New security measures causing travel woes

[Mellyrose]

I understand increased security procedures, but not being allowed to bring bottled water and hand lotion in your carry-on?

NYTimes
New Security Rules Prompt Confusion

By JOHN HOLUSHA
Published: August 10, 2006
Changed security rules produced long lines and confusion at American airports today, with passengers missing flights and enduring intensive inspections in reaction to the arrests of alleged bomb plotters in Britain.

Dennis McDermott, 53, a certified public accountant who lives in Hunterton County, New Jersey, arrived at Newark Liberty Airport at 5:15 a.m., expecting to board a Delta flight to Vancouver, British Columbia.

The security wait was so extensive that he missed the flight. “The plane left without me,” he said. “My luggage is in Vancouver.”

He said his daughter Jennifer, 14, was forced to remove her perfume from her handbag and put it checked luggage.

Mr. McDermott said he missed a second flight to Vancouver and was planning to fly to Seattle and then drive three hours to Vancouver after clearing security at 9:35, over four hours after arriving at the airport.

In Detroit, employees of Northwest Airlines, the dominant carrier there, handed out photocopied sheets explaining the items that could not be taken aboard planes, as the lines grew longer this morning.

Passengers were told they could check a third bag without charge; normally only two are allowed.

Bobby Mathew, 36, and Michael Durso, 27, were returning to Philadelphia after a business trip to Detroit. Like many business travelers, they said they never check baggage and did not consider checking their rolling suitcases.

As a result of the new rules, Mr. Matthew threw away a bottle of lotion and toothpaste, but kept shaving cream and allergy medication on the assumption they would be allowed aboard. Mr. Dennis threw away his after shave lotion and other liquids.

“It’s another wake-up call,” said Mr. Matthew. “I grew up in India, and it’s not rare to have 14 checkpoints and spend three hours at the airport.”

Outside the Detroit airport, Kelly Crane, 17, a high school student from Stamford, Conn., was repacking as she prepared to leave Michigan after a sailing trip. She pulled nail polish, sunscreen, lotion and water out of her pink and blue backpack and stuffing them into a large duffel bag she planned to check.

“I don’t really mind not bringing my sunscreen on the plane, but that I can’t bring my water, that’s a little ridiculous,” she said.

[T-Bird76]

I agree, these regulations are ridiculous and silly. I find it hard to believe (well maybe not) that Homeland security just found out that bombs can be made out of liquids.

So does this mean you can't even buy a bottle of water on the other side of the checkpoints and bring it on? I also wonder how credible this threat is. If these guys were anything like the boobs they arrested in Miami who couldn't pick pocket a 90 year old woman, I'm not too worried. Candidly I don’t put to much stock into anything that comes from that talking jaw Michael Chertoff.

[PhilDernerJr]

I don't understnad the big deal. Who can't live without lotion? The airlines serve water on board.

This is because of a threat that terrorists were specifically using liquids to carry out attacks. This kind of regulation sounds like a given, at least for these few days as the facts start to settle about the attack threat that's coming public.

I'd think that people would choose a little more safety over dry hands.

[hiss srq]

I tend to agree with Phil, anything that you need will be onboard the airplane and obviously the regulations will be just slightly less than they are for any of GTW, LHR, STN, and MAN flights leaving the USA. I completely support these measures. I just came home from SRQ where I have been since 7 A.M. Observing the events. A few bitchy pax but most are being pretty good about it all. We will see, I doubt very highly that this is going to be a lasting regulation. If it is than I am sure Amtrac sales are going to skyrocket

[Mellyrose]

I tend to agree with Phil, anything that you need will be onboard the airplane and obviously the regulations will be just slightly less than they are for any of GTW, LHR, STN, and MAN flights leaving the USA. I completely support these measures. I just came home from SRQ where I have been since 7 A.M. Observing the events. A few bitchy pax but most are being pretty good about it all. We will see, I doubt very highly that this is going to be a lasting regulation. If it is than I am sure Amtrac sales are going to skyrocket

This coming from the guy who thinks "hovering 30 feet above an ex-girlfriend's house in a helicopter" is not dangerous.

[T-Bird76]

Phil I think the issue is how close we're these guys from really pulling this off? If they were caught in the airport with the devices then by all means liquids should be banned at least until they can reasonably say they eliminated the threat.

However if this was anything like the boys in Miami then Homeland security is totally overreacting. If this plot was months away from being launched why step things up the day it was uncovered? The two dates are totally unconnected.

The other issue behind the scenes is that the TSA has dragged its ass and wasted tens of millions of our dollars on installing screening machines that don't screen for explosives. This event in itself should be proof to everyone that the TSA and Homeland security is a total and complete failure. It’s a blatant admission that "opps we didn't think of that scenario."

[PhilDernerJr]

When did Amtrak start trains to London? ;)

I agree that many security measures are silly these days, and are just there as a way to imply that things are secure. But come on...it's not a big deal to not be able to take water, lotion or perfume on a flight.

[RDU-JFK]

I'm flying down to Fayetteville tomorrow for the weekend and as a result I need to leave my toothpaste, deodorant and shampoo at home since I'm not cheking a bag (tight connection). It's an inconvenience, and add on the fact that when I get to LGA tomorrow I need to deal with all the uninformed travelers with their huge rollaboard suitcases bringing the kitchen sink on the plane. So I'll have to leave like 4 hours before the flight. So yes, it is an inconvenience.

Another thing...what if you're airside-checking your luggage on an RJ? It's unfair cause you're checking your bag anyways but then again you're not.

[Mellyrose]

I didn't mean that it was such a huge inconvenience to not be able to take those items on a flight, but it really does mean changing the way you plan and pack for a trip....and even if you are as careful and conscious as you can be, with these measures, I'm sure you'd still have to throw things out at security.

Pretty much just seems like a pain in the ass...I wasn't implying that it was anything more than that.

[Midnight Mike]

Well, blame to ACLU for this one, not allowed to racially profile:

He said his daughter Jennifer, 14, was forced to remove her perfume from her handbag and put it checked luggage.

As far as the liquids, they said the bomb plot involved liquid explosives, the airports are not equipped correctly to detect liquid explosives, so, airport security has to adjust.....

Liquid explosives, do not leave the same residue trail as powdered type explosives....

[Matt Molnar]

Liquids should already been banned as Al-Qaeda demonstrated their ability and motivation to do exactly the same thing long ago. A plot hatched by Ramzi Yousef to bomb a dozen trans-pacific flights with liquid explosives assembled in-flight was thwarted in the Phillippines in 1995. The plot was unraveled when Yousef's Manila apartment/bomb factory caught fire.

[MarkLawrence]

I talked to family in the Uk a while ago - the whole basis of the attack was based on a liquid explosive - up to 10 flights - close together in time of explosion and far enough away from land so crews could not turn around - that's what they've been told in the UK (and I think it's also reported on MS-NBC).

What would frustrate me more is - the HUGE delays getting home to the US - apparently, at one stage, all out-bound trans-Atlanstic flights from LHR, LGW, Stanstead, Birmingham and Manchester were grounded with no take off time - what does that do to the lines at check-in. I haven't listened to the live feeds from JFK today, but I expect they are very deviod of Trans-Atlantic flights....

[Jonesbeach]

Walking through AA's terminal at JFK, you would think it was Thanksgiving weekend, there are so many people milling around. They have it set up that you have to go through a pre-screening station to enter the line for security where they make you throw out your beverages. Only then you are allowed to get on the line for screening. The line for security looks like it would take at least an hour to get through. Anybody that's flying these next couple of days has some real fun times in store.

[RDU-JFK]

Jonesbeach,

So you'd recommened me to get to LGA extra early? Was the security line really crawling?

[Jonesbeach]

I'm at JFK, but over here it looked pretty bad. I would anticipate lines simlar to the holidays (Thansgiving, Christmas).