A question for the security guys [Archive]

millerman

6th Dec 2006, 08:13

Here is a question for the security guys ( I don't know if it is valid for this forum but feel free to move it to the correct one:) ).
The missus and I flew back to Dusseldorf yesterday from Dubai via Munich. We bought some perfume in duty free in Dubai which was all sealed in the original packaging. Transferring in Munich we had to go through security again ( which i personally believe is ridiculous ) they took away the sealed packages which were clearly labelled duty free Dubai but my wife was allowed to take through a half used bottle of perfume that was in a clear plastic bag!
Was the sealed perfume an early christmas present for the security guys or is there more danger in a sealed box than an open perfume spray?
Trying to explain the ridiculous nature of the "rules" nearly lead to our arrest:ugh:
Surely there should be some system to allow sealed duty free items which have presumably been security checked to be allowed through other airports on your journey.
So a couple of nice duty free gifts for relatives turned out rather expensive:(

cargo boy

6th Dec 2006, 09:45

Millerman, whilst I can sympathise with you about your predicament, I can't for the life of me figure out why you expect the Security Dipsticks to frequent what is essentially a pilots website. I mean, if it was 'ThePilotsAndAnyoneWithARemoteInterestInAviation,IncludingSe curityNumptiesAndTheirIlk,EspeciallyAnyoneWhoIsOrderedByTheD ftToDoSomethingAndNotGivenAnyDiscretionBecauseTheyAreNotTrus tedThemselvesAndProbablyDon'tHaveTheIqAnywayWebsite' (http://www.crayola.com/)then I could understand you asking your question on here. :rolleyes:

millerman

6th Dec 2006, 10:52

Because having seen previous threads on a similar issue there have been people replying who are obviously involved in the security side of things! Which is also why I asked for it to be moved to the correct forum as I wasn't sure where it should go :=
I admit it was a bit of a shot in the dark and also a chance for me to vent some steam after coming across such :mad: idiots:)

763 jock

6th Dec 2006, 11:00

Nice link CB!:E

noodnik

6th Dec 2006, 12:29

Security Numpty here. Seems it causes offence to some of the people on this site that this numpty has brains enough to access it never mind post a reply.
The reason I use it as it is very informative and if it wasn't for some of the individuals with such a high and mighty attitude then it would be a greater pleasure to use. CB

millerman

6th Dec 2006, 14:29

Noodnik
Can you actually answer the original questions or were we just singled out for some extremely poor treatment?

matkat

6th Dec 2006, 14:56

This is another anomally of the security regimes throughout europe, I regularly transit through Bergen(for a domestic destination) and on arrival there you can buy duty free and continue on your way however I had not bought any until the very helpful duty free guy pointed out that if I wanted some and wished to continue to the aforementioned domestic destination they would simple seal the goods in a transparent bag with the receipt showing, I was a bit dubious at first but it works, a very sensible and common sense approach if you ask me.

ducking

6th Dec 2006, 16:26

Final 3 Greens

7th Dec 2006, 02:25

Dear Noodnik

if it wasn't for some of the individuals with such a high and mighty attitude then it would be a greater pleasure to use.

Sounds like the experience I have (too) often have when meeting you and your co-workers during my regular use of airports.

noodnik

7th Dec 2006, 08:05

Dear Millerman

In answer to your question.

1. Most duty free shops don't care if you have the goods confiscated they just want the sale.

2. Common sense is the answer to the sealed box part.

3. Don't get stroppy when going through security. The security staff are just following rules laid down by the airport authorities/ government agencies and they're not allowed to use common sense or they get their a***s kicked.

Flagon

7th Dec 2006, 08:35

Noodnik - good of you to stick it out and put up with the narrow-minded comments above. I suspect there are not many airport security staff who frequent here, for several reasons.

Millerman - a few too many unknowns in your post, I feel?

Going through security at MUN: often happens when changing airlines, where your luggage is not checked through or where the screening is at the gate. It is not unusual to have to go through 2 sets of screening at some airports.

Was your purchase in containers of less than 100ml and 'presented' in a clear, sealed plastic bag? If not, you really cannot complain.

Noodnik answers another of your queries at 2

Answer 3: I'm fairly sure that some of the 'decisions' made by crew (in accordance, of course, with their orders/instructions) might annoy Noodnik if he/she were travelling as a pax. <and they're not allowed to use common sense or they get their a***s kicked.> - bit like crew, really? "No sir/madam, you cannot drink your own alcohol". Is there any point in Noodnik having a spat about that?

NB: Not directed at Millerman

No, it is not fun trying to operate in this environment. Yes, I would like to see more rapport and humanity in screening, but it is not going to happen, and shouting, screaming and kicking toys out of prams will not help.

GwynM

8th Dec 2006, 09:10

When I buy duty free in Stavanger, I'm always asked if I've got an onward flight, so I wouldn't buy it if I did.

Rules are rules, and are plain and obvious for all to see. I have some (quite a lot actually) sympathy for the occasional flyer, but people who fly regularly or read these forums know the current situation, whether or not they agree with it, so shouldn't attempt to take liquids through security. (Although I'm unclear whether the plastic bag should be taken out or your hand baggage for screening).

Finally, I've never had a bad experience with a security numpty, I work on the principle that if you are nice and friendly to them, they will be nice and friendly back (actually, 25 years ago there was an immigration officail in Libya, who was a total prat when the immigration card was updated, but the translation wasn't, and just ripped it up when it was filled in wrongly and sent you back for another card)

millerman

8th Dec 2006, 19:14

Flagon,
I flew Lufthansa on both legs. Anyone who has been through Dubai knows security is pretty tight. The reason I had to go through security was that we arrived in section H and the connection was in section G. If the connection was in section H I would not have had to go through security again!
Anyone who knows me would say that I am a calm and reasonable man but the attitude of the security staff was arrogant and surly from the beginning. We were rushing to catch the connection and were slightly surprised to have to go through security again. We had a couple of cans of drink in our bag which I had no problem with them taking ( I had forgotten they were there) but these were snatched out of my hands and thrown away in a completely unnecessary manner.
All the perfume bottles were less than 100ml and they were also snatched away - it was at this point that we started to get a bit upset -we didn't shout or swear - just tried to point out the ridiculous nature of the situation. The reaction was to ignore us and then call the police over when we wouldn't "go away".
The irony is that on the way out my wife had left a half empty bottle of perfume in her bag which we were willing for the security guard to confiscate but he just said that it was ok and put it in a clear plastic bag for us!!! It is this different interpretation of the rules that confuse everybody and they seem to change every week:confused:
I know people do have bad days but courtesy would make things move a lot smoother

zed3

9th Dec 2006, 12:48

Millerman.....the point is that there is no joined-up thinking on this problem . I find it hard to believe that it is beyond the wit of the people concerned to come up with a workable solution in international travel . Why can't the airport managers , airline managers , security managers and the rest (leaving out politicians) make simple rules , including sealed duty free packs and other common items , easily transportable over borders . They've had five years now to do this but the galling point is that WE are paying their salaries , paying for the duty free goods and in effect paying for them to be taken away from us !!!!! lunatics , asylum , taken over , have , the - comes to mind here and we both know about that sort of management , don't we ?

millerman

9th Dec 2006, 16:27

We certainly do zed3:ugh: We have to keep smiling though :)
You would have thought something would be worked out though!

IB4138

10th Dec 2006, 11:28

Travelling back through Manchester T3 yesterday, my wife suffered at the hands of two of these mindless security morons.

Whilst I passed through still wearing my belt and shoes without a problem, my wife was asked, no ordered, to remove her shoes for x-ray and walk barefoot on a cold tiled floor. She requested some disposable paper slippers, but that produced no answer from the moron. She also asked if the floor was clean...again no answer.
Not to leave it there, the moron then requested that she take her cardigan off for x-ray. She objected, as the area is quite cold, which only produced the muttered comment "We have to work here. We are tired of complaints from you lot"

Not to finish there, she was subjected to an extremely thorough body frisk by a female operative, which my wife found very uncomfortable and the moron appeared to enjoy.

She had no such problems passing through Heathrow T1 and T2 the week before and now says she would rather transit any other airport than Manchester, as a result.

"No sir/madam, you cannot drink your own alcohol".

Interesting aside.

There is now a sign in the new bar, half way down pier C at Malaga that advises you that you can by all food and drink available from that outlet, to consume on your flight.

Should lead to some interesting arguments!

fyrefli

10th Dec 2006, 20:50

Millerman.....the point is that there is no joined-up thinking on this problem . I find it hard to believe that it is beyond the wit of the people concerned to come up with a workable solution in international travel . Why can't the airport managers , airline managers , security managers and the rest (leaving out politicians) make simple rules , including sealed duty free packs and other common items , easily transportable over borders.

I can understand it's infuriating. The problem is that some airports, e.g. Schiphol, have responded to the issue of such a large variety of goods being available for purchase airside by moving security to immediately pre-gate. The new rules have no sensible solution for this, so at Schiphol and, I imagine, other similar airports, you can take the duty free through, even though everything else is in 100ml bottles in clear plastic. It is then very easy to fall foul of the supposedly same rules if you then connect in another airport.

It's a classic demonstration of lack of joined up thinking, I'm afraid :ugh:

Cheers,

Rich.

TSR2

10th Dec 2006, 21:18

Dear oh dear, makes one wonder who is the real mindless moron.

IB4138

11th Dec 2006, 07:45

TSR2
Unless you are the mindless moron I refer to, you have no idea as to what happened. Zip it, if you have nothing constructive to add.

Further enquiries have revealed that the particular white haired, balding, moustached, earing wearing, 60ish aged, person referred to, is well known for being an asshole with the public, crews and ground staff at MAN T3.

Why is he still in employment?

Momo

12th Dec 2006, 07:30

And the answer is:

- EU rules mean that you cannot transit an EU airport with any liquids in your hand baggage that have been purchased anywhere other than an EU country, Switzerland, Norway or Iceland. These same goods have to have been bought after passport control, on the same day, and remain sealed. So therefore, liquids bought duty free in Dubai cannot be transited through any airport in any of the above countries. There are stricter restrictions on connections to USA flights.

Personal perfumes, etc, can be carried. So, a permissible alternative would have been to open the perfume, throw away the box, put it in the sealable bag, assuming all volume restrictions are met. No use for a present.

Quite well explained here>

http://www.swiss.com/web/trip-planner/id-tp-ba-carry-on-baggage/id-tp-ba-carry-on-baggage-regulation.htm

skydriller

12th Dec 2006, 23:29

And the answer is:
- EU rules mean that you cannot transit an EU airport with any liquids in your hand baggage that have been purchased anywhere other than an EU country, Switzerland, Norway or Iceland. These same goods have to have been bought after passport control, on the same day, and remain sealed. So therefore, liquids bought duty free in Dubai cannot be transited through any airport in any of the above countries. There are stricter restrictions on connections to USA flights.
]

And the above is a perfect example of European protectionism...........And it really Pi**es me off!!!:mad: :mad:

derekl

13th Dec 2006, 20:10

Can anybody yet explain what all this is about? What is this dramatic new explosive that is only effective in quantities greater that 100ml in an unsealed container?

It seems to me that we are all being sheep here -- despite reasonably diligent research, I have yet to discover what the threat is. We should demand to be told what the threat is. How would that compromise safety?

For example, it seems a good idea to prevent guns being taken into the passenger cabin -- although they regularly are (in the hands of those who are deemed to be "safe").

Can anybody explain?

LuckyStrike

9th Jan 2007, 02:55

Can anybody yet explain what all this is about? What is this dramatic new explosive that is only effective in quantities greater that 100ml in an unsealed container?

:ugh:
Do you need to know how to fly an airplane to travel with it? No. I guess that's enough of an explanation for you.
And mind you, guns are useless without ammo, so you rather can carry a brick instead...:rolleyes:

Akubra

9th Jan 2007, 08:31

Do you:
1, Get issued a receipt for confiscated property?
2, Have it visibly disposed at the time into a sealed quarantine container?

If not, I am a bit surprised as I thought that would be the norm...

25F

9th Jan 2007, 17:13

The "dramatic new explosive" is probably the one that was used in Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction:

http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/200608/msg00087.html

On a side note, I took my Leatherman Micra through security at STN the other day - completely by mistake. They didn't spot it.

SXB

14th Jan 2007, 19:47

SXB

14th Jan 2007, 20:33

With regard to security in BAA UK airports a quick check of the BAA site reveals an advertisement for security people at Gatwick paying £18,000 per year. No previous experience is required in security, experience in a "customer service role" is desirable though. Applicants should also be "fluent in English" and be able to "stand for long periods"

Interestingly they should also be able to "keep queues to a minimum"

Without being derogatory to those working in these roles I would think it would be extremely difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel given the extremely low pay.

skydriller

15th Jan 2007, 08:57

They miss a lot. On my last two trips I left a half litre bottle of coke in a part of my hand luggage that I don't use much, this was not spotted at frankfurt, Heathrow, Zurich or Belgrade.

More worryingly while I was in Belgrade the local police presented me with a 'police knife' This is a really evil looking weapon with a blade of about 7cm, weighing about a kilo, a seriously dangerous piece of equipment. I gave it to my colleague, who's Icelandic and likes such things. She put it in her laptop bag and forgot about it. Security at Belgrade airport (which is done by the Police) failed to spot the illegal item, she didn't realise it was in the bag until we arrived in Zurich. I'll be sure to raise this with my friends in the Serbian Police when I'm there again next month:)

Security check in airports is a last line of defence and is there to give is the illusion of safety, it's ineffective and carried out by people, for the most part, who have no security expertise.

Quite Frankly, Who Cares?

She had no intention of using the knife to kill people on the plane though, right?
Only those 0.000000001% or whatever with the intention to do harm need to be stopped....and the determined are not going to be detered even by the security currently in place.

OOoooooh, you got through security with a plastic bottle of coke..Shock, Horror!! ....were you hoping to drench the cabin crew into a sticky submission or something?

Of course security miss alot. Havent you worked out that its just there to make the less intellegent of the public masses think the government is doing something to protect them, and severely piss the rest of us off.....

When is the public going to wake up and realise we are paying for a farce....

Regards, SD..

SXB

15th Jan 2007, 09:29

SD
Agree entirely.

Security in airports, as I said in my post, is to give the travelling public the illusion of safety. Most of the rules are a farce. For example the one concerning no liquids of more then 100ml in each indivudual container. Some bod in whitehall has read somewhere that liquid explosives need to be more than 500ml to yield an explosion large enough to cause an aircraft a serious problem, hence the rule. Of course if I was a terrorist I'd then use 5 containers of 100ml and then transfer all the liquid into a whisky bottle I'd bought airside. If I wanted to make a really big bomb I'd also get a few of my terrorist mates to get on the same flight and do the same thing.

Of course if I was a really intelligent terrorist I'd become a real pilot and then get a job with an airline, then I wouldn't need a bomb at all.

Profiling passengers is the only way to give effective security on planes.

derekl

15th Jan 2007, 10:49

I must humbly apologize to LuckyStrike for seeming to be so stupid as to ask the simple question about liquid explosives.

Equally, I thank 25F for researching an article (in his link) which poses the very question. So HOW were they going to do this?

I must also thank SXB for (indirectly) coming to my aid by pointing out that much of what we are subjected to is security theatre, not security. And that is the real point.

I merely picked a nit by questioning the existence of a suitable explosive. I can think of one -- nitroglycerine -- but we can eliminate that one by getting every passenger to jump up and down a few times on a trampoline with their hand luggage :}

TightSlot

15th Jan 2007, 11:00

...I would think it would be extremely difficult to recruit and retain quality personnel given the extremely low pay...

With apologies, but in my view, it's not very low pay - it's actually pretty good pay! For example, many recent entrant Cabin Crew can only dream of earning that much (Yes, I do realise that the jobs are not directly comparable).

daedalus

15th Jan 2007, 11:01

Sad thing about this is that it is the airlines and their employees (including pilots) who will suffer because of all this. With government slapping unjustified extra taxes on fares and the low-cost airlines using all sorts of strategems to increase fares (in the most opaque way possible), passengers will vote with their feet and use rail and sea connections instead. Perhaps not in the UK where rail is so poor, but certainly elsewhere.
We looked recently at fares for a trip to England from Luxembourg. Going Ryanair from either Hahn or Brussels to Stansted added up for 5 of us to about Euro 700. Add another 350 for car hire once in UK and then the hassle factor - the sheer unpleasantness of travelling through airports and being treated worse than cattle in transit.
Alternative, drive to Boulogne, take fast catamaran with no hassle, no crap about liquids in 100ml bottles and toothpaste in plastic bags (can't ferries be blown up? or trains?) and bst of all Euros 88 RETURN for car and 5 pax.
Air travel unless absolutely necessary - stuff it!:ugh:

skydriller

15th Jan 2007, 11:47

.... Air travel unless absolutely necessary - stuff it!:ugh:
That is, I believe, happening already.
We are actually flying to the UK next week for a family do. The only reason I am subjecting my family to this is because Airmiles paid for tickets, Airmiles paid for Hirecar and the fact that I dont fancy the whole days drive/sea crossing x2 for what will be only a long weekend.
I have said this before....I still love the flying part of my trips for work, its just all the other cr&p at the airports I have to put up with......And I wont subject my family to it if its not necessary, which means instead of us all flying to visit family this summer we will be driving over....
Speaking to various travellers as you do while on the move, many comment they are only flying because the have to, not because they choose to.
Regards, SD..

SXB

16th Jan 2007, 21:10

Tightslot
With apologies, but in my view, it's not very low pay - it's actually pretty good pay! For example, many recent entrant Cabin Crew can only dream of earning that much (Yes, I do realise that the jobs are not directly comparable).Both groups will probably not agree but security clearance in an airport and Cabin Crew are directly comparable, both are direct facing customer service roles. It's just that one of these groups doesn't, generally, understand that.

As for the salaries, I realise some recent entry CC in certain airlines will be earning a lot less than £18k per year, I'm guessing most will also be fairly young but maybe their renumeration is comparable to certain others in the same age group in different industries. My point was that £18k per year, generally speaking, is not a good salary in the SE of England.

Have a look at the CC thread in R & N, according to some posters certain long haul CC are earning between £40-60k per year:)

25F

17th Jan 2007, 18:34

The following is from a Canadian government site:

"Q1: Why were liquids, gels and aerosols in carry-on baggage banned on
August 10, 2006?

A: The events that occurred in London, England revealed that liquids, gels
and aerosols can be used to make explosives and other threat items."

What a load of :mad:

Now, where can I get resealable 100ml containers so I can take my own
water, juice, etc, through security?

lplsprog

18th Jan 2007, 12:16

Heard the rumour that security personnel are to sent on courses about liquids evaluation, whatever that is!:confused:

Polehill.flt70

18th Jan 2007, 14:41

Heard the rumour that security personnel are to sent on courses about liquids evaluation, whatever that is!:confused:

It is to be the testing of liquids present in the 20cm x20cm bag, randomly. It will be in conjunction with the swabbing for explosives and normal bag searching routines.

13Alpha

22nd Mar 2009, 00:55

OK I have another question for any "security guys" reading, or indeed any passenger who might have done this.

I want to carry 4 100 ml whisky miniatures in my hand luggage on a domestic flight from Edinburgh next week. If I read the rules correctly, as long as the bottles will fit in the standard resealable 20cmx20cm plastic bag - no problem. Correct ?

The rules seem pretty clear - no mention of alcohol being banned, and this is a domestic flight. But then rules don't always get applied in a commonsense way... and I'd rather find out now than watch my single malts being chucked in the bin.

13Alpha

Dit

22nd Mar 2009, 11:52

13 Alpha, you should be alright, as you say there is nothing in the rules regarding alcohol as long as its less than 100ml. I took 3 75ml bottles of whiskey through STN just before xmas as a present for someone... thankfully they didn't demand that the sealed bottles were opened for testing!

hotmetal

22nd Mar 2009, 23:26

They told a colleague of mine only toiletries were allowed in the bag. This is incorrect of course but typical of the sort of people employed in airport security. They are often confused by the simplest rules and interpret them in their own way. Numerous examples. Won't bore you here.

Munnyspinner

22nd Mar 2009, 23:53

Had you been able to put your duty free in your hold baggage I think this would have been OK. It gets screened as well.

It is very easy to reseal anything like perfume to make it look unopened. There is a limit on the volume of liquid that can be carried for well documented reasons.

In the UK, duty free is security checked and sealed to ensure that it is what it says it is. You can't get through from Landside to Airside with Duty free from anywhere else. Tansfer pax are not all rescreened if deemed to be clean. I would suggest next time you check in the duty free bags in a holdall or something. You can check with the airline if this is OK. If Security don't like it the net result will be the same but you might have a claim for lost baggage?