Odd: UK Reimposes Airport Liquids Restrictions

Comment about LHR isn’t quite right.

Terminal 5 flight connections also have the new scanners.

Possibly a vulnerability discovered.

The (security theater) show must go on!

At LHR, certain checkpoints still have the old imaging equipment.

Think of it as Beta testing IRL. Issues come up and need to get fixed as wider rollout continues.

To me it sounds like they are temporarily switching to old scanners as changes are done to the new ones. I also read the message as not all passengers will have to go back to the old rules (which would be crazy as you couldn’t plan when going to the airport). I could totally misinterprete it though.

I'm sure airside vendors screaming, about how much allowing full-sized drinks through security will affect their bottom lines.... didn't help.

I saw an odd security rule for US-origin flights headed to Israel the other day on Ops Group: https://ops.group/blog/israel/

This plus that makes it seems as if there may be a credible threat related to recent regional events

At LIS since 2020 Electronics don't have to be removed from hand luggage. Still, liquids have the same issues. Their talking about since a while, but only talking.

I wonder if the have new intelligence they aren't reporting on. LHR outbound planes was the target which initiated these restrictions so I cannot help but think there is a new threat. I hope not but seems odd to roll things back after all this investment.

That Place is a MESS!

Only at these (very small) airports: Newcastle, Leeds Bradford, London City, Aberdeen, Southend, and Teesside

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/article/2024/jun/07/six-uk-airports-temporarily-reintroduce-100ml-liquid-limit

Unlikely to affect a significant percentage of travelers.

I think it is caused by the confusion of travellers taking whatever liquids through when going to their holiday destinations, and then throwing YouTube worthy tantrums when they can't bring it back from their holiday destination.

I was very happy to be able to use the new scanners at NCL recently but then security insisted on giving my and others' electronics a "bespoke service hand screening" (laughing as they said this) after going through anyway. Think there are still some kinks being worked out for sure.

Them airside drink vendors are mighty powerful dark and evil lords. One dirty look and the UK gov't crumbles into a heap, retreats, and begs for forgiveness from those airport softdrink vendors. Yup, don't mess with the Lemonade and Fizzy Water Man.

@Ben - it’s not a nationwide policy just some regional airports;
Newcastle, Leeds Bradford, London City, Aberdeen, Southend and Teesside airports.

If you knew how much pure profit Coca Cola, PepsiCo, etc, make from selling filtered water plus or minus bubbles and flavour syrup, you wouldn't be so flippant.

Because until everything is set up and consistent you can’t have different restrictions at every airport

an airport supervisor in Europe (not UK) told me that the new EU law to "verify" the new machines have been made at the orders of the US, who is afraid of "unrestricted" liquids coming into the US.

Having flown out of LCY many. many times. The new machines break-down often; as loose 'clothing' (i.e...sleeves of jackets..etc)' tend to get stuck inside. Thus needing a repair.
It would also seem that bags require more secondary screening. Many more bags get shunted down the 'need-for-extra-scrutiny' lane. Thus slowing everything down. It takes about the same time to get through security , as it did with the old machines.

It is a nationwide policy, those are the airports that have the new scanners in service (plus certain checkpoints at LHR which the DfT appears to have forgotten). I also don’t understand how LCY is a regional airport.

I get flagged for no reason almost every time I pass through LHR. Last time, it took 20 minutes to check my liquids that had already been checked and rechecked. Sigh...

UK is currently in a (5-week) election campaign.
Unlike the USA, during this period there are no MPs (many who were MPs until last month are currently candidates, along with other people) and ministers, while still formally in post, do not take any substantive decisions, so anything substantive like this is decided by apolitical civil servants.
Thus this is likely to be either:
a) new intelligence of security threats (but they said not)
b) feedback that implementation is causing practical problems

@Tom all news outlets here in the UK are only reporting this temporary reinstatement only effects 6 airports as listed. LCY doesn’t handle large metal so is classed as regional.

(C) the regional airport staff failed to detect hazardous liquids as part of a random check of security procedures.

This makes the most sense. U.S. flights would be the primary target and I will bet that chatter was picked up amongst terrorist groups on vulnerabilities they identified. The war in Gaza, the Olympics, I am sure that intelligence agencies in the U.S., EU and U.K. are very concerned about this summer.

Given how the 9/11 terrorists did "dry runs" to test U.S. security lapses prior, it's possible some linked to organizations were identified doing the same in the past weeks to "test" the new machines.

My personal belief is that it's not about plans to take aircraft down as much as it is with identifying the airports themselves as the target.

That would feel a bit odd though, given airports like London City have had this in place for close to a year and a half, meaning they would have already had plenty of time to discover deficiencies. Perhaps the implementation issues (B) seems more likely

You’re mistaken - it is a nationwide policy. It’s just the smaller regional airports got their act together quicker and have the new scanners installed already. The Government only put back (again) the date to 2025 for every airport to have the new scanners because the bigger ones didn’t have robust plans and failed to hit the deadline.

I think your confused ;
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clmm97x3yvmo

I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories are trying to do something to distract from the election in a little under a month - "we'll keep you safe" etc.

d) duty free & beverage outlet revenues have dropped too much.

This article is so pointless. You even commented about only being able to speculate on the reason. Makes me question why having the article. Perhaps you could have a list of headlines without much content if there is not much to talk about.

It applies to all the airports which had loosened the restrictions as a result of the new scanners. There have been a raft of complaints about the scanner erroneously identifying liquids as dangerous with passengers being made to throw away perfectly safe items. This seems the most likely reason

Coming up on summer vacation peak travel for much of the Northern Hemisphere and the amount of secondaries kicked up by the CT hand baggage scanners slows things down along with the UK’s use of the electronic strip search machines at the passenger screening checkpoints with the CT hand baggage scanners.

Add in that politicians on the eve of elections and their “security state” establishment players often have a thing for trying to run up the fear factor, and can’t say this is a surprise. Just waiting for someone to cart out “it’s because of Hamas, the war on Palestinians or the Iranians”. But the problem around the US, UK and Europe with these hand baggage CT scanners is that it doesn’t take a lot of flagging for secondaries to really back up and slow things down, especially if not very heavy on the extra staffing and extra “temporary holding” space.

I can certainly see d) affecting political governments, but not apolitical civil servants.

There wasn’t much in the way of “dry runs” actually done by most of the 9/11 terrorists in 2001 and the year prior. But after the attacks, it sounded better to say “dry run” to ramp up “see something, say something” paranoia than to say that the terrorists traveled around primarily for much the same kind of reasons non-terrorists do — to socialize and solicit from associates — even while also familiarizing themselves with travel within the US.

The 9/11 terrorists didn’t violate cabin baggage rules on 9/11. They stuck with the rules for cabin baggage and exploited the old mentality of airline crews and passengers not factoring in the possibility of kamikaze/suicidal hijackers.

Of course you can. Just look at US airports where we have this PreCheck and passenger “identity as security” nonsense that means there is not complete uniformity of process for all passengers at all US airports.

At one of my more frequented airports in Europe, a couple of lanes in a given terminal have the CT hand baggage scanners allowing me to not remove any items from my cabin baggage items while the process elsewhere in the same terminal is different because most is the other lanes don’t have the CT hand baggage scanners.

Also, remember when some of these “security” characters said they wanted to have some “randomness” with the screening process to “keep the terrorists on their toes”? So they clearly are not into being consistent and uniform for all passengers at all airports even within a country.

That’s been a dynamic for over a decade now.

Just curious if anyone has sued a UK airport or the UK government for seizing “permitted liquids” in the absence of a police officer being there to seize the liquid//gels/aerosols of the sort that were being allowed to those using the screening checkpoints with the CT hand baggage scanners.

There is always “new intelligence”, courtesy of the super surveillance (i.e., government-authorized stalker) state. But when looking at the risk, there is a matrix of consideration for motivation + opportunity + capability and the expected outcome/damage arising from the mix thereof.

There is no new capability this year over last year; and the opportunities vis-a-vis airports/planes are more or less the same as a year ago.

There is always a vulnerability. We can’t afford to pay for zero-vulnerability when it comes to a mass transport system, so it is risk mitigation that is delivered rather than total risk-elimination even as the political and bureaucratic lords don’t want to highlight that life involves risks and there is a point of diminishing returns on allocations for “security” and so some vulnerabilities are just going to be unless going for broke.

The new scanners can’t be moved so easily. They are heavy and require work to uninstall and move. The old scanners can be brought in if they are still close by and available for use, but the space is limited and so any transition or sequence of transitions will be a nuisance that hits passengers. LHR is too messy at the best of times for it, and thus swapping equipment will just make a bigger mess of the airport.

I don't think it's that surprising - all UK airports were meant to have 100% new scanners by this month, and they are really far behind. (My local airport has about 10 scanners of which 2 have been updated). Also there is an issue with a high number of secondary scans and with summer holidays about to be in full swing they won't want so many delays.

The easing of liquid restrictions wasn't official and only applied in certain airports (the rules will be changed uniformly once all airports are ready) so there seems to be a lot of confusion with passengers who don't know whether they will be scanned by a new machine or an old one and consequently more delays.

It's simply a triumph of ambition over experience...

I think it's a matter of the confusion that airports are different. However @seat1Cnew may have a point. I took two nice bottles of wine through the first wing on Friday afternoon. It was awesome to be able to do so without checking a bag or, alternatively, leaving the bottles behind at the hotel. However, the screener did have to pull them and run them through the scanner. In the future, I'd happily put them in the bin separately, which would speed things up a bit, but not solve the problem entirely.

Regardless, I'm glad that I got to have the experience while it was possible and look forward to it returning!

I can assure you that, for all the reasons @GUWonder states, they are not reinstalling the old equipment.

I flew through Heathrow twice in the past month on Virgin Atlantic, both times through Virgin's Upper Class terminal. They didn't have any liquids requirements for the first flight. 2nd time, the security staff were handing out clear bags for liquids. I did have 2 items above 100 ml. They were scanned for explosives and allowed. Security staff were very apologetic about the reimposition of the liquids ban (imagine that TSA!).