Airport Security liquids Bag

[JellyWings]

As a relatively regular business traveller and sufferer at the hands of airport security (!) can anyone suggest where I can purchase a security compliant bag to carry my toiletries in?

Am getting a bit fed up with my tatty and ripped sandwich bag!!!!

Many thanks in advance. :ok:

[apaddyinuk]

YUP....

M&S do a cool little zip up see through bags with black trim. You have to buy the pack of 3 sizes and the middle sized one is the security approved one (it will have a little yellow sticker on it saying "suitable for airport security" or something to the effect on it) and I think costs about £10 or less!!!

It has saved my life as crew!

[ab33t]

So do Boots

[JellyWings]

Thanks guys for the info - I will take a look at the Boots one. Interestingly enough, I have tried the M&S bag but it was rejected at security in Glasgow as they deemed it 'non-compliant' :ugh:

[Herod]

Has anyone got an answer as to why it has to be a re-sealable bag? After all, once through security, you can open it again.

[Dan Winterland]

Two questions spring to mind.

If you've had a colostomy, do you have to carry the bag in your hand?

What happens if the contents are over 100ml?

[SparrowMan]

I also had my M&S bag declined at Glasgow security - was told that it had a volume of greater than 1 litre???

I have since been using www.securitywashbag.com (http://www.securitywashbag.com)

and have not had a problem at any airport so far, but don't hold me to that - you just never can tell with the muppet show who run airport security in the UK............. :O

[ExXB]

Has anyone got an answer as to why it has to be a re-sealable bag? After all, once through security, you can open it again.

Silly PPruner, it's the rule FOLLOW IT, or I'll get out my rubber gloves :=

Actually this is a very good question - I'm guessing they want it sealed so stuff doesn't fall out in the scanner.

I actually now use two 1L resealable bags as my travel 'washbag'. One with toothpaste, deodorant etc. and the other with my other 'bathroom' stuff. Much less bulky than a traditional washbag and I always have a spare bag (such as when my wife forgets).

[Rusland 17]

The best bag I have found is sold by Muji. It is compliant, very strong and holds more than any other bag I have used. Just £3.95 (and available online).

http://www.muji.eu/pages/online.asp?V=1&Sec=18&Sub=79&PID=3402

[Capot]

Any bag that complies with the following, dated 2006 but lifted today from the EU Commission website, complies with the "EU regulations", in spite of what a moron with a little petty power might say. Whether or not you argue the toss is up to you!

You are only allowed to take small quantities of liquids in your hand luggage. These liquids must be in individual containers with a maximum capacity of 100 millilitres each. You must pack these containers in one transparent, re-sealable plastic bag of not more than one litre capacity per passenger.Helpfully, other sources suggest that a bag of 20X20cm would have 1 litre capacity as it would with a uniform depth of 2.5cm, which sounds about right. But there is no regulation specifying those dimensions; all that's needed is is a re-sealable bag of up to 1 litre capacity, regardless of its other dimensions, within reason of course.

Many UK airports have a scam of forcing passengers to buy grossly over-priced "compliant" bags to replace ones which are perfectly compliant. To their credit, BAA does not join in this fraud and gives away bags to the needy, or they did when I was last there (LGW? Can't remember.) In the UK, the racket should be reported to the local Trading Standards office whenever and wherever encountered.

[SparrowMan]

The securitywashbag seems to work very well because it has very similar characteristics to the sandwich bags that UK security seem to hold in such high esteem! I have never had any of the Gestapo from security even give it a second look!

I also like the safety clasp on the zip which means nothing's gonna leak out in my hand luggage with all that cabin pressure change! :D

[PAXboy]

Thread drift but an amusing moment (I hope) talk of pressure change ...

Last August I went from CPT to JNB and the cabin pressure was fine but JNB is at some 5,000ft. When I unscrewed the cap of my roll-on deodorant I met a new problem. The unit was almost empty and so the air inside the container was at sea level, which was applying pressure to the roller ball which was suffused with the liquid deodorant. As the cap came off, the ball was ejected several inches and the remaining liquid followed - all of which landed inside my still part filled suitcase.

You will readily understand the similarities of having a large ball ejected, with a long trail of white goo, which covers much of your clothing and leaves you with messy fingers ...:* :sad: :( :ouch: :eek:

[SparrowMan]

Nice story PAXboy - sounds like a "Something About Mary" moment.......... :p

[A2QFI]

I have never had any grief from using the right size supermarket "Press to Seal" storage bags - box of 25 - 18cm by 20cm. My experience is that sandwich bags, which seal with a flap, like an envelope, are much thinner plastic and are probably intended for a one way trip somewhere, the contents eaten and the bag binned.

[IJM]

The clear sealable bag I used during my Xmas / New Year trip - going through Calgary, Edmonton, Gatwick, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Memmingen airports at various stages - was issued sometime in the past at a Canadian Airport, as it has the Canadian Govt logo on it and refers to the 100ml restrictions etc. Therefore it would appear to be be some sort of "officially sanctioned" bag?

However when going through security at Edinburgh airport, a member of staff there was very concerned about it as it was "non compliant" as it is a rectangular shape (fairly small in size, don't have it to hand right now), and she handed me a square-shaped bag and asked me to use it in future.

No other airport from the list above queried my rectangular bag - not quite sure what the issue was at Edinburgh?

Mind you, another member of staff at Edinburgh was insistent that my hooded sweatshirt had to be taken off, as it was a "jacket"?!

[hotmetal]

They are well known within my airline for being a bunch of jobsworth eejits at EDI security. That experience is completely typical.

[Katamarino]

The fact that it has to be in a bag at all is a complete nonsense, in my opinion. I just throw my stuff in the end pocket of my carry-on, transparent-bag-be-damned, and have not yet had any problems at all.

[PAXboy]

One way in which I minimise the problem is to take non-liquid products, particularly after the problem described above! Solid stick shaving soap and solid stick deodorant, then it's down to mini-tube of toothpaste but you can still get tooth powder and for the really frequent traveller, that might be a good idea. Just don't take any liquids at all.

[hotmetal]

Ahh but the stick deodourant and the solid shaving soap can be 'melted down in to a liquid and are not allowed' according to some of the jobsworths. I kid you not this sort of nonsense has come out of the mouths of our friends in 'security'. As for toothpowder I don't live in Victorian England and would like to keep my teeth when I retire.:}

[TheTiresome1]

I have avoided all these problems by [a] using whatever the airline gives me as a freebie, and [b] using the shops at my destination and thus supporting the local economy. ;)

The KISS principle works so far! And US "personal care" products are cheap.

[AircraftOperations]

I was told by UK security staff that the bag had to re-sealable for 2 reasons:

Firstly, so a "vapour test" can be performed on the contents if required. (not quite sure about this myself)

Secondly, so liquid items stay together and can be quickly studied on the X-Ray.

Ring any bells?

[hotmetal]

There is no guarantee that any security staff understand the reasons they do anything. I think the reason it had to seal was to stop people stuffing so much it was all falling out of the bag and making a nonsense of the 1L limit on volume for the bag. The vapour reason is becoming the common answer but in 2006 at our check point we had no vapour type checking machines available. As for 'keeping it all together' why does that matter. As the years march on the real reasons for the whole circus are forgotten and myths are repeated so often that they become the new reasons.

[JellyWings]

I ordered one of the SecurityWashbags as recommended - am very pleased with it. Excellent quality and has been accepted thru every airport security I have passed thru so far! :D

[Businesstraveller]

I came through BHX on Monday and unusually for me, had a shampoo bottle in my luggage (approx. 60ml). Security picked it up (fine), but then insisted on me placing it in a resealable bag to be re-scanned. I pointed out that as I only had 1 liquid item, I saw no need for it to be bagged (on it's own). However, the security Taliban on duty didn't agree. As I know BHX demonstrates it's 'cheap and chearful' credentials by charging 50p for two small plastic bags (what a blatant money making scheme that is!) I decided against contributing towards the BHX Christmas fund and so donated my half empty shampoo bottle to the delightful lady in question - happy days....

[Thames virtual]

I use these from Lakeland Zip-Seal Freezer Bags - Lakeland, the home of creative kitchenware (http://www.lakeland.co.uk/zip-seal-freezer-bags/F/C/storing-preserving/C/storing-preserving-food-bags/product/10918_10917)

They hold 1.5 litres (I've just checked with a jug of water). Nobody's complained it's too big, but I don't put a lot in it. They look about the height and width as the ones that were being handed out at Heathrow when I went through earlier this month.

[nicolai]

I used to use plastic wallets with a plastic zip close, like a beefed-up "Ziplock" bag, from office stationery suppliers, but I found that the plastic was not flexible enough and would crack after a few weeks of weekly travel, usually while away - so even though they are cheap, they are too cheap.
I now use this bag from Eagle Creek (http://www.eaglecreek.com/accessories/accessories_toiletry_kits/Pack-It-LiquidGel-Set-40456/) which is made of a more flexible plastic, and so far no airport security has complained about it and it is showing no signs of wear after some months.

[JellyWings]

Just a foot note to this thread:

I travelled through a major regional UK airport last week. My securitywashbag was accepted fine but my wife's M&S bag was rejected :=

The officious security bod proudly announced that the M&S bags were no longer permitted as they had been 'proven to be greater than 1 litre in volume'.

Was wondering if anyone else had suffered similar?

I have to say - it's enough to make us take the train next time :ugh:

[Pontius Navigator]

I was told by UK security staff that the bag had to re-sealable for 2 reasons:

Firstly, so a "vapour test" can be performed on the contents if required.

In theory, by placing all the smellies in a sealed bag and gases that leak are contained within the bag. As the bag passes through the scanners the sensor would detect this concentraion of gases.

This presupposes that one bag that passes through does not contaiminate the machine for later bags/

It presupposes that the sealed bag is not so totally sealed as to stop any gases escaping.

It is certainly the case that they want even a single item in the bag so that any aromas are captured.

Now Mrs PN is know for arriving at security with about 2 litres of essentials despite Mr PN having forcibly extracted a suitcase from her the night before. At LGW she passed about 4-5 items through in her handbag. These were spotted, a plastic bag was produced and they were bagged (post-scanner). Her handbag was then scanned with a hand-held sniffer and then the bag was also scanned. This was all done without hastle and quite pleasantly.

Naturally any terry would use an odourless solid that could be activated by ***** **** *** ** *** ******.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

I have to query the need for all these liquids to be carried as hand baggage anyway. Neither the OH nor I feel the need to carry shampoo etc. into the cabin - it's all in our hold baggage.

At worst, we could [shock horror] buy some on arrival at a shop. That's what we usually do - why is it so important to carry the stuff into the cabin anyway? Is there a shower on your aircraft?

[Pontius Navigator]

TTB, one reason is the additional cost for hold baggage on some airlines so it is both cheaper and more convenient to have hand lugage only.

Yes you can buy what you need in a shop; shampoo, shower gel and shaving cream, but Mrs TTB, and certainly Mrs PN, will not want to take the risk that they cannot find the right colour nail varnish, hair spray, shampoo, deoderant, perfume, nail polish remover, toothpaste, lipstick, lipsalve, sunscreen, insect repellent, hand gel etc etc.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Dear Pontius, you make a fair point. I forgot the scurrying Executives whose lives are so hectic that they cannot afford to wait for hold baggage, and thus clutch their small world to them in a small bag.

Mrs TTB is not a painted woman, however. Being ex-RAF, she is perfectly capable of surviving 7 hours without the need for a mobile beauty salon. Natural beauty and a robust persona will suffice. ;)



BTW, are you perchance formerly XP or XW? Feel free to PM.

[radeng]

Medicines are where it can get interesting. You are allowed more than 100ml, and part filled bottles of more than 100ml, provided they have a proper prescription label from a pharmacy on them. They obviously can end up filling up a 3 litre bag, let alone a 1 litre! Depending on where you are, the muppets can vary from being helpful to downright obnoxious - LHR T5 had been the worst. When the dose is 2.5ml, and exceeding it can lead to fainting, demands to 'taste it' need to be refused. Explaining that a collapse at the top of the escalator and what would happen to people further down just about got through to the muppet - who was not a native English speaker, incidentally.

The TSA seem to be on top of this problem, incidentally.

So if the pharmacy is in Tehran, what then?


Slightly related subject

Does anyone know if there has been a legal challenge in the US to the TSA's 'no fly rule' on the basis that it should need a court order, and is illegal without? I'm surprised the ACLU hasn't gotten into that one.

[jetset lady]

TTB,

In my case, the airline I work for strongly discourages us against putting bags in the hold, due to the way one aircraft type is loaded. As crew, on the average three day short haul trip, we change aircraft approximately every two sectors, often on pretty tight turnarounds and bags are difficult to locate quickly. As a result, we have to carry all the extra liquids needed for the trip, in hand luggage. For this reason, the company actually went to the Dft to confirm that the M&S bags were acceptable. They agreed that the bags, did indeed, fit all the requirements and gave us the green light.

Sadly, while they may be accepted by the DfT, "They 'aint at Manchester", according to the vile, nasty little swamp rat of a failed wheel clamper, who I suspect spends his time off counting how many hairs he has managed to grow "down there". It appears that Manchester have their own rules, but then again, as this character was keen to point out, his girlfriend manages just fine and she has to go through security every single day to work in the Ethiad lounge. What a hero, God bless her! I'm assuming she's not night stopping in the lounge though? :rolleyes:

And if you do go through and get forced into buying one of their rip off bags for £1, despite the fact that the person in front of you, has just been cleared without question, with exactly the same bag, then don't even think about using that as an excuse. Apparently, inconsistencies in security are not this supervisors fault, or his problem.

Finally, if you are tempted to stand your ground and argue, be aware that if you are crew, this one will helpfully remind you of your responsibilities with regards to an ontime departure and suggest that you cough up quickly before you make the flight late, as you aren't going anywhere till you do!

However, never fear. At least you can rest easy, knowing that your £1 has supposedly gone to charity. You won't find out which one though, as that appears to be priviledged information.....:*

[flyingfemme]

I have to query the need for all these liquids to be carried as hand baggage anyway.

Ain't you the lucky one. I have psoriasis and my handbag always contains handcream, lip balm and antibac gel as a minimum. Usually a prescription item, or two, when travelling in case my checked bag goes missing. In the space of a "normal" day's travelling without them my skin can crack, split and infect enough to ruin the next week. Particularly when I am dehydrated because I can't carry any water with me!

[jetjockeyusa]

I love that useless security regulation LOL.

[Final 3 Greens]

Is there a shower on your aircraft?

Between DXB and LHR, yes.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

I apologise unreservedly to all of you with medical requirements that entail the carriage of various 'potions and lotions'. I had failed to consider that aspect when I started dribbling on my keyboard.

Crawling away in a sideways manner :oh:

[Pagan_angel]

I have to say - it's enough to make us take the train next time


for short haul distances.... The Man in Seat Sixty-One... (http://www.seat61.com) shhhhh.....

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Short-haul ... a possible option for some.

Long-haul ... a farce, and I had noted your caveat! Taking the quoted 6 days each way to NY, which is not where I need to be, I therefore add 2 weeks to my planned [and regular] 3 weeks, and then another 2 days getting from NY>DC and back. My 3 weeks in the DC area is now getting close to 6 weeks away from home.

[radeng]

JSL,

Won't the company support you in blaming the security muppet for the late departure and demand compensation from the airport? Or don't the company care about their employees?

[west lakes]

radeng
She's away, but yes they will!

[jetset lady]

Thanks Westie! Back now. :ok:

Radeng,

As westie said, having read the report, my managers have said that the company will back me all the way if it happens again. The problem is, it's not just me and the company that will be affected if I decide to stand my ground. It's also the passengers that could be delayed and subsequently miss meetings, connections etc. And possibly the next lot of passengers waiting for that aircraft. And the crews, both those flying with me and those that are again, waiting for the aircraft.

In all honesty, I'm not sure I could do that to so many people. No doubt, that is exactly what these idiots bank on. :(

[Final 3 Greens]

In all honesty, I'm not sure I could do that to so many people. No doubt, that is exactly what these idiots bank on.

JSL, you have my sympathy, as I have seen security screeners behave like this many times.

I don't think that you should make an issue of it, as it stresses you out (and this type of pond life may 'retaliate' by being even more difficult next time.)

Someone at management level needs to start keeping an incident log and when there are sufficient entries, come down on the airport management like a ton of bricks.

[Torquatus]

F3G, are you suggesting that a Manager should keep (or require someone to keep) a permenant record that would show a deficiency that they would then need to resolve? Without legislation to require it?

That would be a bit too much like effective management, surely! :ok:

[JWP2010]

Terminal One on Thursday with a longer than usual queue before the boarding card & photo security check, reason being that the bag-checking personnel were being very picky. A number of travellers were made to re-pack their liquids into clear plastic re-sealable bags because they had their liquids packed in, er, clear plastic re-sealable bags.
From my viewpoint the bags they were using were fine. Perhaps it was the wrong type of clear plastic?:)

[Pontius Navigator]

Digressing slightly, but still on security, we know why we have random checks of our footware, but why belts?

Is it to prevent false alerts from the metal buckle or do they suspect more clandestine uses from a belt? If they suspect that I have razor blades, a gigli saw, or Kruger Rands concealed then fair dinkum. If it is just the metal buckle then my plastic buckle should be OK.

Going through Luton I was also asked to remove my watch. When I assured them that the watch would not initiate the alarm they let me through with a 'let's see' and possibly hoping for an 'I told you so.' My watch is titanium and does not set off the alarms :)

[sTeamTraen]

Yesterday at STN, I was in the security queue (just behind a nice Irish lady who had a 90ml drum of expensive face cream confiscated by the female tray-loader, for no obvious reason other than that she was in a hurry to get to the gate and was unlikely to object) when I committed a major terrorist attack by putting:
- one roller deodorant
- one tube of toothpaste
- one small non-pressurised aerosol spray
- one spare contact lens
through the machine in a plastic bag measuring 27x28cm.:=

After these items had been through the scanner, I was hauled off for a "frank chat". The security person informed me of my choices:
- go back and buy the right size of bag
- abandon my items

The security queue was 20 minutes long and I would have risked missing my flight. I asked if I could keep the contact lens, which is in a tiny glass bottle about 2x1cm, containing about 1ml of liquid. I was told that this was not possible. I offered to prise the lid open and drink the liquid, but apparently if you drink 1ml of saline solution which has been scanned you can make the plane explode. I then offered to take a tissue, absorb the 1ml of liquid onto it, then wait the couple of minutes which it would take for said liquid to evaporate. At this point, perhaps because I had been polite and non-sarcastic throughout the entire conversation, Mr. Jobsworth relented and allowed me to take the contact lens, but the lethal toothpaste, deodorant, and aftershave had to go, because they had already been scanned inside a bag which was too big. :ugh:

My question is: Do these people actually think that their inflexibility on meaningless points of minor details actually contributes to security? Or, do they do it for kicks? Or, are they so aware that the whole procedure is meaningless that they're in fact taking the mick out of the system as much as out of the pax?

[TSR2]

Do these people actually think that their inflexibility on meaningless points of minor details actually contributes to security

If you allow the tens of thousand security guys 'flexibility' on what they allow through however meaningless you think they are, then you might as well have NO security checks at all.

The message is simple. Stick to the rules no matter how silly or unimportant they may seem to you and you will have an easier passage through security.

[Skipness One Echo]

Q : Would the member of staff be sacked for not following the company rules and / or DFT Guidelines if they decided to start making these decisions themselves?
A : Quite likely

Q : Is the liquid ban a new thing?
A : No

Q : How long have these bags been given out at major airports?
A : 4 1/2 years

Q : Is there a website you can check before you fly?
A : Usually

Q : Would I tolerate the grief I personally inflict on security staff, glowers, evil eyes, muttering and whispering in my own work environment?
Last week I went through the body scanner at MAN as I pinged the arch on the way through and by my body language alone I made it clear I wished the man was dead.
A : NEVER, I would dismiss anyone who approached that sport of nonsense.

Q : Do I fly more than once a year?
A : Yes

Q : Ever thought of hanging onto the approved bag you got at the airport rather than risking something I bought in a supermarket?
A : Yes I have a small pile at home I lifted from Heathrow. I appear to be a thief as well as an arrogant swine when I pass through security.

Taking all that into account, I have never had an issue with my liquids aside from some silly woman ( again with the attitude problem ) checking I didn't have the limited edition special exploding toothpaste. In around a hundred flights since the ban was introduced, I have not had a major issue. If you find yourself arguing with anyone at security, you have already been awarded the coveted "EPIC FAIL" award of the day as the above hassle and stress is all completely avoidable for travelling passengers. At some point, we as a society need to stop blaming "everyone else" when frankly a little more planning on our own parts and we could all avoid an awful lot of grief.

Pilots are another story, God help them, I don't know how they manage!

[TSR2]

At some point, we as a society need to stop blaming "everyone else" when frankly a little more planning on our own parts and we could all avoid an awful lot of grief.

Absolutely spot on there Skip.

[Joao da Silva]

All well and good, but what about when the security staff do not follow the published rules?

[lurkinginSTO]

"Stick to the rules no matter how silly or unimportant they may seem to you"

What if we are following the rules? I take a bag that was perfectly acceptable in ten airports but on the eleventh it's suddenly not compliant. I have to take my shoes off at the security in BRU but the rest of Europe doesn't give a rats arse about shoes, you just go through the detector. More often than not I see people going through with empty bottles of water, but if you have 10 drops left in it, it goes in the bin. Years ago, some airports were demanding you would turn on your laptop at security (because if it's a bomb, it's better to kill people at the airport than on the airplane, right?), and my boyfriend almost didn't fly one day because his battery was not working, and the laptop wouldn't turn on without the electrical cord...
There is no consistency in security checks, and this leaves passengers with the constant worry that something will go awry despite best compliance and preparation. How do you prepare for randomness?...

[sTeamTraen]

What if we are following the rules? I take a bag that was perfectly acceptable in ten airports but on the eleventh it's suddenly not compliant.
This is what happened to me. I was stopped at STN for a too-big ziploc bag that had been no problem at FKB 24 hours earlier. Had the people at FKB queried it, I would have gone to the back of the security queue (length: 1 minute) and got a smaller one from the pile of free bags there. Anyone want to bet that someone at STN isn't on commission from the pound-a-pop bag company?

A couple of years ago I saw an American pax having a penknife with a 2cm blade removed from him at SXB (where all the staff, not just security, are humourless Rottweilers). He was protesting that he had flown all over the world with it since 9/11. At STN there are notices stating that blades <6cm are OK (but nothing about the size of the bag, saying "seriously, if you're over 20x20cm, buy one of these now, we're not kidding).

[Manchikeri]

Is there the slightest chance that someone, somewhere, in authority reads these remarks?

If yes, what are the chances that some action might be taken to rectify matters?

[Skipness One Echo]

I was stopped at STN for a too-big ziploc bag that had been no problem at FKB 24 hours earlier. Had the people at FKB queried it, I would have gone to the back of the security queue (length: 1 minute) and got a smaller one from the pile of free bags there.

The threat level is a little higher over here. Perhaps they take security a little more seriously? By your own admission you walked straight passed the approved bags and didn't lift one. The fact that the guys at FKB aren't enforcing the rules is the issue at fault here, not the fact that BAA Stansted are. This was your own fault.

[Joao da Silva]

The threat level is a little higher over hereWith the greatest of respect, how do you know that?

The answer is that you do not, as Germany does not publish it's security levels, like other countries.

However, my recent visits there suggest that it is higher than before, with armed police patrolling stations and airports.

[crippen]

I once got 'pulled' by security at Manchester with a small metal key safe that looked like a hand grenade on the X ray machine! Opened up and the nice security man let me take it through ok.:O


The man on security in the sand pit was on the phone instead of watching the screen as I watched it pass through on the X ray machine screen.:=

Nuff said. And it did look a bit like a hand grenade.

[Skipness One Echo]

With the greatest of respect, how do you know that?

Ah OK I see your point. I was alluding to the fact that the UK has a relatively large and young, often unemployed and angry population of muslim men from Pakistan, which in recent years has been the centre of Islamic militantism. They are not integrated and indeed do not wish to do so. They are much more religious than their parents and they are blazing with rage about what they see as our attack on Islam by being in Afgahnaistan and Iraq at all. Our last government was in utter denial until a group of supposedly British men caused carnage and murder the day after London won the 2012 Olympics.

The community's very strong links with "home" allow an easy conduit for terror into the UK itself with men and women marrying on direction allowing our enemies British passports over time. Roughly, that is why I think the ongoing terror threat is greater.

Which country's citizens hatched the bomb plot that gave us the liquid ban?
Which country was Richard Reid the shoe bomber from?
Which country was the underwear bomber on the AMS-DTW NW A330 radicalised?

Sometimes I think the UK is a danger to the world, and that's without mentioning Simon Cowell. ooops too late, just did!

[radeng]

If the muppets have any sense, why did I have a spanner (US: wrench) 2 inches long confiscated at Frankfurt - being 4BA and 6 BA, what could I atke apart with it?

They have a problem know as my travelling trousers have the belt sewed onto the back of the trousers........they don't like it, but other than having me remove trousers, there's not much they can do. Luxembourg were really pi**ed off with this - so were Copenhagen.

But for crew to object and then eventually have the airline announce


"XYZ airlines apologise for the delay in departure of flight ABC 1234. This is beacause the incompetant airport security staff were totally unreasonable in harassing and delaying the access of the flight crew the aircraft to the stage where the crew no longer felt safe to fly."

have such an announcement four or five times an hour and something will happen.....

[Chica]

Last week my Muji pouch ("Pouches designed to airport regulations, perfect for carrying your liquids through security") was rejected by Gatwick security, and I had to transfer the contents into one of their plastic bags.

Reason given because it has a zip rather than an airtight seal :confused:

[cockney steve]

Re- Jsl's post #42.

You would feel guilty about inconveniencing and disrupting the lives of ONE load of passengers.

It's time that ALL flight personnel took a stand against these farcical, meaningless and useless regulations.
Every day, MILLIONS of productive hours are wasted in pointless queues,undergoing futile and pointless checks. A couple of days of concerted "disobedience" by aircrew ,would surely be supported by the majority of their Pax. Imagine the effect of telling the "security" jobsworth , that the entire crew and majority of Pax, were not willing to cooperate and DEMANDED that a senior manager hear their grievances and follow the procedures in a prompt,courteous and orderly fashion (provision for sitting, whilst replacing footwear, tables to repack bags, coathooks, etc also seem reasonable to demand) The disruption and exposure of the apalling treatment of paying pax would soon make a few managers fear for their cosy jobs and just maybe heed the old proverb about "biting the hand that feeds you".

The fact that would-be terrorists HAVE boarded,despite the "security" points to it's ineffectiveness. No, I don't swallow the "how many have been deterred" argument.

Any thickos would be detected by the "normal" diligence of checkin /Gate/ general Public-Facing staff....the bright ones are NOT going to be dissuaded by the present "security" charade.


I refute any suggestion that the muppets at the sharp-end of the job are too lacking in gorms to exercise discretion regarding the "clear plastic ziploc bag" issue...a rule CAN be framed, stating a preferred capacity and a suggested tolerance acceptable....jobsworth would then have his boredom alleviated by exercising his authority and discretion and getting the self-satisfied feeling of importance. Likewise, framing a set of regulations to state that the intent of the checks should NOT be to maliciously disrupt,deprive or deny any passenger or their luggage of prompt, fair and courteous service abuse of power shall result in sanctions including possible dismissal against the employee.
the spirit of the regulations can ,and should be, the same as the letter.
Our custodians of the Law, the Police-Force, exercise their discretion every day. Some would say they have a markedly superior level of intelligence and training...

[Skipness One Echo]

Our custodians of the Law, the Police-Force, exercise their discretion every day. Some would say they have a markedly superior level of intelligence and training...

Actually they have had ten years of being undermined by plastic plods in England and Wales where a cheaper muppet dressed up in a pretendy Police uniform was the public face of Policing. Technically if you tought the Police were perhaps not that bright, you would find yourself plummeting new depths with a PCSO. Widely varying powers across the English regions mean the public have no idea what powers a PCSO has on meeting without a look on the local Police website. BTP have handcuffs and get off on using them, the Met don't have cuffs and are more civilianised whereas the ones at Gatwick are actually disguised in real Police uniforms and you have to read the small print to know what you are dealing with. The good news is though most of 'em are getting dumped as we can't afford this cosmetic, pretendy nonsense anymore. Ranting? Me?

[speke2me]

Going through Luton I was also asked to remove my watch. When I assured them that the watch would not initiate the alarm they let me through with a 'let's see' and possibly hoping for an 'I told you so.' My watch is titanium and does not set off the alarms

Never knew that titanium was neutral - thanks for the tip. Have been taking my watch off with no need. Reason for titanium? It's very light on the wrist and actually stronger than its steel counterpart. Also not that expensive :ok:

Just need a titanium belt buckle and I'm laughing...

[VP8]

Sparrowman says

I also had my M&S bag declined at Glasgow security - was told that it had a volume of greater than 1 litre???

I have since been using SecurityWashbag (http://www.securitywashbag.com)

and have not had a problem at any airport so far, but don't hold me to that - you just never can tell with the muppet show who run airport security in the UK.............

My securitywashbag.com was rejected at STN one day and a week later was accepted as being OK.

There's no pleasing some folk!!

[OFSO]

The security guys at GRO (members of the Guardia Civil = Spanish federal police) found a sculpting tool, that's a metal rod about 5" long with rounded ends, not sharp, like a small spoon) which had slipped into the lining of my wife's handbag.

The Guardia said to her with a smile "we have no problem here with you taking this on board your flight, but they'll never let you on with it at Stansted on your return flight."

Tool was expensive (hand made) so she phoned me waiting outside GRO airport to see her plane off, I went up, Guardia brought her over to me and she handed me the tool.

Phew ! Another terrorist attack averted !

[speke2me]

Ok went through MAN 3 weeks ago, hand luggage only. In my bag were:

2 x small (Hotel type) shampoos
1 x disposable fag lighter
1 x tiny eye drops bottle

Oh, and a similar fag lighter in my coat pocket, which went through the scanner.

Sailed through security. I then bought an eye pencil for a lady friend. Was told this was a liquid, so it was sealed in a bag. No problem.

Returned a few days later, again no problem.

Went through MAN again last week. Same bag, with addition of empty lip gloss (to match the colour and then replace) and said eye pencil (which was also wrong colour and needed replacing - women!!)

This time bag was pulled. Lady went through it and took out the two shampoos, fag lighter, and empty lip gloss container.

Had to pay a quid for a bag to get them through.

However the eye pencil was deemed ok, and the similar fag lighter in my coat pocket, went through ok too?

Consistency anyone?

Suffice to say, reducing the hassle factor is paramount here. I have kept their pound bag. In future I will use it as it seems to placate them that you have made some effort, although not always, judging by some posts. However, it is one of their pound bags, which might help.

As a PAX I almost feel security are on a mission to catch me out for some minor infringement, rather than just look after security.

After all, if they didn't have a visible bin full of empty lip gloss tubes, fag lighters and 5% full small shampoo/cosmetics containers, how could they justify their continued employment? I don't recall seeing any grenades or guns in the 'naughty box'?

[speke2me]

Ah OK I see your point. I was alluding to the fact that the UK has a relatively large and young, often unemployed and angry population of muslim men from Pakistan, which in recent years has been the centre of Islamic militantism. They are not integrated and indeed do not wish to do so. They are much more religious than their parents and they are blazing with rage about what they see as our attack on Islam by being in Afgahnaistan and Iraq at all. Our last government was in utter denial until a group of supposedly British men caused carnage and murder the day after London won the 2012 Olympics.

The community's very strong links with "home" allow an easy conduit for terror into the UK itself with men and women marrying on direction allowing our enemies British passports over time. Roughly, that is why I think the ongoing terror threat is greater.

Which country's citizens hatched the bomb plot that gave us the liquid ban?
Which country was Richard Reid the shoe bomber from?
Which country was the underwear bomber on the AMS-DTW NW A330 radicalised?


Undoubtedly there appears to be a radical muslim faction in UK. But I suspect it's a tiny minority. Tar all UK muslims with the same brush and you get the 'knee jerk' reaction we have now. And btw I'm not Asian or muslim.

The 7/7 lot didn't target an airport or flight.
The Glasgow lot never attempted a flight but simply tried to attack the airport building.

Of your last 3 examples, for the first one, liquid checks weren't in place, the second one, I'm not sure if they were or not, and for the third one, they were in place but made no difference?

A cynic might say 'vested interests and big security contracts worth thousands of jobs', but I'm not a cynic.

:)

[radeng]

Last year, at T5 as usal, I took my raincoat off, and it went through the scanner, together with my carry bag and the computer. Get into the lounge, take off raincoat and hear a dull 'clunk'. Investigate to find that a 150mL can of Malvern water, scrounged from CC on the previous trip, forgotten and not drunk, was in the raincoat pocket.

'Nuff said.

[speke2me]

Last year, at T5 as usal, I took my raincoat off, and it went through the scanner, together with my carry bag and the computer. Get into the lounge, take off raincoat and hear a dull 'clunk'. Investigate to find that a 150mL can of Malvern water, scrounged from CC on the previous trip, forgotten and not drunk, was in the raincoat pocket.

'Nuff said.

Outrageous! Next thing you'll be posting that you and all the other PAX survived the next flight.

:D

[speke2me]

came through ZRH today, en route FCO to MAN.

Bag pulled up. Major problem. Zippo petrol fag lighter.

Had to empty all the cotton wool out. With a provided bent screwdriver.

I give up!!

Checked bag next time. Had enough.

:ugh:

[Helol]

Does Gatwick provide free liquid bags?

Sure I saw them available at some point, maybe I was dreaming...

[Skipness One Echo]

Yes they are still free at Gatters.

[givemewings]

I was under the impressions that Zippo/refillable lighters are banned under the DG regs for carriage onboard, has that changed?

Think you guys have it bad, try being crew going through MAN... I duly had all my liquids in the required baggie, however it broke in my bag and as I was going through the checkpoint I explained to them what had happened and could I please get a replacement. They handed it over, I put the stuff in, went through. Then had to wait while my bag sat on the side while all the others went through, only then did they bring my bag over and ask me if I had any liquids in it. Not that I can think of, I said, I put them in the bag. "What's this then?" (holding up a mini size clear nail polish) It had fallen out of the baggie when it broke and lodged itself inside my aircraft manual (ring binder) They way they reacted you'd think it was an IED!!!! Got frisked up, name taken down and email sent to my boss.

When I politely asked if they also record the names and details of passengers mistakely in breach of the rules I might as well have asked to eat their firstborn!!! They have no ability to distinguish between a genuine mistake. I get that someone could feign so to get something through, but mate, I have access to far more effective items than clear nail polish if I were someone that wanted to cause some fuss. They just don't seem to understand this.

And FYI I am still very ticked off that one of your staff felt the need to go up my dress during a 'search' without any warning whatsoever!!!! :sad::ouch: No idea how to lodge a complaint and anyway since then lost the notebook which I wrote down said persons' details....

[carousel]

A new generation of scanners could end the 100ml restriction on carry-on liquids, but will they affect security queues too?

Having passed the Department of Transport's trials, the new X-ray devices, which can detect explosive properties in liquids, will be installed in all British airports and across Europe by 29 April 2013. While passengers will still have to remove liquids for inspection, they will no longer have to comply with the 100ml restriction.
Department of Transport has approved a new generation of airport scanners that will allow passengers to carry containers of fluid larger than 100ml. It's frustrating when you have to buy expensive drinks in the departure lounge or throw away toiletries that you had forgotten to remove.”

The ban has been seen as a huge inconvenience to travellers as they pass through security; 20 household bins full of confiscated items are thrown away daily at London Stansted alone. Seized items range from expensive perfumes to bottled water and champagne.:ok:

[Tableview]

This is what happens when the combined stupidity of the travelling public is pitted against the pointless regulations and the army of knuckle draggers who enforce them with varying degrees of consistency and boorishness.

That said, the regulations are clear in most respects and I have no sympathy for people who try to go through with full 750ml or litres bottles/containers of liquid.

[radeng]

If the flight crews did disrupt matters (and JSL, it's going to be the only way) AND the airlines backed them and sued the airports, with LOTS of publicity, we might get somewhere. Until then, no hope....Interestingly, they never ask for my insulin pen and possibly as much as 6mL of insulin to go in a plastic bag.

I doubt you could get away with a pharmacy label on a bottle of champagne though......imagine the label "XYZ Pharmacy, Mr Radeng, 18.75 cL every 30 minutes"

[ExXB]

Last time I went through BRS I saw a shop employee pulling a pallet of bottled water bottles. It was cling rapped in plastic through which you could see shipping labels. What are the chances that liquid was checked?

Same trip the guy ahead of me at security had a 12" wrench taken from him. Oh, sir, you could hit somebody over the head with that. I recalled that comment as I walked through the DF shop and observed hundreds of similar weapons. Made of heavy glass, many of which had a perfect handle for doing the nasty. Canes of elderly passengers seem to be OK, but woe betide you if you've got a pool cue.

It's theatre, and not very good theatre at that. To be honest it doesn't make me feel secure and the holes obvious to me certainly must be obvious to the black hats.

[Tableview]

At ZRH, one used to be able to buy Swiss Army knives airside. Presumably if bought airside, they are no use as a weapon? I believe this is no longer the case.