HitAndRun

Seems my choices are check bags and accept high probability of ending up stuck overnight at one airport with bags at another - especially when flying multi legs in afternoon / evening) or leave toiletries at home and make a stop at store at destination to pick some up. Either way, at best way it adds 45 - 60 minutes to my travel and neither of these options is something I want to do with my weekly transcon travel schedule. It just adds to the inconvenience of todays air travel. If these measures stay in place I see myself doing whaever is possible to curtail my air travel.

Perhaps opportunity for new business? Stores within airports selling "safe" toiletry packs, maybe UAL selling toiletry packs instead of those nasty food boxes or perhaps hotels including toothpaste, deoderant and shaving stuff in the room charge?

I don't know but I find these restrictions highly inconvenient. Can't help wondering why TSA wasn't ahead of the curve on this especially since the threat of liquid explosives has been known for some time. You would think the USA could come up with some kind of solution, whether it is biometric security card for pre-screened people (widely adopted not current program planned ot be active at a single airport I believe) or electronic system for screening chemical signatures.

Perhaps it just me being unreasonable....

ozflier

On the other hand, it may actually speed up boarding .
No more people trying to lever their kitchen sink into the overhead!
FAs not having to bring bags to the front to be loaded into the hold!
No overhead lockers so full that once opened, you had better stand back or be crushed!
No fighting over where your feet go when the underseat area in front of your row is full with bags and laptops.
This may be a real improvement - if only we didn't have to wait round for a half hour til our baggage comes onto the carousel.

us2

The bigger question is whether this is the end of it or whether they'll impose something even more Draconian, like a ban on all carry-ons. If that happens, I think several carriers are headed for liquidation. As it is, I think this latest round of banned items, if it sticks, will make people rethink some of their travel plans. Teleconferencing, driving and general aviation are viable alternatives for all but the lengthiest and most necessary trips. A ban on carry-ons would kill a great deal of business travel because of the problems involved in checking laptops and the resulting inability of people to work on their flights, not to mention the extra time involved in waiting for checked bags.

someotherguy

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4780815.stm (remember, this only applies to flights from the UK): "Sources at the Department for Transport have indicated that the current restrictions on hand baggage (i.e., you can't have any) could become permanent."

I guess Draco is back in favor.

nrgiii

Are you kidding me? The same TSA that has my name (and that of thousands of other frequent flyers) on the no-fly list for no good reason, preventing me from using the web or kiosk to check in for the last 3 years? The same TSA that still does little or no screening on most air cargo? Let's remember that the TSA is first and foremost a government bureacracy. Granted, they are an improvement over the airport security we had before 9/11, which was a complete joke. No offense, but expecting TSA to be ahead of the curve is almost silly.

I still say if we *really* want good airport security, we'll have to suffer much more inconvenience than we have even now. If you've ever flown out of Tel Aviv, then you know what I'm talking about.

What I *do* hope is that the carry on restrictions will be relaxed somewhat over time. Hair gel and toothpaste on board might well be a thing of the past, but I could see them allowing unopened bottled water (purchased after security) back on board in a few months. Dehydration on flights over 2 hrs is a real problem for many people and the service in coach is already bad enough. Most Congressmen are frequent flyers, which I think helped get DCA reopened after 9/11.

Hey at least (for now) we're better off than the poor people who live in the UK. Those photos of LHR travellers lined up with their "carry ons" in a little plastic bag made me thankful I was not travelling in London today. Having to check my laptop is the stuff of nightmares.

Norm

emma dog

I have my pilot's license and am instrument rated. My wife had been taking the "it's not so bad" approach to flying since 9/11, however, even she is getting agitated with the new rules (she LOVES water!). Given that we're a couple weeks shy of moving to a TEDlocked city and 2/3 of our flying can be reached by a Cirrus SR22 in 3.5 hours, I suspect a fractional ownership is in our future.

I'm surprised no one has asked the obvious question: has beverage service on Theodore changed? I've done the MIA/MCO/TPA-DEN flight a dozen times in the past year and gotten my two cups of soda and no more. Thankfully, I've brought a couple liters of water on board for Mrs. Dog and me. I can't imagine the 4 hour flight from FL to DEN, eating that salty BOB "meal", and only being given 2 cups of beverage without the can option.

Continuing my ramblings, I am grateful that the US and UK have seemingly foiled a very bad terrorist plot. However, until you get passengers on planes without any cargo whatsoever (checked or carryon) and sitting in seats the whole time with handcuffs on, I don't think airplanes will ever be 100% secure. Problem is that our airport security measures catch the ignorant and not the malevolent. If you've ever seen how our Special Forces or Rangers train, you'd see that a determined individual can McGuyver anything out of nothing and cause serious damage.

ozweepay

Too bad there's no overnight shipping service alongside security: just dump whatever you won't need into a small box and they deliver it to your hotel room. Maybe $10 for this service.

FedEx, are you listening?

tailfirst

I for one am changing my travel plans.

If it isn't absolutely imparative that I fly I won't.

Vacations, I'll drive when ever I can.

Flying is a convience of time and distance. This no longer applies.

Everything will change now and this airine was in trouble before now it is really in trouble.

PanAm916

I think people's aversion to checking bags, esp on domestic travel, is unreasonable. I _always_ check a bag(s). Sure it takes me a little more time on arrival to pick it up at the carousel but with 40+segments and 40k+ miles so far this year alone I have had zero problems with my bag(s) keeping up with me. Even during irrops UA has been great in getting my bag to where I needed it within minutes of my arrival, even if it was on a different plane.

That aside, I am disgusted with the state of airline "security". All these knee-jerk reactions do not make us any safer. The laws of diminishing returns and unintended consequences will eventually rear their ugly heads.

divilish

Give it some time, everyone will settle down and forget...just like the "box cutter threat" that used to be such a big deal, now nobody cares about.

So are the pilots and FA's checking their bags also??

nrgiii

I'm also a PP and that route is looking more attractive all the time. GA is still much less of a security hassle (unless you live in DC near the ADIZ). Now you only have to watch out for all those TFR's in and around Puget Sound.

mahasamatman

I find TLV security far smoother and less obtrusive than any commercial airport in the US. That's because they actually know what they're doing and don't go into a panic and call in a supervisor if you have a toothpick in your carry-on.

nrgiii

I agree with that 100%; they don't screw around in TLV.

My point was that you need to be there 3 hrs before your flight and go through the interview and complete baggage search process before even checking in. That's the inconvenience I was talking about.

HitAndRun

I disagree re checked bags. I've had a run of bad luck over the past 11 flights which reinforced my never check bags philospohy

* FLight to Washington DC diverted to Den en route due to sewage problem near rear toilets - had to reroute through multiple other airports due to missed connections
* Flight to Newark cancelled after boarding due to mechanical problems - had to reroute through ORD
* Flight from Providence cancelled due to weather - forced to buy last ticket from Provdence to MSP on Northwest
* Weather delays in Tampa on code share flight with USAir and resulting missed connections forced me to buy new ticket on United
Weather delays

In each of these cases I would have been SOL if I'd checked bags. I can't arrive at a business meeting in jeans and a T shirt.

Not to mention several flight where I was able to catch earlier flight on standby due to weather delays or inbound flight running early

Either way, checking bags severely curtails your flexibility when things go wrong or you have the opportunity to accelerate a journey!

cblaisd

Since not UA-related, moved to Travel Buzz where the mods there can decide if it's best there or in TS/S

cblaisd
Moderator, United