They only have the system as a ‘trial’ in Heathrow terminal 2 at the moment. I think the problem is that ALL airports have to have the system or it gets too confusing for travellers. And so, far, some major airports don’t have the system fully deployed yet. (Its also implied in the article).
Conveth on
They should just keep the rule, it’s inconvenient for passengers but it means the security queues are shorter as there’s one step fewer.
kevix2022 on
Because Boots is minting it selling tiny toiletries.
Every-Progress-1117 on
At least here in Helsinki, the new CT scanners are “too sensitive” and misidentifying thing. Last time I went through I had to explain there were no liquids in my bag and that the big square solid thing that was supposed to be “liquid” was in fact my laptop.
je97 on
Our usual security obsession, it seems.
dahid on
I didn’t even know they removed the rule in the first place, I’ve been following the old rule this whole time. Bigger liquids I always have put in my checked luggage.
CollReg on
The only rational explanation is that new evidence has come to light that these new scanners don’t actually work as intended – they’re either missing stuff, or identifying benign stuff as dangerous at too high a rate (always going to get some false positives) – but they can’t explicitly admit that…
Fair_Director_5277 on
We went through Malpensa in Italy this summer and they had the new scanners. It made such a difference at security. Just scan the bags and walk on through, wonderful. I hope this gets sorted quickly. Funny how the Uk is behind the rest of Europe with this stuff. A trip from Northern Ireland to Republic of Ireland tells you how behind we now are. UK has been stagnating as Europe zooms ahead. Even Venice seemed cheap compared to Belfast
9 Comments
Unless I missed it, the only “why” is
> a technical issue
They only have the system as a ‘trial’ in Heathrow terminal 2 at the moment. I think the problem is that ALL airports have to have the system or it gets too confusing for travellers. And so, far, some major airports don’t have the system fully deployed yet. (Its also implied in the article).
They should just keep the rule, it’s inconvenient for passengers but it means the security queues are shorter as there’s one step fewer.
Because Boots is minting it selling tiny toiletries.
At least here in Helsinki, the new CT scanners are “too sensitive” and misidentifying thing. Last time I went through I had to explain there were no liquids in my bag and that the big square solid thing that was supposed to be “liquid” was in fact my laptop.
Our usual security obsession, it seems.
I didn’t even know they removed the rule in the first place, I’ve been following the old rule this whole time. Bigger liquids I always have put in my checked luggage.
The only rational explanation is that new evidence has come to light that these new scanners don’t actually work as intended – they’re either missing stuff, or identifying benign stuff as dangerous at too high a rate (always going to get some false positives) – but they can’t explicitly admit that…
We went through Malpensa in Italy this summer and they had the new scanners. It made such a difference at security. Just scan the bags and walk on through, wonderful. I hope this gets sorted quickly. Funny how the Uk is behind the rest of Europe with this stuff. A trip from Northern Ireland to Republic of Ireland tells you how behind we now are. UK has been stagnating as Europe zooms ahead. Even Venice seemed cheap compared to Belfast