10 ms·
Passengers at EU Airports Not Allowed over 100ml of Liquids on Cabin Luggage
- yashg 2y agoHasn't this rule been there for many years? I have flown to UK twice and there ere always restrictions on 100ml per bottle. Even lost a deodorant bottle because of that (security made me throw it away).
- Rinzler89 2y agoOf course. Why do that when selling a bottle of water for 4 Euros is way more profitable.
- bowsamic 2y agoYou can bring in empty water bottles and every airport I've been to has bottle refill stations after security
- lanna 2y agoNot at tourist destinations in Mexico and Dominican Republic. It is inhumane that those airports offer absolutely no free drinking water options for passengers. Tap water in these countries is not safe to drink.
- Rinzler89 2y ago>and every airport I've been to has bottle refill stations after security Many in Europe do not.
- bowsamic 2y agoEvery airport I've been to personally in Europe does
- Rinzler89 2y agoHow does repeating this make any kind of point? Your anecdotes don't become a general rule across a continent. For example, most I've been to do not. That doesn't become a rule now, it just disproves the point that hydration stations are the norm. So why do you insist to dismiss the existence of other airports you've haven't been to that don't have water stations just because it doesn't match your personal experience? Please keep an open mind and arguments in good faith as per HN rules.
- ramon156 2y agoHave you heard of a bathroom?
- kjrfghslkdjfl 2y ago[dead]
- Rinzler89 2y agoHave you heard about having a civil discussion without being snarky for no reason? Have you seen the dark patterns some airports use like very low taps that don't fit a water bottle under them in the sinks, or hooking up the taps to the warm water lines? Also, tap water in some countries, while safe to drink, tastes awful, like chlorine, so even if you can get it from the bathroom tap, it's not ideal.
- chgs 2y agoClaiming “many” proves nothing. There has been one claim in this thread, that Hamburg does not. It does. https://www.wateratairports.com/topic/flughafen-hamburg-ham-airport/ https://www.wateratairports.com/topic/flughafen-hamburg-ham-...
- Rinzler89 2y ago>Claiming “many” proves nothing. And claiming "every one I've been to" proves what exactly? >There has been one claim in this thread, that Hamburg does not. It does. Great, but what does that have to do with my comments? Since I never mentioned Hamburg airport, so why rub that in my face? I've been to other airports that don't provide water stations which I can talk about, but not Hamburg.
- almostnormal 2y agoThere are bathrooms, and tap water is the most strictly regulated food of all, more than bottled water.
- chrisldgk 2y agoNot all European countries have tap water that’s safe to drink. In Germany you can get away with that, in Spain I wouldn’t risk it.
- Fargren 2y agoIn most of Spain the tap water is totally safe to drink. I would avoid it in the islands only.
- siva7 2y agoToilets aren't exactly a good source to refill your water bottle for obvious reasons.
- hagbard_c 2y agoBack when I still subjected myself to the security theatre at airports I was told to toss the nearly empty tube of tooth paste I had in my backpack. Why was that? Well, the tube stated it contained 125 ml when new and you're only allowed to bring 100 ml containers so toss it or be denied boarding. I now travel by train instead of plane. Sure, it takes a lot more time but I can bring however much of whatever I want, I get to sit in a comfortable chair, I have my laptops (etc.) with me and get to work on whatever I want. Sometimes I even meet interesting people. I regularly travel from Sweden to the Netherlands this way, sometimes alone, sometimes with my daughter when she comes home from university or goes back there (she studies in Utrecht, we live in Sweden). Train travel is far from perfect and delays are common but seen as a whole it is a far better experience than air travel. It also happens to be quite a bit less expensive on the routes I frequent.
- BobaFloutist 2y ago>I now travel by train instead of plane. And so will I, just as soon as the build a train tunnel under the Atlantic.
- lifestyleguru 2y ago> bottle of water for 4 Euros is way more profitable. Add a 8 EUR sandwich and you have a perfect dinner.
- bowsamic 2y agoI'm confused at this. Wasn't the whole point to allow it?
- Fargren 2y agoNot the _whole_ point. New scanners still allow you to not take electronics out of your bag before scanning, so not having to do that is still nice.
- INTPenis 2y agoWasn't it always 100ml? If I understand this correctly there are new scanners that should make it easier to detect explosives, I guess. But while they do have these new scanners, they still will not allow more than 100ml, which was the case already.
- bowsamic 2y agoThere was a rule that no more than 100ml per container is allowed Then they got rid of the rule so that more than 100ml is allowed Now they've reintroduced the rule
- Muromec 2y agoIt was always 100ml, but some airports don't comply because their national regulator says it's fine if you have a fancy scanner. Now EC says, no it's not, go back in line. Schiphol for example lets you bring in whatever whater you want in whatever flask you have.
- rmccue 2y ago> some airports don't comply This is not true, airports with upgraded scanners are complying with the law just fine. This appears to be a temporary technical problem: > This precautionary measure is not in response to any new threat but addresses a temporary technical issue, undertaken in alignment with the EU’s international partners And: > Technical information received by the Commission and validated by ECAC States and laboratories, shows that the existing configurations of standard C3 EDSCB equipment to which the Commission has granted the ‘EU Stamp’ marking or the ‘EU Stamp pending’ marking need to be revised in order to improve their performance
- RandomLensman 2y agoNot always, the 100ml rule came sometime in the 2006, I think.
- jochem9 2y agoCorrect. With the promise it was temporary.
- planetjones 2y agoBetter details here: https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/commission-enforces-temporary-restrictions-liquid-screening-certain-eu-airports-2024-07-31_en https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/commission-e... Seems even with the new scanners there is some issue why they have to limit items to no more than 100ml temporarily. Maybe waiting for a software update… though if there is a loophole seems weird to wait until September 1st…
- trte9343r4 2y agoBasically no change. 100ml limit per bottle was always there, and still is.
- Muromec 2y agoSchiphol has those fancy scanners and they allow to bring bottles with you and did so for years.
- anon23432343 2y agoyes as has Arlanda for example. They now found a problem with them and now you even there from sept. 1 can not take more then 100ml
- Muromec 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- trte9343r4 2y agoBut some gates don't, or it is broken...
- switch007 2y ago
- anon23432343 2y ago- Once the EU had 100ml rules. - Then new scanners were installed. - Where new scanners then you could take more then 100ml. - Problems found in new scanners now everybody has to take 100ml (temp. solution).
- puttycat 2y agoThis article is completely illisible, seems to have been written very quickly and/or by AI.
- amelius 2y agoMeanwhile, you can bring Play-Doh in any quantity.
- GaryNumanVevo 2y agoFor anyone wondering: Play-Doh has a much lower density than RDX or other plastic explosives and will definitely show up on Xray differently.
- RandomThoughts3 2y agoIf you read the commission announcement, you get the actual reason between the lines: “undertaken in alignment with the EU’s international partners”. The EU is bending backward to US pressure and the rumour is that it’s because Avionix scanners are not as good as the ones from their non US competitors.
- snowpid 2y agoCan your provide any sources?
- RandomThoughts3 2y agoWell, no, that’s why it’s a rumour i.e. a currently circulating story of uncertain or doubtful truth. Maybe it’s just that there is a major issue with all the C3 scanners currently on the market which was somehow missed during all these years of strenuous certification. Who knows? Certainly not me.
- mikeodds 2y agoLuckily it’s illegal for bad guys to buy multiple plane tickets or this wouldn’t work
- Gud 2y agoFor each person you add to the conspiracy, the harder it is.
- unglaublich 2y agoEasier for the fantasy bad guy with explosives would be to have them in a solid state. Check mate, TSA and friends.
- netsharc 2y agoGotta love this ~20 year old limitation, conjured up because some idjit (more likely a committee of idjits) believed in some crackpot theory about terrorists cooking up liquid bombs: https://www.theregister.com/Print/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/ https://www.theregister.com/Print/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_t...
- yawpitch 2y agoThat article really overestimates the desire of suicide bombers to survive their attempt. It also really overestimates how hard it is to do massive economic damage just by implying you know how to make TATP. What Bin Laden et al wanted to do was inflict long term economic pain, and they absolutely accomplished that goal. This just shows they’re still succeeding, really.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Y_Y 2y ago> In transaction processing, the Telecommunication Application Transaction Processing Benchmark (TATP) is a benchmark designed to measure the performance of in-memory database transaction systems. It's amazing how much of the world runs off inefficient databases! Certainly rigging a benchmark would do a lot more than a ziploc full of some volatile peroxide.
- pfannkuchen 2y agoI don't think long term economic pain was the goal. I think influencing the American people into opposing interference in the Middle East as "not worth it" was the goal. And that would be achieved by the visceral carnage and the implication of "we'll stop if you stop". Not through fuzzy and indirect economic effects. I don't think they ever cared about damaging the US in general, they just want the US and the west in general out of their backyard.
- hyperman1 2y agoI think that not the US, but the Arab world were the target of the message. Al qaeda simply didn't care one bit what the average USian was thinking. The USA was the stage, not the public. Their message to the arab world was to unite against a common enemy, hated and proven vulnerable.
- yawpitch 2y agoGive 100ml total of a whole lot of different room-temperature liquid reagents to a moderately-trained college-level chemist and down cometh that plane. Security theatre is such a waste.
- amelius 2y agoBy the way, anyone else here annoyed by the typical form factor of perfume bottles? Usually these containers have thick glass walls, are large and heavy, totally inadequate for traveling. Yes, you can transfer a bit into special travel containers but you'll have to hit the spray button dozens of times to transfer even a meaningful quantity. And if you don't wear latex gloves your hands will have a strong smell for the rest of the week.
- SXX 2y ago> Yes, you can transfer a bit into special travel containers but you'll have to hit the spray button dozens of times to transfer even a meaningful quantity. Fortunately with a lot of modern expensive perfume it's usually possible to just open bottle and use some easier way to transfer the liquid like with syringe. Transfering it by spraying is very invonvinient. So at least there is one good and useful consequence of eco / reuse movement.
- yashg 2y agoIt's called decanting. And no you don't end up spilling the fragrance all over your hands while transferring it to a small bottle. Yiu can also buy travel sized bottled of many popular fragrances which are specifically meant for travelling. But yes, in general full sized fragrance bottles aren't meant for carrying along while travelling.
- amelius 2y ago> It's called decanting Of course they found a nice name to try to make up for this extremely bad user experience ... I use one of the big brand fragrances and I'd prefer they sold small vials, a bit larger than the usual testers, but they don't.
- SXX 2y agoBTW I not sure if it's would work in EU, but in US you can certainly take as much water as you want with you if you freeze it. Then just drink what's unfrozen liquid before you pass security and you're golden. Has anyone tried it in EU or SEA?
- styluss 2y agoI accidentally tried to fly with a small kids juice box and sunscreen. They throw your stuff into a machine. I would've expect that they take a sample from inside but they just scanned the outside
- ozzcer 2y agoSo why did all the airports just buy the new fancy scanners? One of the British airports (can't remember which now) had to redo an entire floor to support the weight of the new scanners lol. What a waste.
- switch007 2y agoIf you try to understand the Tories from the point of view of "How will this enrich their mates?", it's usually easier to understand things
- arccy 2y agohow will it make flying for the rich less inconvenient
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jazzyjackson 2y agoyou don't go through security when flying private
- kkfx 2y agoSo 99ml of novičok or sarin, properly prepared with an industrial machine can came alone in the cabin. Good to know.
- scandox 2y ago(2006)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hypeatei 2y agoI'm convinced all airport security is pure theater and wouldn't actually stop a terrorist attack. For example, the Dept. of Homeland Security (US agency) found that the TSA's failure rate is "in the ballpark of 80%"[0] Another quote from the article: "secret teams from the DHS found that the TSA failed 95 percent of the time to stop inspectors from smuggling weapons or explosive materials through screening." So we're wasting peoples time and forcing nonsensical procedures upon them to... not actually stop anything. [0]: https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-operation-us-airports/story?id=51022188 https://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-fails-tests-latest-undercover-...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- 8bithero 2y agoSame. Additionally, it would be far more lethal if an explosion where to happen at the security gates rather than on an actual plan. The bottle necks caused by these security checks means there are potentially 1000s of people penned into a tiny room. On paper the checks make sense, but in reality their implementation creates a much greater potentially danger zone for passengers.
- 8bithero 2y agoThis 100ml restriction makes absolutely no sense at all. If someone wanted to carry out a suicide attack, it would stand to reason that their goal would be to maximise the damage they cause. If that assumption is correct, then it would make little to no sense to detonating it on a plane with a max capacity of 200-500, when the alternative would be to detonate it in the security hall. The delays caused by these 100ml checks create a bottle neck in airports which leads to potentially 1000s of people penned up in a small room waiting to have their deodorant taken away from them. Surly an explosion happening at the security gates would lead to far greater tragedy than the one they are trying to guard against. Absolutely absurd. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but if it came out the handful of companies that always seem to populate the duty-free area where lobbying to keep security checks in place, I can't say I would be surprised as I'd imagine it being a rather lucrative location to sell deodorant's shampoos, and other basic hygiene essentials.
- eastbound 2y agothe handful of companies? i.e. the airport itself? We’re stuck in a local minimum where people extract the most money from each other.
- more_corn 2y agoSecurity theater protecting against an imaginary threat.
- hulitu 2y ago> Passengers at EU Airports Not Allowed over 100ml of Liquids on Cabin Luggage 911 ? It is the same everywhere. We must fight terrorism (at least some part of it). /s
- g-b-r 2y agoThere must be a terrorist plot to destroy Europe with water bottles. We're not told about it to protect the sources, but yeah it's clearly so. In Italy you have to relinquish your bottle caps to enter concerts, which is interesting now that caps need to be attached to the bottles.