No more "hand carried" wine in flights

Given everything else that is going on, and the potential for what could have happened, I realize this is a very (very) minor issue, but I guess this brings a halt to the practice of transporting your vacation wine purchases home in carry on baggage, rather than trusting your treasures to the gentle treatment of bagge handlers.

Bruce
Do you know if this is just the states or worldwide?
regards
Ian

Ian, here's a link to the new procedures: http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/threat-change.shtm

I read this to apply to all flights from the UK to the US and all US flights within the US and from the US to other countries. The no liquid rules appear to apply to any flight to the US from any country.

Still shake out time, so this may not be a correct interpretation, but that's how the "New York Times" is reporting the application of the rule today.

[Robin Garr]

I guess this brings a halt to the practice of transporting your vacation wine purchases home in carry on baggage, rather than trusting your treasures to the gentle treatment of baggage handlers.

Bruce, first, a housekeeping note ... assuming you wouldn't object, I took off the "WTN" from your message title (since it's not a Wine Tasting Note), and moved it into The Wine Forum (since it is a wine-related topic).

Personally, I think this is just further evidence of how silly and incompetent the airline "security" industry is. But for what it's worth, I always pack my wine in checked baggage anyway, simply because I don't want to have to lug it, and so far I've never had a problem. Packing it securely, ideally in styro carriers but as a minimum, tightly packed with soft items around each bottle so glass doesn't touch glass, and all's well. I've only lost one bag, at Paris Charles de Gaulle, but happily they got the bag to my hotel room within a few hours, and all the wine I was bringing in to France (coals to Newcastle?) was fine.

"Personally, I think this is just further evidence of how silly and incompetent the airline "security" industry is."

Elucidation, please Robin. Should liquids have been prohibited in the past as you see it?

I'm not defending the industry, just interested in your position.

I know you're traveling soon, so no hurry in your response -- I'm sure there will be plenty more talk about this issue in the days to come.

In case you missed it, The Atlantic recently had a piece decrying the $5 billion cost of air security, arguing that passenger awareness and heavy locked cockpit doors, had greatly increased airline security. The searches, etc. were more for show and reassurance of passengers than effective in preventing threats to planes.

Regards, Bob

[Robin Garr]

Elucidation, please Robin. Should liquids have been prohibited in the past as you see it?

Absolutely not.

The Atlantic recently had a piece decrying the $5 billion cost of air security, arguing that passenger awareness and heavy locked cockpit doors, had greatly increased airline security. The searches, etc. were more for show and reassurance of passengers than effective in preventing threats to planes.

You answered your own question, Bob. That's pretty much exactly where I was coming from, although I have a somewhat darker and even more paranoid notion that it's not only for "show and reassurance" but also to help build a climate of opinion in which citizens are willing to accept increasing police-state restriction in the name of "security" and, perhaps, stay so emotionally involved with security and the alleged war on terrorism than worry about what the incumbent administration is doing in Iraq and at home.

Last year, I transported almost a case of Rhone wines from Paris to Atlanta to Reno. They were all lovingly wrapped in bubble-wrap and cushioned by clothes. They arrived home safe. whew!
However, in 2003, I took 2 bottles of 2 Buck Chuck wrapped merely in clothes from Reno to San Francisco to Hong Kong to Bombay. The red made it, but the white perished in the journey. I also had to endure the looks of my relatives when we arrived home reeking of Chardonnay.
I wonder what made the difference - the bubble wrap, the length of the journey, the brutality of the baggage handlers in Bombay, the quality of the bottles or Providence!

Bruce, first, a housekeeping note ... assuming you wouldn't object, I took off the "WTN" from your message title (since it's not a Wine Tasting Note), and moved it into The Wine Forum (since it is a wine-related topic).

Thanks Robin. I didn't even realize I had used the WTN prefix. Guess I am just too well trained.

Bruce
Do you know if this is just the states or worldwide?
regards
Ian

Dunno about the ROW (rest of the world), but the government of Canada has followed suit. Here is the info:

"All passengers should be aware that no liquids will be permitted on board aircraft departing from Canadian airports destined to the United States and the United Kingdom . Exceptions include the following:

1. Baby formula, breast milk, or juice if a baby or small child is traveling;
2. Prescription medicine with a name that matches the passenger's ticket;
3. Insulin and essential other non-prescription medication."

I'm sitting here in an airport waiting to board and listening to the announcements. "No toothpaste, fingernail polish, deodorant, shaving cream will be allowed on board. Saline solution for your contact lenses will not be allowed. No coffee, no bottled water. No, you may not bring juice for your child." Of course, we are all at a point where none of that can be checked.
I chucked my shaving cream and shampoo before leaving home this morning, but deodorant? Toothpaste? wow.

[Robin Garr]

I chucked my shaving cream and shampoo before leaving home this morning, but deodorant? Toothpaste? wow.

Just make sure you march in step when boarding, Tovarich.

Not saying it's real, but I remember a classy move made by 007 where he used plastique hidden as toothpaste to blow out a few windows before taking out some bad guys... I suppose if that technology was real, it could reflect why they're banning toothpaste.

Did you know silly putty was invented by the military for use as a maliable, bouncy explosive? It involved saturating an elastic, soft material with kerosine or some other explosive, flammable liquid... I guess the military couldn't make the material explosive enough, which is why it was ditched and then sold as a toy...

Depends on your government's transportation department's regulations. Here in Canada from what I've heard it's all international flights out of Canada - the radio this morning said it wasn't affecting domestic flights, but that could change easily and quickly.

I fear soon we will all be drugged at the airport, transported whilst unconscious and revived at the other end . Hang on , based on my usual experience in cattle class from UK to Oz/NZ that's actually an improvement on the normal experience. Bring it on!

I'm with others here - not practical measures.

regards

Ian

Someone please elucidate on the flights this affects? In the link it appears to speak only of UK-->US Flights.

The BBC World Service news and US domestic news (WBZ radio in Boston and NPR) were all reporting the following:

On flights from the UK to the USA, the UK is imposing a nearly complete ban on all carry-on luggage. Some sort of exception for stuff carried in transparent plastic bags.

The USA has imposed a ban on all domestic and international flights on all items containing liquids and gels, with the exception of some perscription drugs, injectable insulin, etc.

Bottom line is, check in everything.

Prediction: If this ban stays in effect for any length of time, we'll find terrorists suddenly becoming insulin-dependent diabetics.

-Paul W.

I fear soon we will all be drugged at the airport, transported whilst unconscious and revived at the other end.

I don't mind air travel, but do find cattle class quite tiring, so I would be all in favour of being knocked out and revived at the other end.

Kind of like those corny sci-fi movies where the astronauts are placed into suspended animation pods for their 500 year old space trip!!

This is getting ridiculous. Soon we will all have to fly naked because of the 'no clothing' rule.

Here are the restrictions listed on the British Airways website:

With immediate effect, the following arrangements apply to all passengers starting their journey at a UK or North American airport and to those transferring between flights at a UK airport.

All cabin baggage must be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.

Passengers may take through the airport security search point, in a single (ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items. Nothing may be carried in pockets:

pocket size wallets and pocket size purses plus contents (for example money, credit cards, identity cards etc (not handbags));
travel documents essential for the journey (for example passports and travel tickets);
prescription medicines and medical items sufficient and essential for the flight (eg diabetic kit), except in liquid form unless verified as authentic.
spectacles and sunglasses, without cases.
contact lens holders, without bottles of solution.
for those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger) and sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy disposal bags).
female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed (eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes).
tissues (unboxed) and/or handkerchiefs
keys (but no electrical key fobs)

Every other item must be carried in customer’s hold luggage.

I'm supposed to fly B.A. on Sunday. Can't wait!

This is getting ridiculous. Soon we will all have to fly naked because of the 'no clothing' rule.

I don't think the authorities will be happy with the "fly naked" rule. Didn't you see the 1973 movie "Papillon"? Don't you recall where Steve McQueen hid stuff?

[Jenise]

Have to admit feeling a bit comforted this morning by the fact that my next international flight is booked on a Canadian airline.

Have to admit feeling a bit comforted this morning by the fact that my next international flight is booked on a Canadian airline.

I am afraid that the sort of people who plotted the UK airline bombings don't like us (Canadians) anymore either Jenise. No safe place.

In the past I always carried on my wine not so much because I worried about the baggage handlers (styrofoam carriers seem to prevent breakage) but because I worried about the temperature in the luggage compartment -- potentially much too hot if the plane sits on the runway a while, and much too cold up at 30,000 feet. Does anyone have any evidence that the temperature extremes have wrecked their wines?

Cheers, David

[Jenise]

Have to admit feeling a bit comforted this morning by the fact that my next international flight is booked on a Canadian airline.

I am afraid that the sort of people who plotted the UK airline bombings don't like us (Canadians) anymore either Jenise. No safe place.

Understood, but you're only on the B team. I'll take it.

Understood, but you're only on the B team. I'll take it.

In a case like this, I will happily agree to be relegated to the B team.