of making it work. Big, clear signs in multiple languages/with pictures showing what you have to do, lots of "work surfaces" to reorganise your bag without blocking the queue behind you, staff that are there to help not just to bark at you, etc.

> lots of "work surfaces" to reorganise your bag without blocking the queue behind you Yeah, this is what I've actually never seen in Europe. They mostly just expect you to pack everything back up quickly and tend to be annoyed if it takes some time. Which it usually does because I have to collect my belongings from several trays, some of which may have gone to additional checks, so they don't all come back together.

I'd say Heathrow (at least T3) is pretty good at this. Lots of space before security, and then afterwards there's tables to put stuff back in your bag.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#173

Post by recursive »

cfiggers wrote: post #107
TulliusCicero wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That lists twenty, and the minimum to be "dozens" would be 24.

Grammatically, 1.5 donut is wrong and 1.5 donuts is correct. So, in this case "1.66~ dozens" (because 20 / 12 = 1.66~) is pedantically correct. (...But logically and intuitively everything I just said is extremely stupid because by that logic 12.01 counts as "dozens" and that's ridiculous, so your complaint is absolutely correct and I agree with you 100%)

Grammatically, 0.2 donut is wrong also. So by that logic, 0.01 also counts as dozens.

I'd argue that "dozens" obviously means there are a multiple of 12.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#174

Post by delecti »

actionfromafar wrote: post #155
0xDEF wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were dozens of terror attacks against air travel in the 80s and 90s. The global post-9/11 "security theater" did make flying in the developing world much safer.

I always attributed that to: - before 9/11, the advice was: sit down in your seat and wait for the ransom demands - after 9/11: fight for your life now or die in a blaze of fire Hijackers must feel this too. No quarter will be given.

Wasn't that a contributing factor to UA93 being "unsuccessful"? The passengers had gotten word of the other three flights, and stopped being quite as compliant (though "compliant" is obviously not the full story for the other three flights).

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#175

Post by actionfromafar »

delecti wrote: post #174
actionfromafar wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always attributed that to: - before 9/11, the advice was: sit down in your seat and wait for the ransom demands - after 9/11: fight for your life now or die in a blaze of fire Hijackers must feel this too. No quarter will be given.

Wasn't that a contributing factor to UA93 being "unsuccessful"? The passengers had gotten word of the other three flights, and stopped being quite as compliant (though "compliant" is obviously not the full story for the other three flights).

Yes! Without this incident, I wouldn't be as optimistic about people fighting back. Turns out, people can be pretty rational after all.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#176

Post by lesuorac »

enigma20 wrote: post #104
cjrp wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even at airports where you have to take things out, there are ways of making it work. Big, clear signs in multiple languages/with pictures showing what you have to do, lots of "work surfaces" to reorganise your bag without blocking the queue behind you, staff that are there to help not just to bark at you, etc.

When I',m flying to UK I always wonder if there are so many first timers, or people are so ignorant. In Germany I never seen so many people have to open the bags after the scan, and have them re-scanned.

Well not Germany, but the average American flies ~1/yr so yes the terminal is full of first time fliers effectively.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#177

Post by staringback »

vlovich123 wrote: post #122
meghan_rain wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but to their defense, there have not been 9/11 attacks or anything remotely similar since 9/11... so either it was all fake anyways or the security theater also deters potential low IQ attackers?

I also found a magic rock that keeps away tigers. Would you like to purchase it? No tigers have ever been spotted in my area since I found it.

Lisa, I want to buy your rock

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#178

Post by lesuorac »

adwww wrote: post #58
bagels wrote: post #14

First time I've seen a hint at why liquids were banned besides vague references to explosives: British police said they had foiled a plot to blow up as many as 10 planes using explosives hidden in drinks.

I think it was quite a developed plot, and led to several high profile trials and convictions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_pl...

Sure but that plot wasn't stopped by TSA / at the airport.

The people also apparently were only convicted of bomb-making and nothing to with airplanes (allegedly being arrested to purchasing an airline ticket made the airline charges not stick).

As well as here's what the register had to say after learning about through the trial how the attack would've worked.

> Could the bombs have done that job, in fact?

> The answer, unusually, is yes. The three convicted bombmakers - unlike other UK-based terrorists seen recently - had everything ready to assemble devices which would have had a good chance of getting through airport security as it then was.

...

> Does the liquids limit prevent this kind of attack?

> No, not really.

> It's fairly easy to get round, in fact; a big team of terrorists with boarding passes for many different flights could bring many small amounts of liquid main-charge through security and combine them afterwards, still needing only one detonator, one firing device and one suicide bomber.

https://www.theregister.com/2008/09/10/liquid_bomb_verdicts/...

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#179

Post by Arrath »

yamtaddle wrote: post #165
carlmr wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"We can't breathe in business class. Somebody's got mace or something.” 100ml of mace would be enough though, right? So why the limit? Also why is liquid a special category? That doesn't make sense either.

I once lost a 3/4 full normal-size tube of toothpaste because of one of these limits. Made me wonder how paste-like something has to not count as a liquid to them. Playdough? How closely do they look at deodorant? Some stick-form ones are more liquid than toothpaste is.

Thanks to the TSA holding the power, at the very least in the "Well if you have a dispute with my ruling just step to the side and I'll get my manager, hope they wander over before your flight leaves..." way, I have in fact had TSA agents take away my stick deodorant before.

Re: UK airport scraps 100ml liquid rule with new scanners

#180

Post by Arrath »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #56
locallost wrote: post #12

I flew yesterday and in the plane realized I had some water from my daughter in the backpack. It was scanned and missed of course. And why wouldn't they miss it, it's a waste of time anyway. But at least they harassed a 3-year old to stand in a certain way to get scanned and fail at it. Unrelated, but I've come to believe it's a form of social welfare. So much policing for nothing, not just airports, wars on drugs et…

It may be a sample size of one and whatnot, but as a European, the best security experience I've had has been in the US (LAX), by far. In my neck of the woods, I have to take out basically everything from my carry-on. Laptop, camera, lenses, you name it, they want it out. Phone, keys, ditto. They usually ask for the belt to come out, too, and sometimes even the shoes. And this is even for internal flights. LAX, by co…

It seems to entirely depend on the mood of the security agents, and the backlog.

I've watched them dynamically adjust the levels of required "unpacking all your shit" based on how long the lines are getting.

Post reply on HN