No more talcum powder (or waxing kits)

A wider list of 'banned' items appears to have been issued[:(!]

Story here

Originally posted by sailor99
A wider list of 'banned' items appears to have been issued[:(!]

Story here

I wish they would make their bleedin' minds up![:(!]

[buns]

I think it certainly helps with helping the staff who have been press ganged into marshalling the lines. On Saturday, I witnessed a strained discussion about mascara.


buns

[Darren Wheeler]

How do they check for the gel-filled bras ??????????

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
How do they check for the gel-filled bras ??????????

Sorry mate - you missed the take off!!

[Darren Wheeler]

I can't see that forum and some how I think it's NSFW.

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
I can't see that forum and some how I think it's NSFW.

Oh I do aplogise for that - and the membership thing is still being sorted isnt it.

Ah well I guess its another great incentive for becoming a member - reading a thread about Gel Bras.

Originally posted by buns4vs
I think it certainly helps with helping the staff who have been press ganged into marshalling the lines. On Saturday, I witnessed a strained discussion about mascara.

I can see what you mean. However, apart from the UK being out of line with the rest of the world, the policy is now different depending on which UK airport you happen to take off from. This seems like an ideal confusion situation, especially for people transiting the UK or travelling within the UK, who do not know who happens to own the airport they are using.

Would it not be better if BAA committed to recruiting and training the necessary quantity and quality of staff to enable them to do suitable checks, rather than publishing and ever inreasing list of what we cannot take in our ever smaller cabin baggage?

[Darren Wheeler]

Originally posted by MarkJ

Originally posted by Darren Wheeler
I can't see that forum and some how I think it's NSFW.

Oh I do aplogise for that - and the membership thing is still being sorted isnt it.

Ah well I guess its another great incentive for becoming a member - reading a thread about Gel Bras.

O yes indeedy [^][^][^]

Originally posted by MarkJ
Ah well I guess its another great incentive for becoming a member - reading a thread about Gel Bras.

Mark! You know you weren't supposed to mention this - it's secret. You'll be black balled you know.[B)]

Back OnT though, I just had a look at the BAA website. The front page seems to echo the artical I published above in that it says cosmetics are banned. However the [url=http://www.baa.com/portal/controller/dispatcher.jsp?CiID=566cefdec403d010VgnVCM10000036821c0a____&CtID=a22889d8759a0010VgnVCM200000357e120a____&Ct=B2C_CT_PRESS_RELEASE&ChPath=Corporate^Media%20Centre^News%20Releases^Results]detailed page[/url] still talks about 'in liquid, gel or paste form. So I am confused if this story is real or not. Can I take my mascara[?]

Originally posted by sailor99

Originally posted by buns4vs
I think it certainly helps with helping the staff who have been press ganged into marshalling the lines. On Saturday, I witnessed a strained discussion about mascara.

I can see what you mean. However, apart from the UK being out of line with the rest of the world, the policy is now different depending on which UK airport you happen to take off from. This seems like an ideal confusion situation, especially for people transiting the UK or travelling within the UK, who do not know who happens to own the airport they are using.

Would it not be better if BAA committed to recruiting and training the necessary quantity and quality of staff to enable them to do suitable checks, rather than publishing and ever inreasing list of what we cannot take in our ever smaller cabin baggage?

So if you're that desperate to fly to say LAS with your make-up you should get the train up to MAN and then connect from there. This is silly I think BAA and all the airport need to come up with a joint decision, there's not that many airports/operators in this country surely if you sat one from each company down and agreed x,y and z were allowed and a,b and c were def not allowed then we would find it much easier. And while I'm on a rant this 45x35x16 thing is doing my head in. So the depth of your bag can't be more than 16cm is that squashed into shape or not???? I really think they should just bring back the usual size restrictions. I was on the Gatwick Express coming home this evening and an american who was flying home was talking to his mate and coudldn't understand how he was allowed one size bag to fly from new york to paris, then paris to london, but now needs to find a different carry on to go home [:(]

BBC report Here, about Musicians not being able to carry on their priceless Stradivarius' (is Stradivarii the plural? )on to planes.

The interesting line is "Airlines contacted by the BBC said they had to abide by the Department for Transport regulations."

Which to me would imply that if the the DOT is making the rules, all airports around the UK should be applying them in exactly the same way. But that obviously doesn't seem to be happening.

Ade99 - you're too right. I am afraid I believe this is making my country, of which I happen to be proud, look like it is stocked with fools. The US coped with 911 with out this sillyness, so should we. I am afraid the real driver here is BAA's profit and their inability to opererate both an effective and efficient security system (witness the lapses since the new security rules - reported in other threads here). If the US, and for that matter EU countries other than the UK, can do it why can BAA not manage it. What is happening is that the flag of 'homeland security' is being waved, and we are expected to cow tow (sp) to it. I am fine with not taking liquids or gels because there is a clear rational (indeed this is what the US system now specifies). But the little bags, no make up, no powders is simply to make BAA's life simpler and cheaper. And IMHO it is not on - the terrorists win.

Is anyone unclear as to my viewpoint?

Sorry for the rant, but as you may guess from my tag line it gets my goat.

""Britain's main airport operator yesterday banned all cosmetics from passengers' hand luggage unless the items were bought at shops in the departure lounge."

More government efficiency ...[:(]

Originally posted by sailor99
Ade99 - you're too right. I am afraid I believe this is making my country, of which I happen to be proud, look like it is stocked with fools. The US coped with 911 with out this sillyness, so should we. I am afraid the real driver here is BAA's profit and their inability to opererate both an effective and efficient security system (witness the lapses since the new security rules - reported in other threads here). If the US, and for that matter EU countries other than the UK, can do it why can BAA not manage it. What is happening is that the flag of 'homeland security' is being waved, and we are expected to cow tow (sp) to it. I am fine with not taking liquids or gels because there is a clear rational (indeed this is what the US system now specifies). But the little bags, no make up, no powders is simply to make BAA's life simpler and cheaper. And IMHO it is not on - the terrorists win.

Is anyone unclear as to my viewpoint?

Sorry for the rant, but as you may guess from my tag line it gets my goat.

Jeremy, too bloody right! This is making a mockery of our country and our ability to do anything sensible. For once in my life I agree with Michael O'Leary, the rules made between civil servants and BAA are inconsistent, illogical, and stupid. About time things returned to normal minus bottles ...

BTW what do crew do? No lippy application b4 landing???

Originally posted by slinky09
BTW what do crew do? No lippy application b4 landing???

Now there's a grim thought!!Lots of us "Ladies" will be looking a bit ropey after a nice long flight with no slap to re-apply...[:0]

[Neil]

Originally posted by PVGSLF
"Britain's main airport operator yesterday banned all cosmetics from passengers' hand luggage unless the items were bought at shops in the departure lounge."

First sentence of the report sums the motive up really!
Or am I being wayyyyy too cynical?[:?]

Whilst it is cynical of you to think like this, the sad fact is that it wouldn't surprise me if the Gov and BAA have got together and "planned" it, poor BAA, their profits must of taken a hit during this, what a good way to some of it back!

Jeremy's post is spot on IMHO, well put[y]

I was definitely allowed to take talcum powder on a BA flight ex-JFK on 14 Aug. The nice supervisor gave clearence to the "checker".

US TSA practice differs in all US airports. If you print out the TSA regulations to show that they are not adhering to their own rules, they just take longer to check you and your stuff. No point complaining

Power goes to the head!

Terror Threat Security appears to over-rule discrimination, fairness, common sense - but not profit!

Originally posted by DragonLady

Originally posted by slinky09
BTW what do crew do? No lippy application b4 landing???

Now there's a grim thought!!Lots of us "Ladies" will be looking a bit ropey after a nice long flight with no slap to re-apply...[:0]

Damned right. Will we even look anything like our passport phots without having applied the trowel????[:p]

.....and nor will we not having had a shave

Perhaps we can arrange to have you airbrushed.

Or waxed!

[Neil]

Originally posted by sailor99
Or waxed!

Here we go again, way OT, so you do waxing then Jeremy? You wouldn't confirm or deny last time;)

Neil:)

Like I said, that's for me to know. However it would be fair to say that one would not be allowed to take one's waxing kit on board, were one to have one.