Fredd

German scientists said on Tuesday they have developed a new technology that could allow air passengers to take liquids on planes again by instantly being able to tell if they are explosive.

http://www.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20091021-22703.html

greentips

Based on what little the article said, this is not new technology. It is a very well developed technology called NMR spectroscopy. They have merely adapted this very old technology. It is technology that when used in medicine is called MRI. There are a few drawbacks: it is it uses a very powerful magnet which rules out use on anything with ferrous metals, and it is quite expensive technology. A simple spectrograph is cheap, but one that can do a 3d scan and select a region of interest on a 3-d image to do spectroscopy on would not be so cheap. But, perhaps a scaled down version might be cheaper than the big ones.

I could see using this in conjunction with the x-ray stuff. Screener sees scary liquid in bag on xray. Bag is opened, scary liquid is removed and placed in NMR scanner which does spectroscopy and says no C-N bonds ==> ok to go.

An alternative potential use: Kippie bags and all non-steel bottles go directly to NMR scanner where spectroscopy is done. Substances with suspicious chemistry are given to former TSO who are in prison to drink, non-suspicious stuff can be retained by the pax.

Of course, I could be all wet.

Fredd

Not more than 3 oz. wet I trust...

Superguy

So how does this differ from the liquid scanners used at NRT?

Even if the Germans end up deploying this and it gets used in the EU, I don't expect TSA to implement it due to the USG's "not invented here" mentality. They'll have to wait until some US contractor either develops or licenses the tech before they'll trust it.

SATTSO

At SAT next year we are scheduled to get the "AT 2" x-Ray that can detect liquid explosives. So it's on the way.

bocastephen

Here we go again. X-rays do not detect liquid explosives. Never have, never will.

The device you're talking about might have an additional feature attached to it - which if the TSA has half a brain - would be the same feature I blogged about here starting a few months after the stupid liquid ban began.

This is a special type of spectography that can analyze liquid or soft organic matter without a sample prep, just by passing the item under the scanner.

It has nothing to do with x-rays.

SATTSO

If you want to nit pick words you are correct. I say the x-ray to mean the entire machine.

whirledtraveler

They've developed a way to raise IQ? Wow, that would have many more practical applications than just that one.

bocastephen

It's not really nitpicking when everyone is asked to put their silly bags through the x-ray device today (and often have them x-rayed more than once) as if the screeners (or their managers) believe the x-ray has some magic powers to determine the content of those 3.4oz containers.

Superguy

It's not the x-rays that determine the explosives but the combination of the x-rays and kippie bags that render the explosives inert!

SATTSO

No it is nitpicking. I didn't mention one thing that you just mentioned. How does what you just post have anything to do with my post? I don't see the connection.

I made a very short post, stated SAT will roll out newer x-rays and those machines will have the ability to detect liquid explosives. I did not make a technical post about how these AT 2 machines work. If I did I would better understand your response. I do not think it matters to most what device actually screens for explosives, if eventually such technology allows people to carry whatever liquids with them, and that was the point of my post.

So I will still say the new AT2 x-Ray can still detect exosives, knowing full well x-rays can not detect explosives. Sorry.

N830MH

The policy says only 3.4oz & 100ml are still on the liquid restrictions.

bocastephen

How do you account for the entire TSA apparatus that is built around the false concept that x-rays machines can detect explosives or the chemical makeup of what's in everyone's bags? If you agree that x-rays cannot detect explosives or chemicals, do you insist that passengers at your checkpoint place their bags in a bin and sometimes re-screen bags that were left in luggage?

LuvAirFrance

I don't see the relevance. The ban on liquids over 3 oz was intended to prevent taking the components of homemade explosives on board and putting the bomb together there. So the fact that a tool can detect explosives may be useful, but the ban would have to remain in place so that someone can't take enough common household substances on board out of which to fabricate a bomb. As I recall, when the Philippines busted an Al Qaeda plot, it was based on taking bomb components on 12 planes, NOT on taking commercial explosives.

RadioGirl

This assumes that, in the limited facilities of an airport bathroom or on board the plane, one can mix an explosive from "common household substances" that are individually harmless. But you can't.

If you could, throwing all the confiscated water, soda, hair gel, shampoo, yogurt and cosmetics into a big trashcan would be pretty stupid, huh?

When TSA has been asked to explain how someone could mix liquids after the checkpoint to create an explosive, they say, "it's pre-mixed". When asked how someone could get highly volatile pre-mixed explosives to the airport, through the checkpoint (without alarming an ETD) and onto the airplane, they've said "it would be mixed after the checkpoint."

There are already lots of threads in this forum discussing this.