When will airports stop doing the damn 100ml liquid restriction???

[Fragmentedbrain]

I thought there were fine plans to bin this nonsense

So sick of having to plan around it and buy overpriced extra stuff I don't need

Liquids include gels and pastes.

Also remember the liquid restriction applies to staff working past security. So unable to take a pot of yoghurt with their packed lunch

Lol at the idea it's this strategic

Jesus that's absurd. Still, would you rather have staff denied a yoghurt or EVERYONE DIE IN A TROJAN YOGHURT ATROCITY!!!???? etc

How big was your lipstick? 😯

This big

Probably wasn’t in the clear bag and didn’t fit

I remember when the rule came into force, and assumed it was just an emergency response to someone supposedly trying to blow up a plane with liquid explosives. I never imagined it would last, but yet here we are, nearly two decades on. I would have thought technology would have moved on well beyond those little 100ml bottles, but apparently not.

It is a real pain in the arse, especially when you're just travelling with hand luggage so have to really limit the cosmetics and toiletries you bring. Yes I know. 1st word problems.

We just put ours in the hold luggage and didn’t have any issues whatsoever…why don’t people do this? Or are you just referring to those who only take a carry on?

They can tell if you bring containers of more than 100ml.
I took a 100ml Mitchum deodorant and was pulled up, presumably because it contains potent stuff like aluminium, so borderline acceptable. It wasn’t confiscated and the security person said “I knew it was going to be this!”.

I’ve had a jar of Marmite confiscated.
Me: It’s not a liquid!
Them: It’s certainly not a solid!
Me: Fair cop… Enjoy.

We also do multiple 100ml bottles of the same substance. As long as each person’s liquids are under 1litre total you’re fine.

Yes it’s only an issue if you have your liquids in hand luggage.

Theres lots of reasons why people don’t check baggage into the hold

That's what I read too. You can't just spend a few minutes in the airplane toilet mixing that bottle of explosive masquerading as shampoo with that other bottle pretending to be shower gel and hey presto! you've got yourself a bomb! It's a bit more complex than that.

And why is it OK to have 5 x 100ml bottles but not 2 x 250ml? It's all rather arbitrary.

I think initially that you were very restricted to what you could take in the cabin, no hand luggage was allowed in the very early days after the attempted attack. I remember a friend flying to Australia and I think only being allowed prescription medication, everything else including electronic devices had to go in the hold.
The 100ml rule came in shortly afterwards.

Don’t take hold luggage. Takes too long to get it off the plane. We are hand luggage only travellers.

It is extremely difficult if you have medical restrictions. On a long trip, what you can fit within the restrictions is inadequate. There is no guarantee a checked bag will arrive. If you have to special order all your products to because of allergies, you can’t just buy them at your destination. Suncream in particular is problematic. With adequate application just the amount needed for a week in a sunny destination can exceed
your liquid allowance.

sometimes I FedEx a package which can get very expensive.

Yeah, stupid security precautions. What a waste of time! They should stop scanning people, too.

For all the people complaining about inconsistency: Whether or not you have to take your stuff out of the bag depends on what kind of scanner they have. The newer scanners can detect whatever they need to detect through your bag. The old ones can't. Quite a few airports (Stansted, Geneva, Barcelona) are in the process of changing over and so have a mix of both types of scanner. (In each case I now know which way to go to get the new ones!)

There is no inconsistency about the size of liquids at the moment. The newer scanners were meant to be able to look at liquids up to 2 litres, but after a lot of testing, it was discovered that they can't yet do that reliably. So everywhere (in the US and EU, at least) is back to 100ml. We've survived that since 2006, I think we can survive a couple more years. If it does go back up to 2 litres for the new scanners tomorrow, that will be more "inconsistency", but what's worse, 100ml for everyone or 2l for some and 100ml for the rest, if it's clearly signposted?

Also, being as gentle as I can, I think it might also perhaps be an idea for those of us who take commercial flights to slightly dial back our sense of entitlement, just a smidge. The airline industry gives us the opportunity to be transported to another country in remarkably safe conditions, for not much more than the price of a meal out. You can surely put up with a few minutes of faff for that.

It is not difficult to make an explosion big enough to bring down a plane (the chemicals needed are astonishingly common) and we would almost certainly have lost several planes both in summer 2006 and since without the restrictions on liquids. The technology needed to save us from that, plus the logistics involved in making those scanners work while getting 50,000 or more passengers per day through them, is extraordinarily complex. And if there were to be one fatal incident, there would be utter mayhem in the media (and the airports).

And yes, it sometimes seems unnecessary because you aren't planning to blow up the plane. But it's a bit like saying that you don't think your child needs to have a polio vaccine because "When did you ever hear of anyone round here getting polio?". It's called the prevention paradox, and it's a real problem for policymakers because many people have short memories (or are too young to remember what used to happen). See also "Covid lockdowns were unnecessary because the NHS didn't collapse".

So, please feel free to check out the hijacking and plane crash statistics for the 1970s, as well as the real-terms price of tickets back then, and then just follow the damn rules at the airport. 🙏

This! And it changes week to bloody week at the same airport. I flew to Benidorm at Manchester, just liquids out. Two weeks later, flew somewhere else, same terminal, was SCREAMED at by a security woman for not taking my straighteners out. Can’t win!!

I also once did two nights in Warsaw, on the way out went through the scanner, no beeps. Came back in literally the same clothes and jewellery, beeped. It doesn’t make me that confident in airport security!

I’d rather feel safe and don’t mind it.

@samarrange Are you Douglas from Cabin Pressure?!

🤣🤣🤣🤣

It's not difficult at all. Stop being dramatic. I only ever travel with hand luggage and cope no probs. Take my perfume and a deodorant, small sun cream, few items of make up.

Any larger items I need, larger suncream etc buy in airport or at destination.

It's much easier now with the new scanners you don't actually have to take all the liquids out and put them in a separate bag.

Well said 👏

I think I would have taken something more replaceable out of the bag in this case. Shampoo or Sun cream can be replaced. A discontinued lipstick not so much

But not all airports have those scanners. Rather than being rude perhaps read the thread?

This, thought it was a bit obvious, really. Your teeth will be ok for a fortnight with different toothpaste.