I flew out of Munich Sunday morning after a few (maybe too many) rounds Sat night. However, I clearly recall having to go through security twice - once before all the duty free shops and then again at the gate.

Is this really necessary?

Entering the country was a breeze - no forms to fill out, no lines, no questions from immigration. Leaving was quite the opposite (though still no forms).

Where were you flying to? Some countries / airlines levy their own extra security on passengers in addition to the standard airport security. My impression of the security at MUC is that it has always been swift, polite and efficient. Immigration has always tended to be quick because (in T1, anyway), there are ports spaced out inside the terminal. If one line is long, walk about 100 meters to the next point.

We had the same experience back in October. We were first sent through security in the main terminal, then after a very long journey to our LUF gate, were forced to line up again by the gate at an additional security checkpoint.

Problem was, they were ridiculously slow at the second checkpoint, to the point of causing nearly everyone in line to miss the flight to Chicago. Everyone else mentioned that they had been previously screened, so I wasn't quite sure why this was necessary.

Maybe it was a way of dealing with the "suspicious" post-Oktoberfest crowd

Flying back to the States. Inbound was swift and efficient, different story on the outbound. Everyone was fairly polite, it just seems like you could eliminate one of the security checks.

I don't recall the gate number but it was the UA flight to IAD last Sunday.

This is standard operating procedure for flights to the States from AMS and it happened to me at CDG, too. Can't remember from Manchester.

I was told that the gate screening is actually a requirement of the U.S. carrier (maybe they meant the government) for flights headed to the U.S.

It's never happened to me on intra-European flights.

I just had a similar experience two days ago. I flew in from DEL, and had about 1 1/2 hours to kill before my connecting flight to LHR. So, I go to the lounge, and then to the Airbrau outlet in T1 (never left airside). So now, I've got to go to G47, as the LHR flight is boarding.

A security checkpoint??? Now I'm stuck in a line, and the German woman in front of me (it must have been her first flight) has got like four carry ons holding everything that was in her household, so she takes like 5 minutes (she is S L O W). Next, I go through. I forget about the bottle of water that was in my carry on that cleared at least four airports in India (JAI, BOM, GOI, DEL). Anyway, I had to get rid of that and then on to the LHR flight. I was the last pax to clear the gate (I got a small chiding by the gate agent for being so close on time, as the aircraft was parked at a remote stand). Oh well, I made the flight and got off on time. But, I have no idea what that secondary security check was for. It was for all passengers, even those who would have started in MUC.

Non-schengen. I was in MUC last week and there is no extra security check for schengen flights (which is most of europe). US (TSA) has had an extra security check requirement for years, but now it has extended to some other destinations such as LHR. For the majority of flights MUC security is quite fast and efficient, with short lines (much nicer than FRA, for example).

I agree. I much prefer MUC to FRA. The town is much nicer, too.

Agreed on both fronts. It is a US requirement problem, not an MUC security problem. They did have to have an extra look in my backpack the other day, as something looked liquid that wasn't in my Freedom Baggie (nothing found), but shoes could stay on, I didn't get felt up, inspectors were as polite as could be, and things moved nice & quickly. As far as I'm concerned, regular MUC security could be a model that the US could follow.