EU to lift liquids ban in 2012......
 

More confusion to reign..........

The sole sensible suggestion in this lot appears to be the suggestion to allow transfer passengers to keep their duty free.

To have different rules at different airports, with less restrictions at busier airports, based solely (it appears) on the number of passengers passing through makes no sense, or are the EU & security bods conspiring against the poor travelling sods to yank our collective chains once more?

Surely it would make more sense to approve the types of scanning machines & mandate that commercial airports should have them installed by a specific date & then relax the liquid ban say three months after this date to allow for screw-ups, late deliveries, training periods & other delays?

Oh, wait one - that's horribly close to applying common sense. That'll never happen.

hmmm.....should result in total confusion (mind you half the EU or is that all except the UK seem to ignore the rules anyway!)

there are currently machines in various 'undisclosed' airports around the EU going through a testing period scanning for liquid explosives. Maybe by 2012 the technology will be perfected, but by which point there will almost certainly be something else to defend against.

Just seems like more confusion...... And some airports are very strict and others not so strict already!

How right you are magicmorris!

The only country applying the full rules is the UK; yet the EU now proudly proclaims that the rules will be relaxed across the EU from 2012. But they already are except for the UK?

Have the 'rules' prevented any 'occurrence' on a flight departing from the UK? We will never know, but I would have expected some organisation to have carried out some act elsewhere in the world if their security systems were so inadequate as the stringent regulations in the UK suggest they must be.

The last time I posted a thread on this subject it was rapidly removed, so I suggest you copy this one now! :ugh:

Liquids rule changes
 

Given that it appears to the average punter that everything associated with air travel is designed to make the whole experience as horrible as possible, this step is fully in line with that proposal and will add a new and exciting level of complexity to journeys.

But ministers don't care because they get whisked around the unwashed and never have to cope with the mayhem.

Rgds

45378

Explosives 'inside' suicide bomber
 

I kid you not...

See: BBC NEWS | Middle East | Explosives 'inside' suicide bomber

OFFS....

Just go's to prove that if you want to get the job done, you can. If this can stop in 2012 then just stop it now......

Otherwise under current regs terrs can bypass anyway. Bottle of duty free tequila gives sharp knife like object plus nicely flammable liquid if broken

etc etc .....................................doh!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stop it now? NO No No


They just created all these, otherwise useless, jobs all around airports around the world. If they would stop this rule now all these people would find themselves without a job once more.

Why do you think they do everything they do, including annoying people from the moment they step into an airport, with such desparation and conviction? Exactly, to prove the use and value of their job.

As said above...when one wants to get the job done, he will find a way to do so. This is the sad truth about aviation and its an absolute fantasy to even remotely believe that aviation can be 100% terrorism free!

This just keeps the numpties in Brussels in a job until 2012.

Buying themselves time.....

At least I will be able to take my favorite bottle of brandy with me to europe. Pity it is not happening sooner though.

This would make air travel easier and more convenient ! If we daydream of them really waving the bottle ban:ok: I am pretty sure that they will come up with some ugly other time consuming procedure:sad: in order to be able to employ some less intelligent and less motivated state employees.

Look at the US example, TSA according to my experience is a gigantic program to get underintelligent unfriendly people into federal health care. Do we really think that these morons "make America safer" ?:=

In truth I think they do but not nearly on the scale that the illusion would have us believe.

The more serious issue is the powers of the US Patriot Act. Whenever "patriotism" starts to enter the dialogue, I get very worried and alert as to what civil rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the Constitution are about to be taken away in the name of "fighting terrorism".

I first ran across this image on the way to Yosemite National Park at a small wayside gas station run by a New Zealander who'd been there for 30 years. I bought two of the T-shirts and have worn them in the US since, without result except for people who ask where they can get one, (available on the web by typing in fighting terrorism since 1492).

The poster says it all and it is not just applicable to the US. The message applies everywhere but it is the US which takes away its citizens' freedoms in the name of terrorism. It is at once respectful of the original dissidents and poignant in its very current message.


http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/k...curity-1-1.jpg

I understand that the Smiths BS 16HR DV Body Scanner was designed for just this purpose - it will pick up any internal foreign bodies from drugs to explosives in a 7 second inspection cycle. It has been approved by the UK Health Protection Agency but DfT still bumbling!

Come on DfT move a bit quicker!

You are kidding right?

An internal body scanner.

As a routine check? Just to get on an aeroplane?

Please tell me you are kidding?

Will passengers now hear the "snap" of rubber gloves being donned as they approach the security check point ? :eek: :E

The same rules are in force, and enforced, whenever I've flown from German or Belgian airports recently. ANd Antqlya, too, for that matter. As far as I know, they are the same rules across the EU.
On what grounds do you say the UK is the only country applying "the full rules". And what do you mean by the "Full Rules"? What do the Uk enforce over and above the non-"full rules"?

I recently flew from Dalaman to the UK, despite having to go through security twice at DLM, no liquids were ceased.

Quote:-
The same rules are in force, and enforced, whenever I've flown from German or Belgian airports recently

Thats just 2 countries so far. Certainly Turkey sounds different!

There are similar scanners in operation at SVO/Moscow for quite some time now, 100% pax screened as a routine check.

A good post cargo/one, but I do wonder what the Russian machines can actually 'see'?

I know what the Smiths machines can achieve and they need to be installed worldwide ASAP.

It sounds to me as though the Turks have realised the pointlessness of taking perfectly harmless liquids away from passengers. At their airports there is a security check going in to the airport, which can can prove annoying in the summer, especially if youre flying from a 'tourist' airport, as well as one pre boarding.

This latest development is worrying, I'm having nightmares over the extreme measures that are bound to be put in place! (Turn up at the airport and be quarantined for 3 days in order to pass whatever is in you - probably) :hmm:

I went through the Russian body scanner at Domodedovo a couple of weeks ago and found it to be a relatively pleasant experience which only took a few seconds. Stand on the two footprint marks on the floor, raise arms up, the door closes and then opens again almost immediately. No problem!

Dalaman
 

Turkey is not in the EU...

Belgium and Germany may be only two examples, so let me add some more:

France
Ireland
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Czech Republic

All of which I have flown from recently and had my liquids checked or in one case confiscated.

Don't over simplify things. EU liquids were introduced on back of UK ban to avoid confusion for passengers (or at least that was the thinking) - it is thanks to the UK that rules exist... they lobbied for and got the EU ban. No one likes it and maybe coming up with a plan to remove it isn't such a bad idea.

As for the UK applying the "full" rules, there is no such thing :ugh:

But the list of countries in the EU applying the liquids rules to pilots (this is a pilots' website) is as follows...

UK

I think people in the UK who don't get abroad much don't seem to realise this.

Did the same at CLE recently,but I didn't realise it did an INTERNAL scan!

Shogan
 

Yes I know Turkey isn't in the EU, however I was sure that when travelling to the UK the UK rules applied. There were liquid restrictions information signs up in the airport.

Yep Turkey only enforces to the UK, USA and Isreal. Routed Manchester-Beirut via Istanbul and on the way out only a standard luggage scan for Beirut-bound pax, bottles of water allowed, bottles of wine, you name it. On the return leg UK-bound pax routed away to face the usual no-liquids farce.

Dr. Stefan Schulte, Fraport AG's new executive board chairman, has presented the European Commission with a three-point package of demands for alleviating the burden faced by airports. Speaking to journalists in Brussels Wednesday, Schulte advocated the "complete abolition of regulations for liquids in carry-on baggage." However, he disapproved of any rushed and costly interim solutions regarding liquid restrictions. He said that it would be better to wait until new technologies are available that detect prohibited liquids in hand luggage.

Fraport is an airport management company which manages Frankfurt Airport in Germany, and others throughout Asia and the Middle East.

Schulte explained that the rationality of aviation-security regulations needed to be urgently examined. Ground processes, which account for 35 percent of the total operating costs of European airports, are as expensive and burdensome for a transfer airport like Frankfurt (FRA) as fuel costs are for the airlines. Before the 9/11 terror attacks the share of fixed costs amounted to between five and eight percent.

Schulte says the EU Commission's proposal for a directive on aviation security charges is incompatible with the new directive on airport fees, and does not address the central responsibility of the member states. Since the proposal's focus is on independent regulatory agencies and arbitration proceedings in cases of dispute, it does not address the States' ultimate responsibility for security matters, and safeguarding against acts of terror is in essence a sovereign duty of the State, he said. Schulte called on the members of the European Parliament to remain steadfast vis-a-vis the plans of the EU Commission - especially since the directive on charges was already amended only six months ago.

Fraport's CEO also voiced criticism on the revision of the EU slot allocation directive. As part of their legal obligation to operate the airport, airport companies must hold available an infrastructure that is open to all users during operating hours. The extremely high share of fixed costs requires an efficient and cost-effective use of airport capacities. No economy can or should afford idling capacities at major airports such as Frankfurt, which has faced an excess of demand for many years.

Therefore, Schulte called on the EU Commission to review the slot allocation directive. This directive should contain "clear and economically justifiable regulations for using the existing infrastructure as efficiently as possible".

Schulte stated that Frankfurt Airport is playing a pioneering role in sustainable growth and environmental responsibility." He pointed out his company's plans for expanding FRA in a carbon-neutral way and to reduce carbon emissions per traffic unit by 30 percent by the year 2020. Together with Munich, Frankfurt Airport was the first airport in Germany to introduce emissions-based airport charges at the beginning of 2008 for a multi-year test phase. Thus, FRA has also become a founding member of the Airport Carbon Accreditation (ACA) scheme, whereby European airports are committing themselves verifiably to reducing CO2 emissions and energy consumption.

In addition, Schulte underscored "Fraport's role model in the use of electric vehicles". Ten percent of Fraport's vehicle fleet runs on certified green electrical power. The first mass-produced electric vehicle available in Europe is currently undergoing the first major practical testing in Germany at Frankfurt Airport. Fraport plans to increase the share of electric vehicles in its fleet in the future.

In conclusion, Schulte described Fraport's Airport Expansion Program (AEP) as decisive for the future viability and competitiveness of Frankfurt Airport. It will also help the Frankfurt/Rhine-Main region to maintain its position as an "economic powerhouse in the European competition for attracting businesses." Expanding Germany's central air transportation hub is a task of national importance, stated Schulte.

Did the UK "over react" regarding the threat of very loud bangs inside aircraft? Was it a case of either
1) Need to protect my pension so better make a safe decision?
2) As each committee reviewed the advice, they doubled the safety margin?

My suspicions are aroused about the likelihood of loud noise threat from recent flying experiences. Passed a couple of times out of Tel Aviv last month and they didn't seem bothered by liquids in the way that the UK are But the dates did invite an explanation....

Flew recently on domestic flights within Columbia and they weren't either.

However, you couldn't fault the x-raying of baggage and the scanning of the passengers in both countries. Very polite (yes, even Tel) but thorough. So do they know exactly what were they looking for and had they made a practical decision on what constitutes a risk?

Am a frequent passenger through LGW and can't claim they seem polite in the same way. Seems in the UK, the effort is directed at enforcing the letter of the law (and perhaps a bit of lording it over the very people who are "paying their wages"). Sad really.

They were confiscating liquids at the entrance to the departure area at Anatalya, even those bought in duty free, which caused a few arguments.
The passengers were waiting to board 2 flights- one to Oslo and ours to Saarbrücken.

>>Quote:
Stand on the two footprint marks on the floor, raise arms up, the door closes and then opens again almost immediately. No problem!

Did the same at CLE recently,but I didn't realise it did an INTERNAL scan! <<

Does anybody know how it works; not the detail, for obvious security reasons, but is it an x-ray? If so, regular fliers (like crew) will be open to huge risks. I assume it doesn't do x-r but there is a trade off in trying to 'see' things inside you - most plastics/condoms, etc., won't show on less than x-r, which I think is why the Smith machine isn't widely implemented; not useful for drug carriers. Maybe it is a variation of the medical scans? then it is the cost that is holding it up.

Bye, Barry

P.S. who says the UK is the 'best' implenterof the rules? Evidence?

It isnt top secret now, it was a few years ago:ok:

It uses "low power" microwaves and creates an image from their reflection and absorption.

A UK university has developed a portable version for police that does not produce an image like the airport scanners, instead it analyses the signal and calculates if there is a gun or knife on the subject. It apparently has a very useful standoff range.


Mickjoebill

Somewhat related, but Helsinki Vantaa (EFHK, HEL) are removing their body scanner because people refuse to use it ... its colloquial name is the "naked scanner". There are also worries about the radiation dosage too (though it should be very low....)

fc101
E145 driver

I find it ridiculous that people get worried about how they are going to look on the "naked scanner". Just make sure that those viewing the images can't see the passengers "in the flesh" to correlate outward apprearance to their image and no-one will give a damn.
It can't be that different to security staff "eyeing up" or frisking passengers at present - and I doubt the viewers would give much of a damn about an image after they have seen the first few hundred.

I see that the French security are considering introducing these body scanners which I understand can identify liquids and chemicals stored internally.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6862247.ece

quote by reverserunlocked It is this sort of piecemeal approach which ridicules the whole system.

There are different technologies. The "old" new screening technology which produces the "naked" image, and the "new" new screening technology which reveals the internal details. The "new" new is what they're discussing to counteract the internal hidden explosive device. You won't have been through one of these. The "old" new is what you would have gone through at CLE.

I also understand that the Health Protection Agency (UK) have approved use of the Smiths equipment.