PPRuNe Forums - Stansted Security -Plastic Bag "Advisory"

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) (https://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight-61/)

- - Stansted Security -Plastic Bag "Advisory" (https://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/438499-stansted-security-plastic-bag-advisory.html)

The words 'fastened closed' further suggest to me that the bag is not required to be impervious or hermetically sealed.

If that was the case, the form of words would be something like 'your transparent bag must be sealed.'

Quote:

Certain fluids leaking within security equipment could compromise its effectiveness. I can understand why they might insist upon a sealed bag as defined in the OE dictionary - rendered impervious to liquids - not allowing liquid to pass through.

Well the world seemed to manage OK without putting liquids in sealed bags prior to 2006 so obviously this is not a reason to have sealed bags.

The famous inhabitants of Gibraltar are actually monkeys, technically known as Barbary Macaques. The misnomer of 'ape' was applied because they have very short tails.

Note to self: must get out more.

Amusing thread. I can't help thinking that there isn't much point squabbling over definitions of what is 're-sealable' and what isn't. The point is that the idiots at security can define in anyway they want and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it once you're in the line. In fact, they can (and I suspect do) change the requirements every couple of hours for their own amusement. On the other hand, remember that the liquids ban is due to be scrapped quite soon by the EU, whilst I have noticed that in many places (especially US) it is pretty much ignored. Over the past 6 months I have taken to leaving my bagged liquids in my luggage and it has never been picked up. On one occasion I walked through with a 300 ml bottle of contact lens solution - again, ignored or not noticed. If the latter, I suppose it is quite worrying really, but all the more reason to be completely cynical about these idiotic measures and their inconsistent and incompetent application.

Monkey Island and Barbary Apes indeed ... haha, quite apt. BAA = Barbary Apes Authority?

I have found an almost perfect correlation between my plastic zip up wash bag being rejected, and a the presence of a bag vending machine.

Well, well, well......

I invite contributors/readers of this thread to re-read the statement on the BAA website when I first wrote of the confiscation of my liquids and compare it with today's version:

Early January:

Quote:

Today:

Quote:

Liquids – 100ml rule
Only limited quantities of liquids may be carried through airport security into the departure lounge. This includes bottled drinks, suntan lotion, fragrances, cosmetics and toiletries.
The following restrictions apply to all liquids, creams, gels, pastes and aerosols taken through security control:
Liquids may only be carried in containers holding 100ml or less.
They must be carried separately in a single bag which is:
Transparent, resealable and airtight (My bold)
No larger than 20cm x 20cm (8in x 8in)
Able to close properly with all the items inside.
At security control, please ensure the plastic bag is removed from any hand luggage and placed in the tray with your other items in preparation for screening.
Liquids in containers over 100ml will not be permitted through security – please pack them in your hold baggage instead.
To save time and expense please come prepared with your own correct sized plastic bag. If you forget to bring your own bag, plastic bag dispensers are conveniently located in check in areas before the entrance to security. Plastic bags are dispensed in multiples of four costing £1.

My bag was the correct size, clear and zipped. However, if you pushed it hard enough, which the little H****r on the scanner did, some air would of course come out. So, now Stansted have had the decency to publish this requirement for future travellers (without compensating me) some one month later, I'd be interested to know what force said bags have to withstand to be "airtight"? Or maybe those on sale for £1 won't have to be subjected to such rigorous testing........?

Quote:

I invite contributors/readers of this thread to re-read the statement on the BAA website when I first wrote of the confiscation of my liquids and compare it with today's version:

Strake - sorry to spoil a good rant but STN is only quoting the requirements shown on Direct.gov:
If you need certain liquids during the flight, you can take them into the cabin in limited quantities as follows:

containers must hold no more than 100ml
containers must be carried in a single, transparent, re-sealable plastic bag, which holds no more than a litre and measures approximately 20cm x 20cm
contents must fit comfortably inside the bag so it can be sealed
the bag must not be knotted or tied at the top
each passenger can carry only one of these bags
the bag must be presented for examination at the airport security point

Containers larger than 100ml (excluding essential medicines) will not be allowed through the security point even if they are only part full.

@farci

Quote:

containers must hold no more than 100ml
containers must be carried in a single, transparent, re-sealable plastic bag, which holds no more than a litre and measures approximately 20cm x 20cm My bold.
contents must fit comfortably inside the bag so it can be sealed
the bag must not be knotted or tied at the top
each passenger can carry only one of these bags
the bag must be presented for examination at the airport security point

Containers larger than 100ml (excluding essential medicines) will not be allowed through the security point even if they are only part full.

With all due respect the point strake is making is that BAA's requirements have changed from 'Transparent and resealable' to 'Transparent, resealable and airtight'. The excerpt you have provided from direct.gov only requires 'transparent, re-sealable' as shown by the part I have bolded.

However I must admit that I really don't see why anyone would be carrying liquids, other than medicines, through security anyway.

Well one example of people who have to put up with the airport security theatre are professional pilots on a 5 day tour around Europe with no facility to check baggage in the hold. Trusted with £60m of aircraft and 250 lives but not the toothpaste. Madness.

Quote:

Well one example of people who have to put up with the airport security theatre are professional pilots on a 5 day tour around Europe with no facility to check baggage in the hold.

Ah! :O Are cabin crew equally unable to check baggage in the hold or does this just affect pilots?

SamYeager,

You understand my point. Thank you. It is the underhand change to Stansted's rules which is annoying.

As far as:

Quote:

However I must admit that I really don't see why anyone would be carrying liquids, other than medicines, through security anyway.

Maybe I'm missing the point of the question but I have to do two/three day trips around Europe every week or so. I'm able to do this using the 10kg limit for carry-on so I don't need to check baggage. That means I am bringing a small amount of toothpaste, shaving gel, deodorants etc in my little plastic bag. All those items are considered "liquids" under the rules. The only alternative is to buy those items after security (both ways every time) or use checked in baggage.

Why does it have to be airtight, when you can open it anyway...?

These people take the definition of "moron" to a whole new level...

Quote:

Certain fluids leaking within security equipment could compromise its effectiveness. I can understand why they might insist upon a sealed bag

Now you mention it, that does make some sense.

Quote:

the world seemed to manage OK without putting liquids in sealed bags prior to 2006 so obviously this is not a reason to have sealed bags.

I can imagine when the "liquids in bags" rule was introduced someone thought - we're going to be scanning a lot of these bags lets have a rule that they must be sealed.

Now you're just making reasons up that sort of fit. That wasn't the purpose of the bag. There are less liquids going through xray machines now than prior to 2006. This is just as I predicted in 2006. As the years march on people forget the reason the rules were introduced and the rules take on a self perpetuating life of their own. People forget what it was all originally about and the rules morph in a sort of mission creep into new rules. There was originally nothing about the bag being airtight. The bag was to provide some sort of limit to the amount of liquids brought through otherwise people would bring loads of 100ml containers stuffed to overflowing out of a bag.

Some time ago I heard the explanation that the bag had to be airtight so that, if necessary, an air sample could be taken. It could well be another reason that was made up to fit, but it sounded reasonably plausible at the time.

Pohutu

At LTN the bags are on sale inside security so no need to scan out. Though I can see how STN's more cramped layout might make that difficult.

I have had this problem myself and until recently I had used a clear zip type bag you can buy in boots, but Gatwick put a stop to that last Sunday.

I have been told the bags have to be airtight so any liquids that may contain exposives will build up a concentation of vapours in the bag so when they stick the sniffer rod inside it would be easier to detect.
An ordinary zipped bag would allow the bag to be ventilated to some extent and make the test less reliable.

Ok, so the bag has to be airtight so that residue gas due to contraband explosives can be detected. Surely this means that the current liquid limit is too high because the 100ml containers inside the 20x20cm bag could be sufficiently explosive to be a danger to the aircraft and passengers. Why else would you need to detect these gases? So to be absolutely safe surely all liquids should be banned?

Oh I forgot. Logic doesn't come into it.:ugh:

strake,
Thanks for the headsup on that.
I'm a retired pilot and only fly as pax on LH about 3x year - try to use car on UK mainland rather than fly due probs as reported.

Only thing I can add is, when challenged by security, police, authority in general, don't argue; express regret and ask how to resolve problem.
i.e. do not open encounter, as did young Bas many years ago, to couple of plods, with: "WTF do YOU want?!"
(Note to Bas: Start taking your own advice.)